Grammatical choices of ditransitive patterns in academic articles

References

Alley, Michael. 2018. The craft of scientific writing, 4th edn. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4419-8288-9Search in Google Scholar

Banks, David. 2008. The development of scientific writing: Linguistic features and historical context. London: Equinox.Search in Google Scholar

Beavers, John. 2011. An aspectual Analysis of ditransitive verbs of caused possession in English. Journal of Semantics 28(1). 1–54.10.1093/jos/ffq014Search in Google Scholar

Ben El Hadj, Fatma. 2015. Prepositional phrases across disciplines and research genres: A syntactic and semantic approach. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. University of Sfax.Search in Google Scholar

Berry, Roger. 2012. English grammar: A resource book for students. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315881256Search in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 1995. Dimensions of register variation: A cross-linguistic comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511519871Search in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 1996. Investigating language use through corpus-based analyses of association patterns. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 1(2). 171–197.10.1075/ijcl.1.2.02bibSearch in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 2006. University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.23Search in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conard & Edward Finegan. 2007. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Pearson Education.Search in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas & Bethany Gray. 2010. Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9(1). 2–20.10.1016/j.jeap.2010.01.001Search in Google Scholar

Brinton, Laurel J. & Donna M. Brinton. 2010. The linguistic structure of modern English. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.156Search in Google Scholar

Burton-Roberts, Noel. 2013. Analyzing sentences: An introduction to English syntax. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315833477Search in Google Scholar

Deltor, Brian. 2004. Towards knowledge portals: From human issues to intelligent agents. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Search in Google Scholar

Devitt, Amy J. 2004. Writing genres. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Downing, Angela & Philip Locke. 2006. English grammar. A university course. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203087640Search in Google Scholar

Egan, Thomas. 2008. Non finite complementation: A usage-based study of infinitive and –ing clauses in English. Amsterdam: Rodopi.10.1163/9789401205542Search in Google Scholar

Francez, Itamar. 2006. Possessors, goals and the classification of ditransitive predicates: Evidence from Hebrew. In Olivier Bonami & Patricia Cabredo Hofherr (eds.), Empirical issues in syntax and semantics 6, 137–154. http://www.cssp.cnrs.fr/eiss6/index_en.html (accessed 15 September 2018)Search in Google Scholar

Gledhill, Christopher. 2009. Colligation and the cohesive function of present and past tense in the scientific research article. In David Banks (ed.), Les temps et les textes de spécialité, 65–84. Paris: l’Harmattan.Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Grafmiller, Jason. 2014. Variation in English genitives across modality and genres. English Language and Linguistics 18(3). 471–496.10.1017/S1360674314000136Search in Google Scholar

Grafmiller, Jason, Benedikt Szmrecsanyi, Melanie Röthlisberger & Benedikt Heller. 2018. General introduction: A comparative perspective on probabilistic variation in grammar. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1). 1–10.10.5334/gjgl.690Search in Google Scholar

Gross, Alan G. & Paula Chesley. 2012. Hedging, stance and voice in medical research articles. In Ken Hyland & Carmen Sancho Guinda (eds.), Stance and voice in written academic genres, 85–100. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9781137030825_6Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, Michael A. K. 1975. Learning how to mean: Explorations in the development of language. London: Edward Arnold.10.1016/B978-0-12-443701-2.50025-1Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, Michael A. K. 1978. Language as social semiotics. London: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, Michael A. K. & Jonathan J. Webster. 2009. Keywords. In M. A. K. Halliday & Jonathan J. Webster (eds.), Continuum companion to systemic functional linguistics, 229–253. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, Michael A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203783771Search in Google Scholar

Hasan, Ruqaiya. 2009. The place of context in a systemic functional model. In Michael A. K. Halliday & Jonathan J. Webster (eds.), Continuum companion to systemic functional linguistics, 166–189. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Sebastian & Joybrato Mukherjee. 2007. Ditransitive verbs in Indian English and British English: A corpus-linguistic study. Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik (AAA) 32(1). 5–24.Search in Google Scholar

Hood, Susan. 2011. Writing discipline: Comparing inscriptions of knowledge and knowers in academic writing. In Frances Christie & Karl Maton (eds.), Disciplinarity: Systemic functional and sociological perspectives, 106–128. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Hopkins, Andy & Tony Dudley-Evans. 1988. A genre-based investigation of the discussion sections in articles and dissertations. English for Specific Purposes 7(2). 113–122.10.1016/0889-4906(88)90029-4Search in Google Scholar

Hundt, Marianne, Gerold Schneider & Elena Seoane. 2016. The use of the be-passive in academic Englishes: Local versus global usage in an international language. Corpora 11(1). 31–63.10.3366/cor.2016.0084Search in Google Scholar

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

Hyland, Ken. 1995. The author in the text: Hedging scientific writing. Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching 18. 33–42.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 1998. Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics 30. 437–455.10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00009-5Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2004. Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2005. Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2009. Academic discourse: English in a global context. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2010. Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional science. English for Academic Purposes 9(2). 116–127.10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2014. Disciplinary discourses: writer stance in research articles. In Christopher N. Candlin & Ken Hyland (eds.), Writing: Texts, processes and practices, 99–121. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315840390-6Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken & Françoise Salager-Meyer. 2008. Scientific writing. In Blaise Cronin (ed.), Annual review of information science and technology, Vol 42, 297–338. Medford: Information Today.10.1002/aris.2008.1440420114Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken & Marina Bondi. 2006. Introduction. In Ken Hyland & Marina Bondi (eds.), Academic discourse across disciplines, 7–13. Frankfort: Peter Lang.10.3726/978-3-0351-0446-2Search in Google Scholar

Keenan, Edward L. & Matthew S. Dryer. 2007. Passive in the world’s languages. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description Vol.1: Clause structure, 325–361. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511619427.006Search in Google Scholar

Livnat, Zohar. 2012. Dialogue, science and academic writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/ds.13Search in Google Scholar

Malhotra, Yogesh. 2001. Knowledge management and business model innovation. London: Idea Group Publishing.10.4018/978-1-878289-98-8Search in Google Scholar

Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2005. English ditransitive verbs: Aspects of theory, description and a usage-based model. Amsterdam: Rodopi.10.1163/9789004333079Search in Google Scholar

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Ian Svartvik. 2005. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Essex: Longman Group.Search in Google Scholar

Rakam, Ilhem. 2010. Evaluative that-clause: Abstracts of research articles as a case study. Unpublished MA Thesis. Tunisian National University, Sfax.Search in Google Scholar

Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2005. A student’s introduction to English grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511815515Search in Google Scholar

Sellami Baklouti, Akila. 2011. The impact of genre and disciplinary differences on structural choice: taxis in research article abstracts. Text and Talk 31(5). 503–523.10.1515/text.2011.025Search in Google Scholar

Sellami-Baklouti, Akila. 2013. A probabilistic approach to choice: The impact of contextual factors on the tactic system in research article abstracts. In Gerard O’Grady, Tom Bartlett & Lise Fontaine (eds.), Choice in language: Applications in text analysis, 215–242. Sheffield: Equinox.Search in Google Scholar

Sharma, Rajendra Kumar. 1997. Sociological methods and techniques. New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers.Search in Google Scholar

Siewierska, Anna & Willem Hollmann. 2007. Ditransitive clauses in English with special reference to Lancashire dialect. In Michael Hannay & Gerard Steen (eds.), Structural-functional studies in English grammar, 83–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.83.06sieSearch in Google Scholar

Swales, John. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Swales, John. 2004. Research genres: Explorations and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524827Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, K. Dorothea. 1993. Arguing for experimental “facts” in science: A study of research article results sections in biochemistry. Written Communication 10. 106–128.10.1177/0741088393010001004Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, Geoff. 1994. Propositions, projections and things. Paper presented at 21st ISFC, University of Gent, 1–5 August.Search 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