Lilia Raitskaya (@mgimo_en) and Elena Tikhonova (@UniversityRudn)
«The Top 100 Cited Discourse Studies: An Update»
Journal of Language & Education, Volume 5, Issue 1, 2019
Journal of Language & Education | National Research University Higher School of Economics (@HSE_eng) | Moscow | RUSSIA
Se incluye a continuación un extracto seleccionado de las páginas 4 a 5, 6 a 9 y 12 a 15 de la publicación en PDF. Las referencias pueden consultarse en la ubicación original.
Enlace HTML.
MGIMO University.
«Introduction
»Discourse studies actively started in the 20th century. The term ‘discourse’ appeared in 36,084 document titles
indexed in Scopus (as of March 1, 2019), with the earliest of them published in 1838. On average, nearly 2,500-
2,800 titles, incorporating the term, enter the Scopus database annually. The discourse field coverage ranges
from humanities and social sciences to dentistry and geosciences. As discourses occur only in social and cultural
settings, much of the focus in research is given to the relationships between discourse and community.
»Most of discourse studies turn to discourse analysis or based on it, as it examines patterns of language within
diverse frameworks and settings. The concept of discourse is studied across the fields and approaches. Many
articles and books dwell upon such issues as pragmatics in discourse, discourse and conversation, discourse
grammar. Extensive methods and approaches evolve and are applied in the field to cover corpus approaches,
multimodal discourse analysis, and critical discourse analysis, etc.
»As discourse studies lie within the JLE scope, the JLE editors see the recent trends and most promising themes in
this area as a benchmark for the journal authors. The review of the 100 most quoted articles published between
2015 and 2019 might extend the guidelines for authors, informing them of the trends. The goal of the review is
twofold. In analysing the 100 articles, the review authors also set out to fix the prevailing structures in research
articles on discourse.
»Scholarly publishing with research articles at the forefront are the most important means of scientific
communication and knowledge dissemination. Articles form a weighty genre within the academia. Many
components factor in the quality of scientific information in research articles. Schemas combining rhetoric
moves and steps emerged as settled algorithms for writers to logically lay out their information contribution in
the text and for readers to easily navigate through the text. In the world, over-flooded with heaps of unstructured
and often low-quality information, schemas have become a helping hand in searching for relevant information
and detecting its quality.
»It takes readers no time to grasp the research essentials from a move-patterned article:
strong and weak points are all atop. John Swales started his research in the 1980-s and finally ‘combined rhetoric
and linguistics to explain genre’ (Devitt, 2015), introducing rhetorical moves and steps applicable to scholarly
writing for journals (Swales, 1990).
»The scholarly publishing landscape is far from being uniform, with ‘similarities and differences arising mainly
from the idiosyncratic nature of genre, place of presentation, and western versus non-western, center versus
periphery, and theory-versus application-oriented cultures’ (Samar et al., 2014). The editorial review aims
to examine the 100 most cited articles on discourse and discourse analysis and find out the major research
directions in the field as well as prevailing structures or moves. The JLE Editors seek to consider the article
sample based on Swales’s genre concept of moves and steps.
»[...]
RUDN University.
»Results and Discussion
»The top 100 articles on discourse were published between 2015 and 2019, with 35 quoted articles in 2015;
another 27 and 22 were cited in 2016 and 2017 respectively; 14 quoted articles came out in 2018; only 2 were
published and quoted in 2019. The most cited article scores 51 citations (Ball, 2015). The lowest citation is one
per article, with 16 documents out of the 100.
»The articles came out in seven scholarly journals (28 articles in Critical Discourse Studies; 26 in Discourse; 26 in
Discourse and Communication; 12 in Discourse Context and Media; 4 in Lingua; 3 in Linguistics; 1 article in Journal
of Multicultural Discourses). Out of the 100 documents, 94 are qualified as original articles by type including
15 theoretical and 79 empirical/ analytical publications. The remaining six cover one editorial serving as an
introduction to a special issue and five articles (opinion or discussion articles).
»The affiliations of the authors encompass 102 universities and organisations, with Tel Aviv University,
Universidade de Macau, and University of Queensland totalling three authors each and another seven universities
having two authors each. The geographical breakdown includes 29 countries; with 20 documents coming from
the UK, 18 articles from Australia, 16 documents from the USA; China and Sweden gave 8 documents each.
Fitzgerald (2015, 2016, 2018), Talib (2015, 2016, 2018), Molek-Kozakowska (2017, 2018), and Schnurr (2015,
2016) authored more than one article. The rest of 156 authors had one article co-authored or on their own. The
mean authorship per article is 1.6.
»Basic Directions and Methods in Discourse Studies
»The 100 most quoted titles were sifted to find out what the major research directions were and what methods
were implied. The niches produced most research are discourses in education (23 papers) and press/ media
coverage of various events or phenomena (23 articles).
»Educational discourses are approached in diverse aspects. Ledin and Manchin (2015) carried out a multimodal
study of management language in Swedish universities. Kolleck (2017) examines how changes in social
fields shape the concept of education triggered by normative and semantic shifts. The article ‘Inequality as
meritocracy’ is sub-titled ‘The use of the metaphor of diversity and the value of inequality within Singapore’s
meritocratic education system’ (Talib & Fitzgerald, 2015) and examines the ways the metaphor brings about a
moral background for inequality within an educational system.
»Several papers focus on school discourses like e-safety policy discourse related to widespread school Internet
access (Hope, 2015); a critical discourse analysis of school bullying (Horton, 2016); analyses of aspiration
discourses in a British secondary school (Spohrer, 2016); neoliberal common sense and race as neutral discourses
in school policing (Nolan, 2015); discourses of the good parent in attributing school success (Thomas, Keogh &
Hay, 2015); a discourse analysis of teachers’ body talk (Lester & Gabriel, 2017).
»University discourses come under scrutiny in a few articles, with discourses of leadership and responsibilisation
in the framework of deepening neoliberal administration (28) and country-related discourse analyses (Amsler
& Shore, 2017; Stacey, 2017; Dalib, Harun & Yusof, 2017; Banda & Mafofo, 2016; Carden, 2018).
»News coverage discourse analyses cover analyses of news discourses on masculinity (2); Israeli media coverage of
public examinations (Yemini & Gordon, 2017); British television coverage of the Barclays case in 2012 (Thomas,
2016); a crucial role of the right-wing Brazilian media in the impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff (Van
Dijk, 2017); uses of ‘you’ in Guardian editorials (Breeze, 2015); historical analogies in the coverage of the IsraeliPalestinian conflict (Bourdon, 2015); inquiry in the media context of TV cooking shows (Matwick & Matwick,
2015); empiricist discourse in the talk of broadcast journalists (Reardon, 2018) and others.
»Discourses of economics /policies and Internet brought 8 and 9 publications respectively. Few publications
came out to analyse discourses of ecology (3 papers), metaphors (4 articles), discourses of racism (3 articles),
religion (3 papers). The rest of articles aimed to cover various themes: semantics and pragmatics of marking
temporal progression in an Australian language (Ritz & Schultze-Berndt, 2015); discursive formation of
nuclear proliferation (MacDonald et al., 2015); a critical discourse analysis of Swedish public health campaigns
(Törrönen & Tryggvesson, 2015); a decision-making discourse analysis (Du-Babcock & Chan, 2018); relevance of
materialistic-semiotic approach to discourse analysis (Borrelli, 2018); effects of dominant scholarly publication
practices on papers produced by authors worldwide (Larson, 2018); relevance in different types of dialogical
contexts, pursuing both cognitive and non-cognitive goals (Macagno, 2018).
»The prevailing methods in the articles covered critical discourse analysis (CDA) (over 90 %), corpus-based analysis
(10 %). In addition to CDA, the remaining studies applied multi-modal discourse analysis, circumbounded
analysis, macro-sociological analysis, social semiotic analysis, case studies.
»Prevailing Structures in the Articles on Discourse
»Abstracts
»Abstracts serve as a stand-alone source of information and may draw readers’ attention to the
articles they are based on. ‘Research article abstracts are the most effective means of sharing research results.’
(Tankó, 2016).
»The abstracts in the top 100 articles average 153.6 words, with the shortest abstract containing 62 words, and
the longest numbering 275 words. No abstract includes any sub-titles. Most are one-paragraph pieces (98 out
of 100).
»The research aims in the abstracts are stated via set phrases which contain ‘aim’ – both noun or verb – in
9 abstracts; ‘to analyse’ (12 abstracts); ‘to focus’ (11 abstracts); ‘to consider’ (7 abstracts); ‘to examine’ (29
abstracts); to argue (16 abstracts); ‘to explore’ (25 abstracts); ‘purpose’ and ‘hypothesis’ (1 abstract each).
On the whole, the top 100 article abstracts tend to follow the move structure applicable in applied linguistics
(Pho, 2008) and embracing:
»(1) Situating the Research;
»(2) Presenting the Research;
»(3) Methodology;
»(4) Results;
»(5) Discussing the Research.
»The move ‘Presenting the Research’ (No.2 in the above list) is often enforced by ‘Filling in the Knowledge Gap’.
Partly, methodology and discussion of the results were omitted in the abstracts to the empirical articles. The
above moves are relevant to empirical or research articles, with theoretical articles sticking to a simpler structure,
where methodology is rarely included. As for results and their discussion, these sections also aim to convey as a
contribution to a knowledge field. The section titles below are headlined according to IMRAD simplified version
(Introduction; Methods; Results and Discussion).
»Section ‘Introduction’
»As ‘the introduction is of prime importance in grabbing the reader’s attention’(Ecarnot
et al., 2015), we thoroughly compared the introductions to the top 100 articles with the canonical introduction
schema for original theoretical and IMRAD-structured (empirical) papers. It implies that the relevance of the
research is followed by a field or literature outlining the gap to be filled by the present research; the next
step is the research aim (or in addition, hypothesis/ research questions may be included); on top of all, (for a
theoretical paper only) a general description of the main body of the articles displays authors’ logic at the end
of the introduction. As most articles under discussion (88 out of 100) do not follow the standard IMRAD format,
their introductions are often shorter with additional sub-titles for the steps which tend to be included into
introductions to scholarly articles at large.
»The following themed titles and sub-titles exemplify a kind of ‘extensions’ to the introductions:
»• Literature Review (Ross & Rivers, 2017; Wu, 2018; Du-Babcock & Chan, 2018; Carden, 2018);
»• Review of literature on climate change discourses in the context of mobilization (Molek-Kozakowska, 2018);
»• Aims; Literature Review (Marlow, 2015);
»• Aims and outline of the article (Remling, 2018);
»• Marketized Language in the University (Ledin & Machin, 2015);
»• Background covering three sub-titles, i.e. The role of media in education discourse; Neoliberalism and the
global–local nexus; Study context: the Israeli education system (Yemini & Gordon, 2017); Background (Harkins
& Lugo-Ocando, 2016; Stacey, 2017);
»• News values, audience and ideology (Branum & Charteris-Black, 2015);
»• Theoretical Approach (Eriksson, 2015);
»• Theoretical framework: Making ‘frames’ ‘work’ in the business press (O’Mara-Shimek et al., 2015);
»• Theoretical approach and sample (Thomas, 2016);
»• Theoretical Section – journalism and the political (Persson, 2016);
»• Theoretical and methodological perspectives (Lester & Gabriel, 2017);
»• Limitations (Van Dijk, 2017);
»• Conceptualising discourse in everyday context (Spohrer, 2016);
»• Discursive contours in the New Zealand educational landscape (Sandretto & Tilson, 2017);
»• An MSS (multimodal social semiotic) view of communication; Discourse: A critical perspective (Michelson &
Álvarez Valencia, 2016);
»• Selfies as an emerging visual genre (Zappavigna & Zhao, 2017);
»• Our approach (Breen, 2017);
»• State of the art and definitions (Bourdon, 2015), etc.
»‘Introduction’ as a set-apart and headlined part is missing from a few articles, with one being replaced with a
themed title (Corbett & Forsey, 2017), other two starting without any (sub-)titles (Collin, 2016; Larson, 2018).
The latter may be caused by APA style. Whitton and Maclure (2017) starts their article with the headline ‘Video
games in education: a brief overview’; Noy (2017) introduces the research with ‘Morality, museums, and the
public sphere’; Szabo (2016) begins her article with a quotation followed by untitled introduction; Borrelli
(2018) introduces the article in the section entitled ‘Structure and purposes of the study’. Talib and Fitzgerald
(2018) put a question to focus on the topic – ‘Critical Discourse Analysis?
»Section ‘Methods’. Twenty-five articles include the section headlined ‘Method(s)’, whereas 18 have
‘Methodology’. Methods are also described in other sections, often combined with other structural units, e.g.
‘Methods of Analysis’, ‘Design & Method’, ‘Theory and Method’, ‘The Study’, ‘About the Study’, ‘Data Source
and Methods’, ‘Research Method’, ‘Design of the Study’, “Analytic Framework and Data’, ‘Materials and Method’,
‘Data Analysis’.
»Section ‘Results and Discussion’
»As the sample includes only 12 nearly IMRAD-structured articles (IMRAD
structure in some of them is revised or updated), the section ‘Results’ is often replaced with ‘Findings’: 3 and
8 respectively. 28 articles incorporate ‘Discussion’ section. Three publications have ‘Findings and Discussion’.
In 4 articles, ‘Discussion and Conclusions’ combine two sections. There are a few research-tailored sections
headlined ‘Comparison of Findings’, ‘Research Findings’, and ‘Results and Illustration’.
