Ethics in critical discourse analysis

References

• Aristotle, A. (1953/1976). The Nicomachean ethics (J. A. Thompson, Trans.). London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Bartlett, T. (2012). Hybrid voices and collaborative change: Contextualising positive discourse analysis. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Blakesley, D. (1999). Kenneth Burke’s Pragmatism – old and new. In B. L. Brock (Ed.), Kenneth Burke and the 21st century (pp. 71–95). New York, NY: SUNY Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford, NJ: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, K. (1935/1984). Permanence and change: An anatomy of purpose. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, K. (1945/1962). A grammar of motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, K. (1961). The rhetoric of religion: Studies in logology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, K. (1966). Language as symbolic action: Essays on life, literature, and method. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Caldas-Coulthard, C., & van Leeuwen, T. (2003). Critical social semiotics introduction. Social Semiotics, 13(1), 3–4. doi: 10.1080/1035033032000133481
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (1916/2008). Democracy and education. Radford, VA: Wilder Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Fairclough, I., & Fairclough, N. (2013). Ethics and social critique: Evaluation of practical arguments in political discourse. In C. Guerin, G. Siouffi, & S. Sorlin (Eds.), Le rapport ethique au discours: Histoire, practiques, analyses (pp. 271–288). Berlin: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. (1989/2001). Language and power. London: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. (1996). A reply to Henry Widdowson’s ‘discourse analysis: A critical view’. Language and Literature, 5(1), 49–56. doi: 10.1177/096394709600500105
   Google Scholar
• Graham, P. (2004). Predication, propagation, and mediation: SFL, CDA, and the inculcation of evaluative meaning systems. In L. Young & C. Harrison (Eds.), Systemic functional linguistics and critical discourse analysis (pp. 53–67). London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, P. (2006). Hypercapitalism: Language, new media, and social perceptions of value. New York, NY: Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, P. (2016). Halliday and Lemke: A comparison of contextual potentials for two metafunctional systems. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(5), 548–567. doi: 10.1080/17405904.2016.1213177
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, P., Keenan, T., & Dowd, A. M. (2004). A call to arms at the end of history: A discourse–historical analysis of George W. Bush’s declaration of war on terror. Discourse Society, 15(2–3), 199–221. doi: 10.1177/0957926504041017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodge, R., & Kress, G. (1988). Social semiotics. London: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Horkheimer, M. (1937/2007). Traditional and critical theory. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Classical sociological theory (Chap. 27, pp. 347–361). New York, NY: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• James, W. (1907/1995). Pragmatism. New York, NY: Dover Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G. R., & Van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lafollette, H. (2000). Pragmatic ethics. In The Blackwell guide to ethical theory (pp. 400–419). London: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. L. (1995). Textual politics: Discourse and social dynamics. London: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. L. (1998). Resources for attitudinal meaning: Evaluative orientations in text semantics. Functions of Language, 5(1), 33–56. doi: 10.1075/fol.5.1.03lem
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. (2006). Towards critical multimedia literacy: Technology, research and politics. In D. McKenna, R. Kieffer, L. Labbo, & M. Reinking (Eds.), International handbook of literacy and technology (Vol. 2, pp. 3–14). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Machin, D. (2007). Introduction to multimodal analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J. R. (2004). Positive discourse analysis: solidarity and change. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 49 (Special Issue on Discourse Analysis at Work: Recent Perspectives in the Study of Language and Social Practice) (pp. 179–200).
   Google Scholar
• Mill, J. S. (1859). On liberty. Kitchener, ON: Batoche Books.
   Google Scholar
• Peirce, C. S. (1903/1998). The maxim of pragmatism. In Peirce Edition Project (Ed.), The essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings volume 2 (1893-1913) (pp. 133–144). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, R., & Wetzel, M. M. (2013). Studying agency in literacy teacher education: A layered approach to positive discourse analysis. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 10(1), 62–92. doi: 10.1080/15427587.2013.753845
   Google Scholar
• The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–93. doi: 10.17763/haer.66.1.17370n67v22j160u
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyrwhitt-Drake, H. (1999). Resisting the discourse of critical discourse analysis: Reopening a Hong Kong case study. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(8), 1081–1088. doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00025-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dijk, T. A. (1993/2011). Discourse and racism. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 145–159). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• van Leeuwen, T. (1999). Speech, music, sound. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• van Leeuwen, T., & Wodak, R. (1999). Legitimizing immigration control: A discourse-historical analysis. Discourse Studies, 1(1), 83–118. doi: 10.1177/1461445699001001005
   Google Scholar
• Widdowson, H. G. (1995). Discourse analysis: A critical view. Language & Literature, 4(3), 157–172. doi: 10.1177/096394709500400301
   Google Scholar
• Wodak, R. (2001). The discourse-historical method. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 63–94). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar