Multi-level structure of meaning in a business law tutorial

References

1. Allan, K. and D. Burridge
   (1991) Euphemism and dysphemism. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bhatia, V
   (1983) Simplification v. easification-the case of legal texts. Applied Linguistics4, 1: 42–54. doi: 10.1093/applin/4.1.42
   https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/4.1.42 [Google Scholar]
3. Bhatia, V
   (1987) Language of the law. Language Teaching20:227–238. doi: 10.1017/S026144480000464X
   https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144480000464X [Google Scholar]
4. Danet, B
   (1980) Language in the legal process. Law and Society Review14:445–564. doi: 10.2307/3053192
   https://doi.org/10.2307/3053192 [Google Scholar]
5. Gee, J
   (1990) Social linguistics and literacies. Ideology in discourses. London, The Falmer Press.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Halliday, M
   (1978) Language as social semiotic. London, Edward Arnold.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Hammond, J
   (1991) Synoptic and dynamic analyses of classroom discourse: The role of meta language in teaching literacy. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics14, 2: 1–29.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Iedema, R
   (1993) Legal English: Subject specific literacy and genre theory. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics16, 2: 86–122.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Kittay, E
   (1987) Metaphor: Its cognitive force and linguistic structure. New York, Oxford University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Lemke, J
    (1988) Genres, semantics and classroom education. Linguistics and Education1:81–99. doi: 10.1016/S0898‑5898(88)80011‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(88)80011-1 [Google Scholar]
11. Lublin, J
    (1987) Conducting tutorials. Kensington, Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Matalene, C.B.
    (ed.) (1989) Worlds of writing. New York, Random House.
    [Google Scholar]
13. McKenna, E
    (1987) Preparing foreign students to enter discourse communities in the U.S.English For Academic Purposes6:187–202. doi: 10.1016/0889‑4906(87)90003‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(87)90003-2 [Google Scholar]
14. Phelps, T
    (1989) In the law the text is king. In Matalene (ed.)
    [Google Scholar]
15. Sinclair, J. and R. Coulthard
    (1978) Towards an analysis of discourse. The English used by teachers and pupil. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Swales, J
    (1991) Genre analysis. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Swales, J
    (1982) The case of cases. IRAL20, 2: 139–148.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Warnock, W
    (1989) To English professors: On what to do with a lawyer. In Matalene (ed.).
    [Google Scholar]
19. White, J
    (1982) The invisible discourse of the law: Reflections on legal literacy and general education. Michigan Quarterly Review420–438.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Widdowson, H
    (1984) Language purpose and language use. London, Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]