Abbott, C. and Eubanks, P. (2005). How academics and practitioners evaluate technical texts: a focus group study. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 19(2), 171–218.
Aitchison, J. (1994). Words in the Mind: An Introduction to the Mental Lexicon. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell Publishing.
Allen, N. and Bosley, D. S. (1994). Technical texts/personal voice: intersections and crossed purposes. In Yancey, K. B. (ed.), Voices on Voice: Perspectives, Definitions, Inquiry, pp. 80–96. Urbana, Ill.: National Council of Teachers of English.
Allen, N. and Bosley, D. S.The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. (2006). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Amateur Astronomy Magazine. (2009). Author's Guidelines. Available from: www.amateurastronomy.com. [Accessed October 16, 2009.]
Aristotle, . (1991). Kennedy, G. A. (trans.), On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civil Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
Atwood, M. (2002). Negotiating with the Dead: A Writer on Writing. Cambridge University Press.
Axley, S. R. (1996). Communication at Work: Management and the Communication-Intensive Organization. Westport, Conn.: Quorum Books.
Baake, K. (2003). Metaphor and Knowledge: The Challenges of Writing Science. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). Discourse in the novel. In Holquist, M. (trans.), The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays by M. M. Bakhtin, pp. 259–422. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). The problem of speech genres. In McGee, V. W. (trans.), Speech Genres and Other Late Essays, pp. 60–102. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Barabas [Abbott], C. (1993). Uncovering the CYA (Cover Your Ass) phenomenon in organizational writing: initial findings. Technical Communication, 40(2), 344–48.
Barcelona, A. (2000). On the plausibility of claiming a metonymic motivation for metaphor. In Barcelona, A. (ed.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A Cognitive Perspective, pp. 31–58. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bartholomae, D. (1995). Writing with teachers: a conversation with Peter Elbow. College Composition and Communication, 46(1), 62–71.
Bartlett, T. (2003). Why Johnny can't write, even though he went to Princeton. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 49(17), A39.
Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press.
Bazerman, C. and Russell, D. R. (eds.) (2003). Writing Selves/Writing Societies: Research from Activity Perspectives. Fort Collins, Colo.: The WAC Clearinghouse.
Beason, L. (2001). Ethos and error: how business people react to errors. College Composition and Communication, 53(1), 33–64.
Beckett, S. (1960). Krapp's Last Tape and Other Dramatic Pieces. New York: Grove Press.
Berkenkotter, C. (2001). Genre systems at work: DSM-IV and rhetorical recontextualization in psychotherapy paperwork. Written Communication, 18(3), 326–49.
Berkenkotter, C. and Huckin, T. N. (1995). Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication: Cognition/Culture/Power. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bizzell, P. (1982). Cognition, convention, and certainty: what we need to know about writing. Pre/Text, 3(3), 213–43.
Bohlin, P. (2004). Personal interview. May 19.
Bowden, D. (1993). The limits of containment: text-as-container in composition studies. College Composition and Communication, 44(3), 364–79.
Bowden, D. (1999). The Mythology of Voice. Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann-Boynton/Cook.
Brandt, D. (1995). Accumulating literacy: writing and learning to write in the 20th century. College English, 57(6), 649–68.
Brandt, D. (2005). Writing for a living. Written Communication, 22(2), 166–97.
Burke, K. (1966). Language as Symbolic Action. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Burke, K. (1969). A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Burke, K. (1984 [1954]). Permanence and Change: An Anatomy of Purpose, Third Edition. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bushneil, J. (1999). A contrary view of the technical writing classroom: notes toward future discussion. Technical Communication Quarterly, 8(2), 175–88.
Ceccarelli, L. (2004). Neither confusing cacophony nor culinary complements. Written Communication, 21(1), 92–105.
Chambers, V. (2004). Choosing yourself. The College Board Review, 202(2), 37–39.
Chenoweth, N. A. and Hayes, J. R. (2003). The inner voice in writing. Written Communication, 20(1), 99–118.
Clark, G. (1998). Writing as travel, or rhetoric on the road. College Composition and Communication, 49(1), 9–23.
,The College Board. (2005a). The writing section. Available from: www.collegeboard.com/highered/ra/. [Accessed May 26, 2006.]
,The College Board. (2005b). Comments from the College Board on SAT essay length and scores. Available from: www.collegeboard.com/press/article/0,3183,45557,00.html. [Accessed May 26, 2006.]
Coney, M. B. (1992). Technical readers and their rhetorical roles. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 35(2), 58–63.
Cooper, M. (1986). The ecology of writing. College English, 48(4), 364–75.
Cooper, M. (1996). The postmodern space of operator's manuals. Technical Communication Quarterly, 5(4), 385–410.
Coulmas, F. (1996). The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Writing Systems. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Cowley, S. and Love, N. (2006). Language and cognition, or, how to avoid the Conduit Metaphor. In Duszak, Anna and Okulska, Urzula (eds.), Bridges and Barriers in Metalinguistic Discourse, pp. 135–54. New York: Peter Lang.
Croft, W. D. and Cruse, A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row.
Danielewicz, J. (2008). Personal genres, public voices. College Composition and Communication, 59(3), 420–50.
