The fictionalized reader in popular science: reader engagement with the scientific community

References

Barberousse, Anouk & Pascal Ludwig. 2009. Models as fictions. In Mauricio Suárez (ed.), Fictions in science: Philosophical essays on modeling and idealization, 56–73. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Barnes, Jennifer L. 2015. Fanfiction as imaginary play: What fan-written stories can tell us about the cognitive science of fiction. Poetics 48. 69–82.10.1016/j.poetic.2014.12.004Search in Google Scholar

Barton, Nancy. 2010. Escape from the ivory tower: A guide to making your science matter. London: Island Press.Search in Google Scholar

Barwich, Ann-Sophie. 2013. Science and fiction: Analyzing the concept in science and its limits. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 44. 357–373.10.1007/s10838-013-9228-2Search in Google Scholar

Bensaude-Vincent, Bernadette. 2001. A genealogy of the increasing gap between science and the public. Public Understanding of Science 10. 99–113.10.1088/0963-6625/10/1/307Search in Google Scholar

Bowater, Laura & Kay Yeoman. 2013. Science communication: A practical guide for scientists. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Bryson, Bill. 2003. A short history of nearly everything. New York: Broadway Books.Search in Google Scholar

Bucchi, Massimiano. 1998. Science and the media: Alternative routes in scientific communication. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203263839Search in Google Scholar

Calsamiglia, Helena. 2003. Popularization discourse. Discourse Studies 5(2). 139–146.10.1177/1461445603005002307Search in Google Scholar

Carroll, Sean. 2012. The particle at the end of the universe: How the hunt for the higgs boson leads us to the edge of a new world. New York: Plume.Search in Google Scholar

Cartwright, Nancy. 1983. How the laws of physics lie. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0198247044.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Coen, Enrico. 2012. Cells to civilization: The principles of change that shape life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400841653Search in Google Scholar

Culler, Jonathan. 2008 [1982]. On deconstruction: Theory and criticism after structuralism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Search in Google Scholar

De Oliveira, Janaina Minelli & Adriana Silvina Pagano. 2006. The research article and the science popularization article: A probabilistic functional grammar perspective on direct discourse presentation. Discourse Studies 8(5). 627–646.10.1177/1461445606064833Search in Google Scholar

Du Sautoy, Marcus. 2010. The number mysteries: A mathematical odyssey through everyday life. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar

Ferris, Timothy. 1988. Coming of age in the milky way. New York: William Morrow and Company.Search in Google Scholar

Fine, Arthur. 1993. Fictionalism. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 18. 1–18.10.1111/j.1475-4975.1993.tb00254.xSearch in Google Scholar

Fu, XiaoLi & Ken Hyland. 2014. Interaction in two journalistic genres: A study of interactional metadiscourse. English Text Construction 7(1). 122–144.10.1075/etc.7.1.05fuSearch in Google Scholar

Greene, Brian. 2011. The hidden reality: Parallel universes and the deep laws of the cosmos. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Search in Google Scholar

Gülich, Elisabeth. 2003. Conversational techniques used in transferring knowledge between medical experts and non-experts. Discourse Studies 5(2). 235–263.10.1177/1461445603005002005Search in Google Scholar

Harré, Rom. 1994. Some narrative conventions of scientific discourse. In Christopher Nash (ed.), Narrative in culture: The uses of storytelling in sciences, philosophy, and literature, 81–101. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Hunston, Susan. 2000. Evaluation and the planes of discourse: Status and value in persuasive texts. In Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse, 176–207. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hunston, Susan & Geoff Thompson. 2000. Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2001. Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles. Written Communication 18(4). 549–574.10.1177/0741088301018004005Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2005. Representing readers in writing: Student and expert practices. Linguistics and Education 16. 363–377.10.1016/j.linged.2006.05.002Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2009. Corpus informed discourse analysis: The case of academic engagement. In Maggie Charles, Diane Pecorari & Susan Hunston (eds.), Academic writing: At the interface of corpus and discourse, 110–128. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2010. Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9. 116–127.10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003Search in Google Scholar

Iser, Wolfgang. 1972. The implied reader: Patterns of communication in prose fiction from bunyan to beckett. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kaku, Michio. 2011. Physics of the future: How science will shape human destiny and our daily lives by the year 2100. New York: Doubleday.Search in Google Scholar

Kean, Sam. 2012. The violinist’s thumb and other lost tales of love, war, and genius, as written by our genetic code. New York: Little, Brown and Company.Search in Google Scholar

Kylinich, M. A. & M. V. Pokalyhina. 2013. O dialogichnosti paratekstovuh elementov ‘vvedenie/zaklychenie’ v angloyazuchnoi naychopopuliarnoi literature [About dialogicity of paratext elements “introduction/conclusion” in English language popular science]. Izvastia Samarskogo Naychnogo Tsentra Rossiskoi Akademii Nayk [News of the Samara Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences] 2(3). 766–770.Search in Google Scholar

Laslo, Esther, Ayelet Baram-Tsabari, & Bruce V Lewenstein. 2011. A growth medium for the message: Online science journalism affordances for exploring public discourse of science and ethics. Journalism 12(7). 847–870.10.1177/1464884911412709Search in Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey & Mick Short. 2007 [1981]. Style in fiction: A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose. London: Pearson.Search in Google Scholar

Lewin, Beverly A & Hadara Perpignan. 2012. Recruiting the reader in literary criticism. Text and Talk 32(6). 751–772.10.1515/text-2012-0035Search in Google Scholar

Lightman, Bernard. 2000. Marketing knowledge for the general reader: Victorian popularizers of science. Endeavour 24(3). 100–106.10.1016/S0160-9327(00)01307-7Search in Google Scholar

Luzón, María José. 2013. Public communication of science in blogs: Recontextualizing scientific discourse for a diversified audience. Written Communication 30(4). 428–457.10.1177/0741088313493610Search in Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. & P. R. R. White. 2005. The language of evaluation: Appraisal in english. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230511910Search in Google Scholar

Moirand, Sophie. 2000. Variations discursives dans deux situations productrices d’un discourse sur la science de la presse ordinaire. Carnets du Cediscor 6. 45–62.10.4000/cediscor.337Search in Google Scholar

Moirand, Sophie. 2003. Communicative and cognitive dimensions of discourse on science in the French mass media. Discourse Studies 5(2). 175–206.10.1177/1461445603005002003Search in Google Scholar

Myers, Greg. 2003. Discourse studies of scientific popularisation: Questioning the bundaries. Discourse Studies 5(2). 265–279.10.1177/1461445603005002006Search in Google Scholar

Myers, Greg. 2010. Discourse of blogs and wikis. London: Continuum International Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Nigel, Gilbert, G & Michael Mulkay. 1984. Opening Pandora’s box: A sociological analysis of scientists’ discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Oparina, O. I. 2015. Nayka, mirovozzrenie, i yazuk v XIX veke (nekotorue mementu i osnovnue tendentsii) [Science, worldview, and language in the XIX century (some developments and basic tendencies)]. Filologia I Chelovek [Philology and Person] 2. 63–74.Search in Google Scholar

Pilkington, Olga A. 2018. Presented discourse in popular science: Professional voices in books for lay audiences. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004365971Search in Google Scholar

Rouse, Joseph. 2009. Laboratory fictions. In Mauricio Suárez (ed.), Fictions in science: Philosophical essays on modeling and idealization, 37–55. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Semino, Elena & Mick Short. 2004. Corpus stylistics: Speech, writing and thought presentation in a corpus of english writing. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203494073Search in Google Scholar

Short, Mick. 2012. Discourse presentation and speech (and writing but not thought) summary. Language and Literature 21(1). 18–32.10.1177/0963947011432049Search in Google Scholar

Skov Nielsen, Henrik, James Phelan, & Richard Walsh. 2015a. Ten theses about fictionality. Narrative 23(1). 61–73.10.1353/nar.2015.0005Search in Google Scholar

Skov Nielsen, Henrik, James Phelan, & Richard Walsh. 2015b. Fictionality as rhetoric: A response to Paul Dawson. Narrative 23(1). 101–111.10.1353/nar.2015.0000Search in Google Scholar

Suárez, Mauricio. 2009. Fictions in scientific practice. In Mauricio Suárez (ed.), Fictions in science: Philosophical essays on modeling and idealization, 3–15. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203890103Search in Google Scholar

Supper, Alexandra. 2014. Sublime frequencies: The construction of sublime listening experiences in the sonification of scientific data. Social Studies of Science 44(1). 34–58.10.1177/0306312713496875Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, Geoff. 2001. Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics 22(1). 58–78.10.1093/applin/22.1.58Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, Geoff. 2012. Intersubjectivity in newspaper editorials: Constructing the reader-in-the-text. English Text Construction 5(1). 77–100.10.1075/etc.5.1.05thoSearch in Google Scholar

Thompson, Geoff & Puleng Thetela. 1995. The sound of one hand clapping: The management of interaction in written discourse. Text 15(1). 103–127.10.1515/text.1.1995.15.1.103Search in Google Scholar

Toon, Adam. 2012. Models and make-believe: Imagination, fiction and scientific representation. New York: Palgrave McMillan.10.1057/9781137292230Search in Google Scholar

Topham, Jonathan R. 2000. Scientific publishing and the reading of science in nineteenth-century Britain: A historiographical survey and guide to sources. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 31(4). 559–612.10.1016/S0039-3681(00)00030-3Search in Google Scholar

Vaihinger, Hans. 1924/2001. The philosophy of ‘As If’. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Votrina, E. N. 2012 Funktsionirovanie kategorii dialogichnosti v naychnuh tekstah XX veka [The function of dialogicity in popular science of the twentieth century]. Avtoreferat dis. kand. filol. nayk. Volgograd, RF [Volgograd, Russian Federation PhD thesis].Search in Google Scholar

Zimmer, Carl. 2011. A planet of viruses. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226983332.001.0001Search in Google Scholar