Mapping Hansard Impression Management Strategies through Time and Space

References

• Archer, Dawn. Forthcoming. Negotiating difference in political contexts: An exploration of Hansard. Language Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Archer, Dawn & Bethan Malory. 2017. Tracing facework strategies over time using (semi)automated methods. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22(1),27–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baron, Alistair & Paul Rayson. 2008. VARD 2: A tool for dealing with spelling variation in historical corpora. Proceedings of the Postgraduate Conference in Corpus Linguistics, Aston University, Birmingham, UK, 22 May 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Beech, Nic. 2008. On the nature of dialogic identity work. Organization 15(1),51–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, Penelope & Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness. Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chilton, Paul. 2004. Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. London & New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Combs, James E. 1994. Phony culture: Confidence and malaise in contemporary America. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, Cecily D. 2005. Just joking around? Employee humor expression as an ingratiatory behaviour. Academy of Management Review 30, 765–776.
   Google Scholar
• Eder, Robert W. & Donald B. Fedor. 2013. Impression management: Its interpretative role in the supervisor-employee feedback process. In R.A. Giacalone & P. Rosenfeld (eds.), Impression management in the organisation, 327–339. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, Aleksander P.J., Bradley J. West, Anne M. Ryan & Richard P. DeShon. 2002. The use of impression management tactics in structured interviews: A function of question type? Journal of Applied Psychology 87(6),1200–1208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fetzer, Anita & Peter Bull. 2012. Doing leadership in political speech: Semantic processes and pragmatic inferences. Discourse & Society 23(2),127–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia-Pastor, María D. 2008. Political campaign debates as zero-sum gains: Impoliteness and power in candidates’ exchanges. In D. Bousfield & M. Locher (eds.), Impoliteness in language: Studies on its interplay with power in theory and practice, 101–125. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Gass, Robert H. & John S. Seiter. 2015. Persuasion: Social influence and compliance gaining. Fifth edition. Abingdon & New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, Erving. 1959. The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday/Anchor.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interaction ritual. Essays in face-to-face behavior. Chicago: Aldine.
   Google Scholar
• Harré, Rom & Fathali M. Moghaddam. 2003. Introduction: The Self and Others in traditional psychology and in positioning theory. In R. Harré & F.M. Moghaddam (eds.), The Self and Others: Positioning individuals and groups in personal, political and cultural contexts, 1–11. Westport, CT & London: Greenwood.
   Google Scholar
• House of Commons Information Office. 2010. The official report. Revised version. G17 General Series: https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-information-office/g17.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jack, Malcom, Mark Hutton, Christopher Johnson, Douglas Millar, Simon Patrick & Alan Sandall. 2011. Erskine May: Parliamentary practice. Twenty-fourth edition. London: LexisNexis Butterworths.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, Edward E. & Thane S. Pittman. 1982. Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Kay, Christian, Jane Roberts, Michael Samuels & Irené Wotherspoon (eds.). 2009. Historical thesaurus of the Oxford English dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Locher, Miriam. 2004. Power and politeness in action: Disagreements in oral communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Locher, Miriam & Richard J. Watts. 2008. Relational work and impoliteness: Negotiating norms of linguistic behaviour. In D. Bousfield & M.A. Locher (eds.), Impoliteness in language: Studies on its interplay with power in theory and practice (Language, Power and Social Process 21), 77–99. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• May, Thomas E. 1844. A practical treatise on the law, privileges, proceedings and usage of parliament. London: Charles Knight & Co (Ludgate Street).
   Google Scholar
• Rayson, Paul. 2008. Wmatrix: A web-based corpus processing environment. Computing Department, Lancaster University. http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/wmatrix/.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, Robert & Rhodri Walters. 2015. How parliament works. London & New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schlenker, Barry R. 2003. Self-presentation. In M. Leary & J. Price (eds.), Handbook of self and identity, 492–518. New York: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Sieber, Irmgard. 2007. Politicians’ self-presentational tactics and strategies used on television talk shows and interviews. In J. Mecke (ed.), Cultures of lying: Theories and practice of lying in society, literature and film, 205–216. Berlin and Madison, WI: Galda & Wilch.
   Google Scholar
• Sifianou, Maria. 2012. Disagreements, face and politeness. Journal of Pragmatics 44, 1554–1564.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vice, John & Stephen Farrell. 2017. The history of Hansard. London: House of Lords Hansard and the House of Lords Library.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, Douglas. 2013. Scare tactics: Arguments that appeal to fear and threats. Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• White, Naomi R. & Peter White. 2008. Remote relationships as theater: Travellers and group emails. In S. Holland (ed.), Remote relationships in a small world, 155–173. New York: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar