EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 69 (2019) SHS Web Conf., 69 (2019) 00007 References
Open Access
Issue
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 69, 2019
The International Scientific and Practical Conference “Current Issues of Linguistics and Didactics: The Interdisciplinary Approach in Humanities and Social Sciences” (CILDIAH-2019)
Article Number 00007
Number of page(s) 7
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20196900007
Published online 25 October 2019
  1. R.G. Boatright, T.J. Shaffer, S. Sobieraj, and D. Goldthwaite Young, A crisis of civility?: political discourse and its discontents (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2019) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. W. Connoly, The terms of political discourse (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1993) [Google Scholar]
  3. I. Fairclough, N. Fairclough, Political discourse analysis: a method for advanced students (Routledge, London, 2013) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. D. Howarth, A.J. Norval, Discourse theory and political analysis: identities, hegemoni (Manchester University Press, Manchester, 2000) [Google Scholar]
  5. C. Schaeffner, Political discourse, media and translation (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Cambridge, 2010) [Google Scholar]
  6. A.E. Wieczorek, Clusivity: a new approach to association and dissociation in political discourse (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Cambridge, 2013) [Google Scholar]
  7. A. Musolff, Political metaphor analysis: discourse and scenarios (Bloomsbury Academic, London, 2016) [Google Scholar]
  8. L. Sriwimon, P.J. Zilli, Kasetsart J. of Social Sciences, Applying critical discourse analysis as a conceptual framework for investigating gender stereotypes in political media discourse, 38, 136–142 (2017) [Google Scholar]
  9. U. Yaqub, S.A. Chun, V. Atluri, and J. Vaidya, Government Information Quarterly, Analysis of political discourse on twitter in the context of the 2016 US presidential elections, 34(4), 613–626 (2017) [Google Scholar]
  10. P. Norris, A virtuous circle: political communications in postindustrial societies (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013) [Google Scholar]
  11. P. Chilton, J. of Language and Politics, “The people” in populist discourse: Using neuro-cognitive linguistics to understand political, 16(4), 582–594 (2017) [Google Scholar]
  12. J.A. Garrido Ardila, J. of Pragmatics, Impoliteness as a rhetorical strategy in Spain's politics, 140, 160–170 (2019) [Google Scholar]
  13. A. Albalat-Mascarell, M.L. Carrrn-Pastor, J. of Pragmatics, Self-representation in political campaign talk: A functional metadiscourse approach to selfmentions in televised presidential debates 147, 86–99 (2019) [Google Scholar]
  14. M. Temmerman, R. Moernaut, R. Coesemans, and J. Mast, Context and Media, Post-truth and the political: Constructions and distortions in representing political facts, Discourse, 27, 1–6 (2019) [Google Scholar]
  15. G. Lazarovici, Social and Behavioral Sciences, The effects of globalization upon the paradigm of the contemporary political discourse, 63, 58–62 (2012) [Google Scholar]
  16. B. Norman, M. Mukhin, Sibirskii Filologicheskii Zhurnal, Lexical and grammatical semantics: A corpus-based statistical study of lexical semantic group, 3, 178–191 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  17. S. Franssila, Social and Behavioral Sciences, Sell Metaphors in American political news discourse, 95, 418–424 (2013) [Google Scholar]
  18. A.L. Hostetler, M.A. Nee, The J. of Social Studies Research, Difficult discourses: How the distances and contours of identities shape challenging moments in political discussions, 42(4), 361–373 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  19. M.L. Pratt, Language Sciences, Aesthetics, politics, and sociolinguistic analysis, 65, 18–25 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  20. G. Lakoff, Instrumental adverbs and the concept of deep structure, foundations of language 4(1), 4–29 (1968). [Google Scholar]
  21. M. Osborn, Michael Osborn on metaphor and style (Michigan State University Press, East Lansing, 2018) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. H. Davis, Language and Communication, Gender, discourse and gender and discourse 17(4), 353–357 (1997) [Google Scholar]
  23. D. Harp, Gender in the 2016 US Presidential Election: Trump, Clinton, and Media Discourse (Routledge, London, 2019) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. D. Tannen, Gender and Discourse (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996) [Google Scholar]
  25. D. Liu, L. Lei, Discourse, Context and Media, The appeal to political sentiment: An analysis of Donald Trump 's and Hillary Clinton 's speech themes and discourse strategies in the 2016 US presidential election, 25, 143–152 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  26. B.C. Parekh, Colonialism, tradition and reform: an analysis of Gandhi's political discourse (SAGE Publications Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi, 1999) [Google Scholar]
  27. E.U. Sheigal, The semiotics of political discourse (Peremena, Volgograd, 2000) [Google Scholar]
  28. P. Chilton, Analysing political discourse (Routledge, London, 2004) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  29. L. Kissler, Die Öffentlichkeitsfunktion des Deutschen Bundestages: Theorie, Empirie, Reform (Duncker and Humblot, Berlin, 1976) [Google Scholar]
  30. N. Luhmann, Legitimation durch Verfahren (Suhrkamp, Berlin, 2001) [Google Scholar]
  31. M. Hauriou, Die Theorie der Institution und Zwei andere Aufsätze (Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, 1965) [Google Scholar]
  32. G. Göhler, Grundfragen der Theorie Politischer Institutionen (VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Opladen, 1987) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. M. Foucault, The Archaeology of knowledge (Routledge, London, 2002) [Google Scholar]
  34. V. Karasik, Discourse manifestation of personality, Russ. J. of Linguistics 20, 56–77 (2016) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  35. A.P. Chudinov, O.A. Solopova, Social and Behavioral Sciences, Linguistic political prognostics: models and scenarios of future, 200, 412–417 (2015) [Google Scholar]
  36. M.L. Makarov, Basic concepts of discourse analysis (Gnozis, Moscow, 2003) [Google Scholar]
  37. D. Allhoff, Rhetorische Analyse der Reden und Debatten des Ersten Deutschen Parlamentes von 1848/49. Insbesondere auf Syntaktischer und Semantischer Ebene (Tuduv-Verlagsgesellschaft, München, 1975) [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.