«The Top 100 Cited Discourse Studies: An Update»

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».