oa The organisation of knowledge in British university tutorial discourse

References

1. Becher, T.
   (1989) Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Benwell, B.
   (1996) The discourse of university tutorials. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Nottingham.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Brown, G. and G. Yule
   (1983) Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511805226
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805226 [Google Scholar]
4. de Beaugrande, R. and W.U. Dressier
   (1981) Introduction to text linguistics. London: Longman.
   [Google Scholar]
5. de Capua, A. and J. Dunham
   (1993) Strategies in the discourse of advice. Journal of Pragmatics20: 103–125.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Eagleton, T.
   (1983) Literary theory:An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Eggins, S. and D. Slade
   (1997) Analysing casual conversation. London: Cassell.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Guy, J.M. and I. Small
   (1991) Politics and value in English studies: A discipline in crisis?Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Halliday, M.A.K. and R. Hasan
   (1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Halliday, M.A.K. and R. Hasan
    (1989 2nd ed.) Language, context and text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Halliday, M.A.K.
    (1985) 4« introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Hoey, M.
    (1981) On the surface of discourse. London: Allen and Unwin.
    [Google Scholar]
13. House-Edmonson, J.
    (1982) Conversational strategies in German and English dialogues. In G. Nickel and D. Nehls (eds.), Error analysis, contrastive linguistics and second language learning. Heidelberg: J. Groos, pp.135–150.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Jordan, M.P.
    (1992) An integrated three-pronged analysis of a fund-raising letter. In W.C. Mann and S. Thompson (eds.), Discourse description: Diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp.171–226. doi: 10.1075/pbns.16.08jor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.16.08jor [Google Scholar]
15. Keenan, E.O. and B. Schieffelin
    (1976) Topic as a discourse notion. In C.N. Lin (ed.), Subject and Topic. New York: Academic Press, pp.335–384.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Lakoff, R. and D. Tannen
    (1984) Conversational strategy and metastrategy in a pragmatic theory, the example of Scenes from a Marriage. Semiotica49.3-4: 323–346.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Lemke, J.L.
    (1982) Talking physics. Physics Education17: 263–267. doi: 10.1088/0031‑9120/17/6/310
    https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/17/6/310 [Google Scholar]
18. Longacre, R.E.
    (1992) The discourse strategy of an appeals letter. In W.C. Mann and S. Thompson (eds.), Discourse description: Diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp.109–130. doi: 10.1075/pbns.16.06lon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.16.06lon [Google Scholar]
19. Mann, W.C. and S. Thompson
    (1985) Assertions from discourse structure. Proceedings from the Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp.245-258).
    [Google Scholar]
20. Mann, W.C. and S. Thompson
    (1986) Relational propositions in discourse. Discourse Processes9.1: 57–90. doi: 10.1080/01638538609544632
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538609544632 [Google Scholar]
21. Mann, W.C. and S. Thompson
    (eds.) (1992) Discourse description: Diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/pbns.16
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.16 [Google Scholar]
22. Mann, W. C, M.I.M. Matthiessen and S. Thompson
    (1992) Rhetorical structure theory and text analysis. In W.C. Mann and S. Thompson (eds.), Discourse description: Diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/pbns.16
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.16 [Google Scholar]
23. Martin, J.R.
    (1992) English text: System and structure. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: JolmBenjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/z.59
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.59 [Google Scholar]
24. Mercer, N.
    (1995) The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Meyer, B.J.F
    (1992) An analysis of a plea for money. In W.C. Mann and S. Thompson (eds.), Discourse description: Diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp.79–108. doi: 10.1075/pbns.16.05mey
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.16.05mey [Google Scholar]
26. Miall, D.S.
    (1989) Welcome the crisis! Rethinking learning methods in English studies. Studies in Higher Education14.1:69-81. doi: 10.1080/03075078912331377622
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03075078912331377622 [Google Scholar]
27. Ogborn, J.
    (ed.) (1977) Small group teaching in undergraduate science. Higher Education Learning Project (Physics). Heinemann: London.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Phillips, T.
    (1992) Why? The neglected question in planning for small group discussion. In K. Norman (ed.), Thinking voices: The work of the national oracy project. London: Hodder and Stoughton, pp.148–155.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Popper, K.
    (1974- orig.1934) The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchison
    [Google Scholar]
30. Rogers, G.F.C.
    (1983) The nature of engineering: A philosophy of technology. London: Macmillan Press.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Rowell, J.A. and E.R. Cawthorn
    (1982) Images of science: An empirical study. European Journal of Science Education4.1:79-94. doi: 10.1080/0140528820040109
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528820040109 [Google Scholar]
32. Sacks, H. and E.A. Schegloff
    (1973) Opening up closings. Semiotica8.4: 289–327. doi: 10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289 [Google Scholar]
33. Schwab, J.L.
    (1964) Structure of the disciplines; meanings and significances. In G.W. Ford and L. Pugno (eds.), The structure of knowledge and the curriculum. Chicago: Rand McNally, pp.6–30.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Sinclair, J. Mc H. and R.M. Coulthard
    (1975) Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Stubbs, M.
    (1983) Discourse analysis: The sociolinguistic analysis of natural language. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Testa, R.
    (1991) Negotiating stories: Strategic repair in Italian multi-party talk. Pragmatics1.3: 345–370.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Tomlin, R. , L. Forrest , M. Ming Pu and M. Hee Kim
    (1997) Discourse semantics. In T. van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as structure and process. London: Sage, pp.63–111.
    [Google Scholar]
38. van Dijk, T. A.
    (1977) Text and context: Explorations in the semantics and pragmatics of discourse. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
39. van Dijk, TA
    (1985) Handbook of discourse analysis. London: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
40. van Dijk, T.A.
    (1997) Discourse as structure and process. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
41. van Dijk, T.A. and W. Kintsch
    (1983) Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Winter, E.
    (1982) Towards a contextual grammar of English: The clause and its place in the definition of sentence. London: Allen and Unwin.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Winter, E.
    (1994) Clause relations as information structure: Two basic text structures in English. In R.M. Coulthard (ed.), Advances in written text analysis. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]