Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:24:49.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Julia Muschalik, Threatening in English: A mixed method approach (Pragmatics & Beyond 284). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2018. Pp. xiv + 246. ISBN 9789027256898.

Review products

Julia Muschalik, Threatening in English: A mixed method approach (Pragmatics & Beyond 284). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2018. Pp. xiv + 246. ISBN 9789027256898.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2020

Tammy Gales
Tammy Gales*
Affiliation:
Hofstra University, Calkins 313, Hempstead, NY11549USATammy.A.Gales@hofstra.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , March 2021 , pp. 211 - 217
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aijmer, Karin. 1996. Conversational routines in English: Convention and creativity. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan. 2011. Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gales, Tammy. 2010. Ideologies of violence: A corpus and discourse analytic approach to stance in threatening communications. PhD dissertation, University of California, Davis. Retrieved from https://ucdavis.app.box.com/s/vs8l0rflp9ny08sh8o3ar6f4ekqwv3raGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 2009. Speech act research between armchair, field and laboratory: The case of compliments. Journal of Pragmatics 41(8), 1611–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Limberg, Holger. 2009. Impoliteness and threat responses. Journal of Pragmatics 41, 1376–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nini, Andrea. 2017. Register variation in malicious forensic texts. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 24(1), 67–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, Steven, Nowak, Martin A. & Lee, James J.. 2008. The logic of indirect speech. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105(3), 833–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schneider, Klaus P. & Barron, Anne. 2008. Where pragmatics and dialectology meet: Introducing variational pragmatics. In Schneider, Klaus P. & Barron, Anne (eds.), Variational pragmatics: A focus on regional varieties in pluricentric languages, 1–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solan, Lawrence M. & Tiersma, Peter. 2005. Speaking of crime: The language of criminal justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Yamanaka, Nobuhiko. 1995. On indirect threats. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 8(1), 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar