Диссертация (1173494), страница 31
Текст из файла (страница 31)
van. Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: SAGEPublications, 19984. 384 p.243. Dijk T.А. van. News as Discourse. New Jersey; London: LawrenceElbbaum Associates. Publ, 1998с. 200 p.244. Dijk T.A. van. Political discourse and ideology. Paper presented atJornadas del Discurso Politico. Barcelona: UPF, 20011.
P. 15–34.245. Dijk T.A. van.Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis // Thesociolinguistic Reader. Vol. 2: Gender and Discourse / Ed. by Jenny Cheshire and PeterTrudgill. London, New York: Arnold, 19982. P. 367–393.246. Dijk T.A. van. Studies in the Pragmatics of Discourse. The Hague-Paris:Mouton, 1981. 331p.176247. Dijk T.A. van.The Study of Discourse // Discourse as Structure andProcess. Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. London: Thousand Oaks,New Delhi: SAGE Publications, 19972. Vol.1 – P.
1–34.248. Dijk T.A. van. What is political discourse analysis? // Political linguistics /Blommaert J., Bulcaen Ch.(еds.). The Hague: Mouton, 1998a. P. 353– 371.249. Dubois B.L., Crouch I. Regulatory Language Behaviour. Lake Bluff:Jupiter Press, 1985. 96 p.250. Fairclough N. Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language.London: Longman, 1995. XIII. 265 p.251. Fairclough N.
Discourse and text: linguistic and intertextual analysis withindiscourse analysis // Discourse and Society. London: SAGE Publications, 1992. № 3. P.192–217.252. Fairclough N. Language and Globalization. New York: Routledge, 2006.186 p.253. Fairclough N. Language and Power. London: Longman, 1989. 226 p.254. Fairclough N. Textual analysis for social research. New York: Routledge,2003. 270 p.255. Fairclough N.
Chouliaraki L. Discourse in late modernity. Edinburgh:University Press, 1999. 168 p.256. Fairclough N., Wodak R. Critical discourse analysis // Discourse as socialinteraction / Т. А. van Dijk (Ed.). London: SAGE Publications. 1997. Vol.1. P. 258–284.257. Fasold R. Sociolinguistics of Language. Oxford: Blackwell, 1990.
360 p.258. Fauconnier G. Mental spaces. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1994. 190 p.259. Genette G. Palimpsestes. La littérature au second degree. Paris: Editions duSeuil, 1982. 467 p.260. Givon T. Mind, code and context. Essays in Pragmatics. Hillsdale (NewJersey); London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., 1989. 456 p.177261. Graber D.A. Political languages // Handbook of political communication.Beverly Hill: SAGE Publications, 1981. P.
195–224.262. Grimes J.E. The thread of discourse. The Hague: Mouton, 1975. 408 p.263. Gronbeck B.E. The Presidency in the Age of Secondary Orality // Beyondthe Rhetorical Presidency. College Station: Texas A&M Univ. Press, 1996. P. 30–49.264. Harris Z. Discourse analysis // Language. The Hague: Mouton & Co, 1952.V.
28. № 1. P. 1–30.265. Jackendoff R. Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1995.283 p.266. Jäger M., Jäger S. Deutungskampfe. Theorie und Praxis KritischerDiskursanalyse. Wiesbaden: Verlag fur Sozialwissenschaften, 2007. 309 s.267. Jäger S. Kritische Diskursanalyse. Eine Einführung. Münster: Unrast, 2012.258 s.268. Johnson M., Lakoff G. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 2003 – 191 p.269. Joslyn R. Keeping Politics in the Study of Political Discourse // Form,Genre, and the Study of Political Discourse.
Columbia: Univ. of S. Carol. Press, 1986.P. 301–338.270. Lakoff G. Don't Think Of An Elephant! Know Your Values and Frame theDebate. VT.: Chelsea Green Publishing, 2004. 144 p.271. Lakoff G. The invariance hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on imageschemas? // Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Vol.1. N.1. P. 39–74.272. Langacker R.W.
Assessing the cognitive linguistic enterprise // Th.Janssen, G. Redeker (eds). Cognitive Linguistics: Foundations, Scope, andMethodology. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1999. 279 p.273. Langacker R.W. Concept, Image, and Symbol: The cognitive Basis ofGrammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1991. 395 p.274. Link J. Dispositiv / Kammler C., Parr R., Schneider U. Foucault Handbuch.Leben - Werk - Wirkung. Stuttgart; Weimar: J.B. Metzler, 2008. S. 237–242.178275. Link J., Link-Heer U. Diskurs / Interdiskurs und Literaturanalyse //Zeitschrift fur Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik.
Siegen: Vandenhoeck andRuprecht, 1990. S. 88–99.276. Ludwig Ch., Wodak R. Challenges in a Changing World: Issues in CriticalDiscourse Analysis. Vienna: Passagenverlag, 1999. P. 11–20.277. Maas U. Als der Geist der Gemeinschaft eine Sprache fand: Sprache imNationalsozialismus. Versuch einer historischen Argumentationsanalyse.
Opladen:Westdeutscher Verlag, 1984. 261 s.278. Mann W.C., Thompson S.A. Rhetorical structure theory: toward afunctional theory of text organization // Text. Hague: De Gruyter, 1988. P. 243–281.279. Manning P.K. Dramaturgy, politics, and the axial media event //Sociological Quarterly. Colorado: Taylor and Francis, 1996. №37 (2), P. 261–279.280.
Musolff A. The Metaphorisation of European Politics: Movement on theRoad to Europe // Attitudes towards Europe. Language in the Unification Process / Eds.A. Musolff, C. Good, P. Points, R. Wittlinger. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001. P. 179–200.281. Neaman J., Silver C. The Book of Euphemism. Ware: WordsworthEditions Ltd. 1995. 373 p.282. Parret H.
Prolégomènes à la théorie de l’énonciation: De Нusserl à lapragmatique. Berne; Francfort/M.; New York; Paris: Peter Lang, 1987. P. 169.283. Pêcheux M. L’inquiétude du discours: textes choisis et présentés par D.Maldidier. Paris: Editions des Cendres, 1990. 334 p.284.
Renkema J. Introduction to discourse studies. Amsterdam: John BenjaminsPublishing, 2004. 363 p.285. Riffaterre M. Intertextual representation: on mimesis as interpretivediscourse // Critical Inquiry 11 (1). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984. P. 141–162.286. RoschE.ClassificationofReal-worldObjects:OriginsandRepresentationsin Cognition // La Memoire semantique / Erlich S. And Tulving E.(eds).
Paris: Bulletin de Psychologie, 1976. P. 212–222.179287. Rosch E. Prototype classification and logical classification: The twosystems // New trends in conceptual representation: Challenges to Piaget's theory? / Ed.Scholnick E.K. Hillsdale; NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 1983. P.
73–86.288. Schiffrin D. Approaches to Discours. Oxford, UK; Cambridge, Mass.;USA: B. Blackwell, 1994. 470 p.289. Schmid H.-J., Ungerer, F. An Introduction to cognitive linguistics. London;New York: Pearson Education, 2006. 384 p.290. Schudson M. Sending a Political Message: Lessons from the American1790s // Media, Culture and Society. London: SAGE Publications, 1997. Vol. 19.
№3.P. 311–330.291. Sedlak M. “You Really do make an Unrespectable Foreigner Policy. . .Discourse on Ethnic Issues in the Austrian Parliament” / In R. Wodak & T.A. van Dijk(Eds.) // Racism at the Top. Parliamentary Discourses on Ethnic Issues in Six EuropeanStates. Klagenfurt / Celovec: Drava, 2000.
P. 107–168.292. Sériot P. Analyse du discours politique Soviétique. Paris: Institute d’étudesslaves, 1985. 362 p.293. Sériot P. Le déterminisme linguistique en Russie actuelle // Patrick Sériot(dir.) La question du déterminisme en Russie actuelle [en ligne]. Lyon, ENS LSH, misen ligne le 10 décembre 2008.
[Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://institut-estouest.ens-lsh.fr/spip.php?article156 (дата обращения: 27.10.2016).294. Sinclair J. Priorities in discourse analysis // Advances in Spoken DiscourseAnalysis / M. Coulthard (ed.). New York: Routledge, 19921. – P. 79–88.295. Strauss C., Quinn N. A Cognitive Theory of Cultural Meaning. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2001.
323 p.296. Talmy L. Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Cambridge; London: MIT Press:A Bradford Book, 2000. Vol. 1: Concept Structuring Systems. 565 p.297. Taylor J.R. Cognitive Grammar. Oxford; New York: Oxford UniversityPress, 2002. 612 p180298. Warren B. What Euphemisms Tell Us About the Interpretation of Words //Studia Linguistica. Vol.46, #2. Oslo-Stockholm: Scandinavian University Press, 1996.P. 128–142.299. Weiss G., Wodak R.
Introduction: Theory, Interdisciplinarity and CriticalDiscourse Analysis // Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and Interdisciplinarity.London: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2003. P. 1–32.300. Wodak R., Nowak, Pelikan J. «Wir sind alle unschuldige Täter».Diskurshistorische Studien zum Nachkriegsantisemitismus. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1990.401 s.301. Wodak R., Weiss G. Visions, Ideologies and Utopias in the DiscursiveConstruction of European identities: Organizing, Representing and Legitimizing Europe// Communicating Ideologies: Language, Discourse and Social Practice / M. Putz, A.Neff, G. van Artselaer, T.A. van Dijk (eds). Frankfurt a.
Main: Peter Lang, 2004. P.225–252.302. Zinken J. Imagination im Diskurs. Zur Modellierung metaphorischerKommunikation und Kognition. Dissertation zur Erlangung der Wurde eines Doktorsim Fach Linguistik. Bielefeld: Universität Bielefeld, 2002. 262 s.Список словарей и энциклопедий303. Абрамов Н.А. Словарь русских синонимов и сходных по смыслувыражений: Около 5 000 синонимических рядов. Более 20 000 синонимов. 7-еизд., стереотип. М.: Русские словари, 1999. 431 с.304. Арутюнова Ж.М., Новикова Г.А., Сахадзе С.Г.
Русско-французскийсловарь: Язык прессы. Политика. Экономика. Право. М.: Наука, 1995. 362 с.305. Большая советская энциклопедия [Электронный ресурс]. URL:https://dic.academic.ru/contents.nsf/bse/ (дата обращения: 18.12.2017).306. Гак В.Г., Ганшина К.А. Новый французско-русский словарь. М.:Русский язык Медиа, 2007. 1168 с.181307.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