»As most empirical research articles in the sample are analysis-based, they followed the patterns best suited
to the critical discourse analysis. Most articles include from 2 to 5 themed sub-titles covering the logic of the
analysis. They range from background and theoretical issues to specially formed corpuses and databases.
»Section ‘Conclusion’
»The move to conclude the article implies remunerating the main findings and their
contribution. 53 articles end with ‘Conclusion’, 10 publications have ‘Conclusions’. The section is missing from
14 articles where the section ‘Discussion’ or other themed sub-titles contain concluding statements.
»There are 11 variations of section sub-titles in 23 articles, encompassing ‘Concluding remarks’, ‘Summary’,
‘In concluding...’, ‘Discussion and conclusions’, ‘Concluding thoughts’, ‘Conclusion and implication’, ‘Looking
ahead’, ‘Summary and conclusion’, ‘Conclusion and wider implications’, ‘Contribution and concluding remarks’,
and ‘Conclusion and future directions’.
»Theoretical Studies and Other Publications. The theoretical articles do not show any generic approaches to
sub-dividing. Most sub-titles are themed and logic-based. Functional headlines are limited to ‘Introduction’,
‘Conclusion’, and occasionally ‘Background’. There are five opinion papers and discussion articles in the sample.
They are either unstructured essays, or divided into 2-3 sections.
»Conclusion
»The top 100 articles on discourse analysis showed that the original empirical or analytical articles accounted
for 79 percent of the sample, with the theoretical articles amounting to 15 percent. Structurally, the empirical
papers in the sample tended to multiple move variations. IMRAD with minor alterations was chosen only in
12 articles. The other articles in this group, as well as the bulk of the theoretical and opinion articles stick to
research-tailored structures.
»Though the sample covers the most quoted publications on discourse studies, not all findings relating to
rhetorical moves can be considered as relevant to the JLE stance on article structuring. Occasionally, deviated
or free structuring may be based on solid rhetorical foundations. But this approach may get elusive and distract
readers’ attention by irregular and unusual moves and steps. Established genre schemas make a research text
accessible, transparent, and reader-friendly.
»The JLE Editors opt for genre structures that best outline all research components and display their strong
points together with research findings and contribution. As JLE is an international journal, its formats must
fit in the global standards and best practices. Our authors represent dozens of countries, so IMRAD and other
traditional schemas help them follow similar patterns and align their submissions with the benchmarks in the
field.
»[...]
National Research University Higher School of Economics.
»Appendix 1
»The Top 100 Cited Articles on Discourse Analysis (2015-2019)
»Al-Hejin, B. (2015). Covering Muslim women: Semantic macrostructures in
BBC news. Discourse and
Communication, 9(1), 19-46.
doi:10.1177/1750481314555262
»Amsler, M., & Shore, C. (2017). Responsibilisation and leadership in
the neoliberal university: A New Zealand
perspective. Discourse, 38(1), 123-137. doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1104857
»Ariel, M. (2015). Doubling up: Two upper bounds for scalars. Linguistics, 53(3), 561-610.
doi:10.1515/ling-2015-0013
»Baker, P., & Levon, E. (2015). Picking the right cherries? A
comparison of corpus-based and qualitative analyses
of news articles about masculinity. Discourse and Communication, 9(2), 221-236.
doi:10.1177/1750481314568542
»Ball, S. J. (2015). What is policy? 21 years later: Reflections on the
possibilities of policy research. Discourse, 36(3),
306-313. doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1015279
»Banda, F., & Mafofo, L. (2016). Commodification of transformation
discourses and post-apartheid institutional
identities at three south African universities. Critical Discourse
Studies, 13(2), 174-192. doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1074593
»Bannink, A., & Wentink, D. (2015). ‘I need to confess something’:
Coming out on national television. Discourse
and Communication, 9(5), 535-558.
doi:10.1177/1750481315600301
»Borrelli, G. (2018). Marx, a ‘semiotician’? On the (possible) relevance
of a materialistic-semiotic approach to
discourse studies. Critical Discourse Studies, 15(4), 351-363.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2018.1456947
»Bourdon, J. (2015). Outrageous, inescapable? Debating historical
analogies in the coverage of the Israeli–
Palestinian conflict. Discourse and Communication, 9(4), 407-422.
doi:10.1177/1750481315576835
»Bourlai, E. E. (2018). ‘Comments in tags, please!’: Tagging practices on
Tumblr. Discourse, Context
and Media, 22,
46-56. doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2017.08.003
»Branum, J., & Charteris-Black, J. (2015). The Edward Snowden affair:
A corpus study of the British press. Discourse
and Communication, 9(2), 199-220. doi:10.1177/1750481314568544
»Breen, M. D., Easteal, P., Holland, K., Sutherland, G., & Vaughan,
C. (2017). Exploring Australian journalism
discursive practices in reporting rape: The pitiful predator and the
silent victim. Discourse and Communication, 11(3), 241-258.
