Hedged Turkish complaints and requests in the Problem-Solution text pattern

References

1. Akar, Didar
   2002 “The macro contextual factors shaping business discourse: The Turkish case.” International Research in Applied Linguistics40: 305–322. doi:  10.1515/iral.2002.015
   https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2002.015 [Google Scholar]
2. Akbaş, Erdem
   2014 Commitment-detachment and authorial presence in postgraduate academic writing: A comparative study of Turkish native speakers. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. University of York, UK.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Baker, Paul
   2006 Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis. London: Continuum.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Baratta, Alexander M.
   2009 “Revealing stance through passive voice.” Journal of Pragmatics41:10406–1421. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.010
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.010 [Google Scholar]
5. Bhatia, Vijay K., John Flowerdew, and Rodney H. Jones
   2008 “Approaches to discourse analysis.” InAdvances in Discourse Studies, ed. byVijay K. Bhatia, John Flowerdew, and Rodney H. Jones, 1–18. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203892299
   https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203892299 [Google Scholar]
6. Biber, Douglas, Ulla Connor and Thomas Upton
   2007 “Discourse Analysis and Corpus Linguistics.” InDiscourse on the Move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure (Studies in Corpus Linguistics, Vol. 28). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.28
   https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.28 [Google Scholar]
7. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
   1989 “Playing it safe: The role of conventionality in indirectness.” InCross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, ed. byShoshana Blum-Kulka, Juliana House, and Gabriele Kasper, 37–70. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
   1987 “Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or different?” Journal of Pragmatics11:131–146. doi:  10.1016/0378‑2166(87)90192‑5
   https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(87)90192-5 [Google Scholar]
9. Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
   1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
10. Cohen, Andrew D. and Elite Olshtain
    1993 “The production of speech acts by EFL learners.” TESOL Quarterly27(1):33–56. doi:  10.2307/3586950
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3586950 [Google Scholar]
11. Crompton, Peter
    1997 “Hedging in academic writing: some theoretical problems.” English for Specific Purposes16(4): 271–287. doi:  10.1016/S0889‑4906(97)00007‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00007-0 [Google Scholar]
12. Doyuran, Zeynep
    2009 “Conciliation of knowledge through hedging in Turkish scientific articles.” Hacettepe University Journal of the Faculty of Letters26(1): 85–99.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Duruk, Eda
    2017 “Analysis of metadiscourse markers in academic written discourse produced by Turkish researchers.” Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies13(1):1–19.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Emeksiz, Zeynep E.
    2015 “Stance taking and passive voice in Turkish academic discourse.” Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies11(2), 13–22.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Flowerdew, Lynne
    2008 Corpus-based Analyses of the Problem-solution pattern. London: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.29
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.29 [Google Scholar]
16. Flowerdew, Lynne
    2012 “Exploiting a corpus of business letters from a phraseological, functional perspective.” ReCALL24:152–168. doi:  10.1017/S0958344012000043
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344012000043 [Google Scholar]
17. Goffman, Erwin
    1959 The Presentation of Self in Daily Life. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Goffman, Erwin
    1967 “On Face-Work” InInteraction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour, ed. byErwin Goffman, 5–45. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Göksel, Aslı and Celia Kerslake
    2005 Turkish: A comprehensive grammar. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Gu, Yueguo
    1990 “Politeness phenomena in Modern Chinese.” Journal of Pragmatics14: 237–257. doi:  10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90082‑O
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90082-O [Google Scholar]
21. Hartford, Beverly and Ahmar Mahboob
    2004 “Models of Discourse in the letter of complaint.” World Englishes23(4): 585–600. doi:  10.1111/j.0083‑2919.2004.00378.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0083-2919.2004.00378.x [Google Scholar]
22. Hinkel, Eli
    2005 “Hedging, inflating, and persuading in L2 academic writing.” Applied Language Learning15(1&2): 29–53.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Ho, Victor
    2011 “What functions do intertextuality and interdiscursivity serve in request email discourse?” Journal of Pragmatics43: 2534–2547. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.002 [Google Scholar]
24. Hoey, Michael
    1983 On the Surface of Discourse. London: Allen & Unwin.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Hyland, Ken
    1996 “Writing without conviction? Hedging in scientific research articles.” Applied Linguistics17(4):433–454. doi:  10.1093/applin/17.4.433
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.4.433 [Google Scholar]
26. Hyland, Ken
    1998 “Boosting hedging and the meaning of academic knowledge.” Text18(3):349–382. doi:  10.1515/text.1.1998.18.3.349
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1998.18.3.349 [Google Scholar]
27. Karatepe, Çiğdem
    2016 “Indirectness in requests in complaint letters to the higher institution by Turkish EFL Students.” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences232: 354–361. doi:  10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.050
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.050 [Google Scholar]
28. Jenkins, Susan and John Hinds
    1987 “Business letter writing: English, French and Japanese.” TESOL Quarterly1(2): 327–349. doi:  10.2307/3586738
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3586738 [Google Scholar]
29. Kerslake, Celia
    1996 “The semantics of possibility of Turkish.” InCurrent Issues in Turkish Linguistics: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics (pp.84–104). Ankara: Hitit Yayınları.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Lakoff, George
    1975 “Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts.” Chicago Linguistic Society Papers8: 183–228. doi:  10.1007/978‑94‑010‑1756‑5_9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1756-5_9 [Google Scholar]
31. Mackiewicz, Jo and Kathryn Riley
    2003 “The technical editor as diplomat: Linguistic strategies for balancing clarity and politeness.” Technical Communication50(1): 83–94.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Maier, Paula
    1992 “Politeness strategies in business letters by native and non-native English speakers.” English for Specific Purposes11:189–205. doi:  10.1016/S0889‑4906(05)80009‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(05)80009-2 [Google Scholar]
33. Molino, Alessandra
    2010 “Personal and impersonal authorial references: A contrastive study of English and Italian Linguistics research articles.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes9: 86–101. doi:  10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.007 [Google Scholar]
34. Murphy, Beth and Joyce Neu
    1996 “‘My grade is too low’: The speech act set of complaining.” InSpeech Acts Across Cultures, ed. bySusan Gass and Joyce Neu, 191–216. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Myers, Greg
    1989 “The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles.” Applied Linguistics10(1):1–35. doi:  10.1093/applin/10.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/10.1.1 [Google Scholar]
36. Olshtain, Elite and Liora Weinbach
    1993 “Interlanguage features of the speech act of complaining”. InInterlanguage Pragmatics, ed. byGabriele Kasper and Shoshana Blum-Kulka. 108–122. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Reilly, Judy, Anita Zamora, and Robert F. McGivern
    2005 “Acquiring perspective in English: The development of stance.” Journal of Pragmatics37(2): 185–208. doi:  10.1016/S0378‑2166(04)00191‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(04)00191-2 [Google Scholar]
38. Reiter, Rosina Marquez, Isobel Rainey and Glenn Fulcher
    2005 “A comparative study of certainty and conventional indirectness: Evidence from British English and Peninsular Spanish.” Applied Linguistics26(1):1–31. doi:  10.1093/applin/amh018
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amh018 [Google Scholar]
39. Salager-Meyer, Françoise
    1997 “I think that perhaps you should: A study of hedges in written scientific discourse.” InFunctional Approaches to Written Text: Classroom applications, ed. byTom Miller, 105–118. Washington, D.C.: United States Information Agency, English Language Programmes.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Searle, John R.
    1977 “Indirect speech acts.” InSyntax and Semantics, Vol. 3, Speech Acts, ed. byPeter Cole and Jerry Morgan, 59–82. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Varttala, Teppo
    1999 “Remarks on the communicative functions of hedging in popular scientific and research articles on medicine.” English for Specific Purposes18(2):177–200. doi:  10.1016/S0889‑4906(98)00007‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00007-6 [Google Scholar]
42. Vergaro, Carla
    2002 “‘Dear Sirs, what would you do if you were in our position?’ Discourse Strategies in Italian and English Money Chasing Letters.” Journal of Pragmatics24: 1211–1232. doi:  10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00046‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00046-2 [Google Scholar]
43. Wood, David
    2015 Fundamentals of Formulaic Language: An introduction. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Yeung, Lorrita N. T.
    1997 “Polite requests in English and Chinese business correspondence in Hong Kong.” Journal of Pragmatics27(4): 505–522. doi:  10.1016/0378‑2166(95)00050‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00050-X [Google Scholar]