60
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Skrywer-leser-verhoudings: die rol van metadiskoers in tersiêre studiegidse

Writer-reader relationships: the role of metadiscourse in tertiary study guides

Bronnelys

  • Bhatia VK. 2004. Worlds of written discourse: a genre-based view. London: Continuum.
  • Butler G. 2009. The design of a postgraduate test of academic literacy: accommodating student and supervisor perspectives. South African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 27(3): 291–300.
  • Carstens WAM. 1997. Afrikaanse tekslinguistiek: 'n inleiding. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
  • Halliday MAK, Hasan R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
  • Harwood N. 2005. ‘We do not seem to have a theory… The theory I present here attempts to fill this gap’: inclusive and exclusive pronouns in academic writing. Applied Linguistics 26(3): 343–375.
  • Hubbard EH. 1996. Profiling contextual support from technical and general academic terms in writing for students. South African Journal of Linguistics 32: 95–106.
  • Hubbard EH. 2001. Interaction as ‘involvement’ in writing for student: a corpus linguistic analysis of a key readability feature. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 19: 231–240.
  • Hyland K. 1998. Persuasion and context: the pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics 30: 437–455.
  • HylandK.1999. Disciplinary discourses: writer stance in research articles. In CandlinCN,HylandK. (eds.) Writing: texts, processes and practices. New York: Longman. pp. 99–121.
  • Hyland K. 2000. Disciplinary discourses: social interactions in academic writing. Harlow: Pearson Education.
  • Hyland K. 2007. Applying a gloss: exemplifying and reformulating in academic discourse. Applied Linguistics 28(2): 266–285.
  • Hyland K, Tse P. 2004. Metadiscourse in academic writing: a reappraisal. Applied Linguistics 25(2): 156–177.
  • Paxton M, van Pletzen E, Archer A, Arend M, Chihota C. 2008. Writer's stance in disciplinary discourses: a developmental view. South African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 26(1): 107–118.
  • Pienaar M. 2009. Die leesbaarheid van akademiese tekste: 'n tekslinguistiese ondersoek. Ongepubliseerde MA-verhandeling. Vanderbijlpark: Noordwes-Universiteit.
  • Ponelis FA. 1985. Afrikaanse sintaksis. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
  • Pretorius EJ. 2006. The comprehension of logical relations in expository texts by students who study through the medium of ESL. System 34: 423–450.
  • Reed Y. 2001. Language choices in the writing of distance learning materials: how do we write our readers and ourselves? Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 19: 57–65.
  • Thompson G. 2001. Interaction in academic writing: learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics 22(1): 58–78.
  • Van der Merwe W, Scott M. 2006. Handleiding vir die skryf van interaktiewe studiegidse. Potchefstroom: Noordwes-Universiteit.
  • Van der Westhuizen GJ. 2009. Writing as an instrument for learning. South African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 27(4): 471–481.
  • Wood, JW. 2002. Adapting instruction to accommodate students in inclusive settings. 4th edn. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.