doi:10.1177/1750481317697858
»Breeze, R. (2015). ‘Or so the government would have you believe’: Uses
of ‘you’ in guardian editorials. Discourse,
Context and Media, 10, 36-44. doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2015.07.003
»Brindle, A. (2016). Cancer has nothing on Islam: A study of discourses
by group elite and supporters of the
English defence league. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(4), 444-459.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2016.1169196
»Carden, C. (2018). Strengthening discipline in state schools:
Constructions of discipline in a public policy
moment. Discourse, 39(3), 448-460.
doi:10.1080/01596306.2016.1274882
»Chen, S. (2016). Selling the environment: Green marketing discourse in
China's automobile advertising. Discourse,
Context and Media, 12, 11-19. doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2016.03.003
»Chong, P. W. (2016). Moving forward or standing still? A reflection of ‘special’
educational provision in
Malaysia. Discourse, 37(4), 600-613.
doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1073023
»Collin, R. (2016). A Jamesonian analysis of “flat world” imagery in
education discourse. Discourse, 37(2), 298-309.
doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1016896
»Corbett, M., & Forsey, M. (2017). Rural youth out-migration and
education: Challenges to aspirations discourse
in mobile modernity. Discourse, 38(3), 429-444. doi:10.1080/01596306.2017.1308456
»Dalib, S., Harun, M., & Yusof, N. (2017). Student intercultural
competence in a Malaysian campus: A
phenomenological approach. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 12(1), 42-62.
doi:10.1080/17447143.2016.1264408
»Drew, C. (2015). Fuzzy books and sideways looks: Discourses of schooling
on Australian television
advertisements. Discourse, 36(1), 95-105. doi:10.1080/01596306.2013.846992
»Du-Babcock, B., & Chan, A. C. K. (2018). Negotiating consensus in simulated
decision-making meetings without
designated chairs: A study of participants’ discourse roles. Discourse and Communication, 12(5), 497-516.
doi:10.1177/1750481318766935
»Dunmire, P. L. (2015). Beyond space and time: Temporal and geographical
configurations in US national security
discourse. Critical Discourse Studies, 12(3), 297-312.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1013482
»Eriksson, G. (2015). Ridicule as a strategy for the re-contextualization
of the working class: A multimodal
analysis of class-making on Swedish reality television. Critical Discourse
Studies, 12(1), 20-38. doi:10.1080/17405904.2014.962067
»Filardo-Llamas, L. (2015). Re-contextualizing political discourse: An
analysis of shifting spaces in songs used as
a political tool. Critical Discourse Studies, 12(3), 279-296.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1013478
»Francis, B. (2015). Impacting policy discourse? An analysis of
discourses and rhetorical devices deployed in the
case of the academies commission. Discourse, 36(3), 437-451.
doi:10.1080/01596306.2014.902919
»Frederiksen, A. T., & Mayberry, R. I. (2016). Who’s on first?
Investigating the referential hierarchy in simple
native ASL narratives. Lingua, 180, 49-68. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2016.03.007
»Ge, Y. (2016). Sensationalism in media discourse: A genre-based analysis
of chinese legal news reports. Discourse
and Communication, 10(1), 22-39.
doi:10.1177/1750481315602395
»Gellers, J. C. (2015). Greening critical discourse analysis:
Applications to the study of environmental law. Critical
Discourse Studies, 12(4), 482-493.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1023326
»Graham, P. (2016). Halliday and Lemke: A comparison of contextual
potentials for two metafunctional
systems. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(5), 548-567.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2016.1213177
»Gulliver, T. (2018). Canada the redeemer and denials of racism. Critical Discourse
Studies, 15(1), 68-86. doi:10.1080/17405904.2017.1360192
»Halse, C. (2017). Responsibility for racism in the everyday talk of
secondary students. Discourse, 38(1), 2-15. doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1104848
»Harkins, S., & Lugo-Ocando, J. (2016). How Malthusian ideology crept
into the newsroom: British tabloids and
the coverage of the ‘underclass’. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(1), 78-93.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1074594
»Hart, C. (2015). Viewpoint in linguistic discourse: Space and evaluation
in news reports of political protests. Critical
Discourse Studies, 12(3), 238-260.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1013479
»Hope, A. (2015). Schoolchildren, governmentality and national e-safety
policy discourse. Discourse, 36(3), 343-353. doi:10.1080/01596306.2013.871237
»Horton, P. (2016). Portraying monsters: Framing school bullying through
a macro lens. Discourse, 37(2), 204-214.
doi:10.1080/01596306.2014.951833
»Kelsey, D., Mueller, F., Whittle, A., & Khosravi, N. M. (2016).
Financial crisis and austerity: Interdisciplinary
concerns in critical discourse studies. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(1), 1-19.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1074600
»Khoja-Moolji, S. S. (2017). Envisioning an alternative to the
neo-liberalization of education in the global south:
The Aga Khan’s philosophies of education. Discourse, 38(4), 542-560.
doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1113508
»King, B. W. (2016). Becoming the intelligible other: Speaking intersex
bodies against the grain. Critical Discourse
Studies, 13(4), 359-378.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1113190
»Knops, A. (2015). A strategic-relational account of language use,
discourse, and reason. Critical Discourse
Studies, 12(1), 1-19.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2014.962069
»Kolleck, N. (2017). How (German) foundations shape the concept of
education: Towards an understanding of
their use of discourses. Discourse, 38(2), 249-261.
doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1105789
»Kozar, O. (2015). Discursive practices of private online tutoring
websites in Russia. Discourse, 36(3), 354-368. doi:10.1080/01596306.2013.871238
»Kwitonda, J. C. (2017). Development aid and disease discourse on
display: The mutating techniques of
neoliberalism. Critical Discourse Studies, 14(1), 23-38.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2016.1174139
»Larson, J. (2018). Other voices: Authors’ literary-academic presence and
publication in the discursive world
system. Discourse, 39(4), 521-535. doi:10.1080/01596306.2016.1278357
»Ledin, P., & Machin, D. (2015). How lists, bullet points and tables
re-contextualize social practice: A multimodal
study of management language in Swedish universities. Critical Discourse Studies, 12(4), 463-481. doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1039556
»Lester, J. N., & Gabriel, R. (2017). Regulating readers’ bodies: A
discourse analysis of teachers’ body
talk. Discourse, 38(5), 688-700.
doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1135417
»Liasidou, A. (2016). Disabling discourses and human rights law: A case
study based on the implementation of
the UN convention on the rights of people with disabilities. Discourse, 37(1), 149-162. doi:10.1080/01596306.2014.936928
»Liu, M., & Li, C. (2017). Competing discursive constructions of China’s smog in
chinese and Anglo-American
English-language newspapers: A corpus-assisted discourse study. Discourse and
Communication, 11(4), 386-403.
doi:10.1177/1750481317707379
»Ludemann, D. (2018). /pol/emics: Ambiguity, scales, and digital
discourse on 4chan. Discourse, Context and
Media, 24, 92-98. doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2018.01.010
»Macagno, F. (2018). Assessing relevance. Lingua, 210-211, 42-64. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2018.04.007
»MacDonald, M. N., Homolar, A., Rethel, L., Schnurr, S., & Vessey, R.
(2015). Manufacturing dissent: The
discursive formation of nuclear proliferation (2006–2012). Discourse and
Communication, 9(2), 173-197.
doi:10.1177/1750481314568546
»Marlow, M. L. (2015). The American dream? Anti-immigrant discourse
bubbling up from the Coca-Cola ‘It’s
beautiful’ advertisement. Discourse and Communication, 9(6), 625-641.
doi:10.1177/1750481315600299
»Matwick, K., & Matwick, K. (2015). Inquiry in television cooking
shows. Discourse and
Communication, 9(3), 313-330.
doi:10.1177/1750481315576629
»McGregor, W. B. (2015). Four counter-presumption constructions in Shua
(Khoe-Kwadi, Botswana). Lingua, 158,
54-75. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2015.02.005
»Michelson, K., & Álvarez Valencia, J. A. (2016). Study abroad:
Tourism or education? A multimodal social semiotic
analysis of institutional discourses of a promotional website. Discourse and
Communication, 10(3), 235-256.
doi:10.1177/1750481315623893
»Molek-Kozakowska, K. (2017). Communicating environmental science beyond
academia: Stylistic
patterns of newsworthiness in popular science journalism. Discourse and
Communication, 11(1), 69-88.
doi:10.1177/1750481316683294
»Molek-Kozakowska, K. (2018). Popularity-driven science journalism and
climate change: A critical discourse
analysis of the unsaid. Discourse, Context and Media, 21, 73-81.
doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2017.09.013
»Nagar, I. (2016). Reporting rape: Language, neoliberalism, and the
media. Discourse and
Communication, 10(3), 257-273. doi:10.1177/1750481315623900
»Nolan, K. (2015). Neoliberal common sense and race-neutral discourses: A
critique of ‘evidence-based’ policymaking
in school policing. Discourse, 36(6), 894-907.
doi:10.1080/01596306.2014.905457
»Noy, C. (2017). Moral discourse and argumentation in the public sphere:
Museums and their visitors. Discourse,
Context and Media, 16, 39-47. doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2017.01.005
»O’Mara-Shimek, M., Guillén-Parra, M., & Ortega-Larrea, A. (2015).
Stop the bleeding or weather the storm? Crisis
solution marketing and the ideological use of metaphor in online
financial reporting of the stock market crash of
2008 at the New York stock exchange. Discourse and Communication, 9(1), 103-123.
doi:10.1177/1750481314556047
»Paechter, C., & Clark, S. (2016). Being ‘nice’ or being ‘normal’:
Girls resisting discourses of ‘coolness’. Discourse, 37(3),
457-471. doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1061979
»Paradis, C., Löhndorf, S., Van De Weijer, J., & Willners, C. (2015).
Semantic profiles of antonymic adjectives in
discourse. Linguistics, 53(1), 153-191. doi:10.1515/ling-2014-0035
»Pasitselska, O. (2017). Ukrainian crisis through the lens of Russian
media: Construction of ideological
discourse. Discourse and
Communication, 11(6), 591-609. doi:10.1177/1750481317714127
»Persson, G. (2016). Ideological struggle over epistemic and political
positions in news discourse on migrant
activism in Sweden. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(3), 278-293.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2016.1169195
»Prendergast, M. (2017). Hero, leader, traitor: The print media
deconstruction of Argentina’s last dictator. Discourse
and Communication, 11(6), 610-629.
doi:10.1177/1750481317726929
»Reardon, S. (2018). Natural selection: Empiricist discourse in the talk
of broadcast journalists. Discourse and
Communication, 12(1), 80-98.
doi:10.1177/1750481317735711
»Remling, E. (2018). Logics, assumptions and genre chains: A framework
for poststructuralist policy analysis. Critical
Discourse Studies, 15(1), 1-18.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2017.1382382
»Reul, R., Paulussen, S., & Maeseele, P. (2019). News from the pit:
Journalistic performativity and discourse on
Belgian internment policy. Discourse, Context and Media, 27, 32-40.
doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2018.02.005
»Richardson, B., & Langford, R. (2015). A shifting collective
identity: A critical discourse analysis of the child care
advocacy association of Canada’s public messaging in 2005 and 2008. Critical Discourse
Studies, 12(1), 78-96. doi:10.1080/17405904.2014.962068
»Rieder, M., & Theine, H. (2019). ‘Piketty is a genius, but … ’: An
analysis of journalistic delegitimation of Thomas
Piketty’s economic policy proposals. Critical Discourse Studies, 16(3), 248-263.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2019.1573148
»Ritz, M., & Schultze-Berndt, E. (2015). Time for a change? The
semantics and pragmatics of marking temporal
progression in an Australian language. Lingua, 166, 1-21. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2015.07.007
»Ross, A. S., & Rivers, D. J. (2017). Digital cultures of political
participation: Internet memes and the discursive
delegitimization of the 2016 U.S. presidential candidates. Discourse, Context
and Media, 16, 1-11. doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2017.01.001
»Salahshour, N. (2016). Liquid metaphors as positive evaluations: A
corpus-assisted discourse analysis of
the representation of migrants in a daily New Zealand newspaper. Discourse, Context
and Media, 13, 73-81.
doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2016.07.002
»Salter, P. (2015). A re-conceptualisation of ‘knowing Asia’ in
Australian education. Discourse, 36(6), 781-794. doi:10.1080/01596306.2014.967178
»Sanders, T. J. M., & Spooren, W. P. M. (2015). Causality and
subjectivity in discourse: The meaning and use of
causal connectives in spontaneous conversation, chat interactions and
written text. Linguistics, 53(1), 53-92.
doi:10.1515/ling-2014-0034
»Sandretto, S., & Tilson, J. (2017). Discursive constructions of
literacies: Shifting sands in aotearoa New
Zealand. Discourse, 38(2), 222-234. doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1075472
»Schnurr, S., Wharton, S., Alansari, S., Angouri, J., Chimbwete Phiri,
R., Chiriatti, T., . . . Reissner-Roubicek, S. (2016).
Not so ‘innocent’ after all? Exploring corporate identity construction
online. Discourse and
Communication, 10(3),
291-313. doi:10.1177/1750481315623902
»Schröter, M. (2015). 80,000,000 hooligans: Discourse of resistance to
racism and xenophobia in German punk
lyrics 1991–1994. Critical Discourse Studies, 12(4), 398-425.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2014.1002508
»Spohrer, K. (2016). Negotiating and contesting ‘success’: Discourses of
aspiration in a UK secondary
school. Discourse, 37(3), 411-425. doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1044423
»Stacey, M. (2017). The teacher ‘problem’: An analysis of the NSW
education policy great teaching, inspired
learning. Discourse, 38(5), 782-793. doi:10.1080/01596306.2016.1168778
»Stavrakakis, Y., Katsambekis, G., Nikisianis, N., Kioupkiolis, A., &
Siomos, T. (2017). Extreme right-wing populism
in Europe: Revisiting a reified association. Critical Discourse Studies, 14(4), 420-439. doi:10.1080/17405904.2017.1309325
»Szabo, A. (2016). Organizing the (socio-material) economy: Ritual,
agency, and economic models. Critical Discourse
Studies, 13(1), 118-136.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1074597
»Talib, N., & Fitzgerald, R. (2015). Inequality as meritocracy: The
use of the metaphor of diversity and the value
of inequality within Singapore’s meritocratic education system. Critical Discourse
Studies, 12(4), 445-462. doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1034740
»Talib, N., & Fitzgerald, R. (2016). Micro–meso–macro movements; a
multi-level critical discourse analysis
framework to examine metaphors and the value of truth in policy texts. Critical Discourse
Studies, 13(5), 531-547.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2016.1182932
»Talib, N., & Fitzgerald, R. (2018). Putting philosophy back to work
in critical discourse analysis. Critical Discourse
Studies, 15(2), 123-139.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2017.1421242
»Thomas, R. (2016). ‘I think it’s absolutely exorbitant!’: How UK
television news reported the shareholder vote on
executive remuneration at Barclays in 2012. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(1), 94-117.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2015.1074596
»Thomas, S., Keogh, J., & Hay, S. (2015). Discourses of the good
parent in attributing school success. Discourse, 36(3),
452-463. doi:10.1080/01596306.2014.901489
»Törnberg, A., & Törnberg, P. (2016). Muslims in social media
discourse: Combining topic modeling and critical
discourse analysis. Discourse, Context and Media, 13, 132-142.
doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2016.04.003
»Törrönen, J., & Tryggvesson, K. (2015). Alcohol, health, and
reproduction: An analysis of Swedish public health
campaigns against drinking during pregnancy. Critical Discourse Studies, 12(1), 57-77.
doi:10.1080/17405904.2014.934386
»Van Dijk, T. A. (2017). How globo media manipulated the impeachment of
Brazilian President Dilma
Rousseff. Discourse and Communication, 11(2), 199-229.
doi:10.1177/1750481317691838
»Wang, G. (2018). A corpus-assisted critical discourse analysis of news
reporting on China’s air pollution in the official
Chinese English-language press. Discourse and Communication, 12(6), 645-662.
doi:10.1177/1750481318771431
»Way, L. C. S., & Kaya, E. N. (2016). Turkish newspapers’ role in
winning votes and exasperating Turkish–Kurdish
relations: The Ağrı shootings. Discourse and Communication, 10(1), 82-100.
doi:10.1177/1750481315611241
»Whitton, N., & Maclure, M. (2017). Video game discourses and
implications for game-based education. Discourse, 38(4),
561-572. doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1123222
»Wu, X. (2018). Discursive strategies of resistance on Weibo: A case
study of the 2015 Tianjin explosions in
China. Discourse, Context and Media, 26, 64-73. doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2018.05.002
»Yemini, M., & Gordon, N. (2017). Media representations of national
and international standardized testing in the
Israeli education system. Discourse, 38(2), 262-276.
doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1105786
»Ylänne, V. (2016). Too old to parent? Discursive representations of late
parenting in the British press. Discourse and
Communication, 10(2), 176-197. doi:10.1177/1750481315611242
»Zappavigna, M., & Zhao, S. (2017). Selfies in ‘mommyblogging’: An
emerging visual genre. Discourse, Context and
Media, 20, 239-247. doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2017.05.005
»Zappettini, F., & Unerman, J. (2016). ‘Mixing’ and ‘Bending’: The
re-contextualisation of discourses of sustainability
in integrated reporting. Discourse and Communication, 10(5), 521-542.
doi:10.1177/1750481316659175
»Zhang, W. (2015). Discourse of resistance: Articulations of national
cultural identity in media discourse on the 2008 Wenchuan
earthquake in China. Discourse and Communication, 9(3), 355-370.
doi:10.1177/1750481315571177».