Daniels, P. T. (1996). The study of writing systems. In Daniels, P. T. and Bright, W. (eds.), The World's Writing Systems, pp. 3–18. Oxford University Press.
Beaugrande, R. (2006). Metalinguistic discourse and the dilemma of writing versus speech. In Duszak, Anna and Okulska, Urzula (eds.), Bridges and Barriers in Metalinguistic Discourse, pp. 119–35. New York: Peter Lang.
Man, P. (1979). The epistemology of metaphor. In Sacks, S. (ed.), On Metaphor, pp. 11–28. University of Chicago Press.
Devitt, A. J. (1991). Intertextuality in tax accounting: generic, referential, and functional. In Bazerman, C. and Paradis, J. (eds.), Textual Dynamics of the Professions: Historical and Contemporary Studies of Writing in Professional Communities, pp. 335–57. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press.
Devitt, A. J. (1993). Generalizing about genre: new conceptions of an old concept. College Composition and Communication, 44(4), 573–86.
Dirven, R. and Pörings, R. (eds.) (2002). Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Dunmire, P. L. (2000). Genre as temporally situated social action: a study of temporality and genre activity. Written Communication, 17(1), 93–138.
Dunn, P. A. and Lindblom, K. (2003). Why revitalize grammar?English Journal, 92(3), 43–50.
Elbow, P. (1981). Writing with Power: Techniques for Mastering the Writing Process. New York: Oxford University Press.
Elbow, P. (1994). What do we mean when we talk about voices in texts? In Yancey, K. B. (ed.), Voices on Voice: Perspectives, Definition, Inquiry, pp. 1–35. Urbana, Ill.: National Council of Teachers of English.
Elbow, P. (2006). The music of form: rethinking organization in writing. College Composition and Communication, 57(4), 620–66.
Elbow, P. (2007). Reconsiderations: voice in writing again: embracing contraries. College English, 70(2), 168–88.
Eubanks, P. (2000). A War of Words in the Discourse of Trade: The Rhetorical Constitution of Metaphor. Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press.
Eubanks, P. (2001). Understanding metaphors for writing: In defense of the Conduit Metaphor. College Composition and Communication, 53(1), 92–118.
Eubanks, P. (2005). Globalization, “corporate rule,” and blended worlds: a conceptual-rhetorical analysis of metaphor, metonymy, and conceptual blending. Metaphor and Symbol, 20(3), 173–97.
Eubanks, P. (2008). An analysis of corporate rule in globalization discourse: why we need rhetoric to explain conceptual figures. Rhetoric Review, 27(3), 236–58.
Eubanks, P. and Abbott, C. (2004). Using focus groups to supplement the assessment of technical communication texts, pedagogy, and programs. Technical Communication Quarterly, 12(1), 25–46.
Evans, K. (2003). Accounting for conflicting mental models of communication in student–teacher interaction: an activity theory analysis. In Bazerman, C. (ed.), Writing Selves/Writing Societies: Research from Activity Perspectives, pp. 393–427. Fort Collins, Colo.: The WAC Clearinghouse.
Fahnestock, J. (1986). Accommodating science: the rhetorical life of scientific facts. Written Communication, 3(3), 275–96.
Fahnestock, J. (1999). Rhetorical Figures in Science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fahnestock, J. (2004). Preserving the figure: consistency in the presentation of scientific arguments. Written Communication, 21(1), 6–31.
Faigley, L. (1989). Judging writers, judging selves. College Composition and Communication, 4(4), 395–412.
Fass, D. (1997). Processing Metonymy and Metaphor. Greenwich, Conn.: Ablex Publishing.
Fauconnier, G. (2000). Methods and generalizations. In Janssen, T. and Redeker, G. (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Scope, Foundations, and Methodology, pp. 95–127. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.
Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. (2002). The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind's Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.
Fillmore, C. J. (1977). Scenes-and-frames semantics, linguistic structures processing. In Zampolli, A. (ed.), Fundamental Studies in Computer Science, pp. 55–88. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing.
Fletcher, R. (1993). What a Writer Needs. Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann.
Flower, L. (2008). Community Literacy and the Rhetoric of Public Engagement. Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press.
Freisinger, R. R. (1994). Voicing the self: toward a pedagogy of resistance in a postmodern age. In Yancey, K. B. (ed.), Voices on Voice: Perspectives, Definitions, Inquiry, pp. 242–74. Urbana, Ill.: National Council of Teachers of English.
Friend, R. (2002). Personal interview. May 21.
Gardner, J. (1999). On Becoming a Novelist. New York: Norton.
Gee, J. P. (1990). Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. London: Falmer Press.
Gibbs, R. (1994). The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding. Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs, R. (1999). Speaking and thinking with metonymy. In Panther, K.-U. and Radden, G. (eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought, pp. 61–76. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goldberg, N. (1986). Writing Down the Bones: Freeing the Writer Within. Boston, Mass.: Shambhala.
Goossens, L. (1994). Metonymy in the pipeline: another way of looking at the Container Metaphor. In Carlong, K., Davidse, K., and Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (eds.), Perspectives on English: Studies in Honour of Professor Emma Vorlat, pp. 386–94. Leuven: Peeters Publishers.
Goossens, L. (1995). Metaphtonymy: the interaction of metaphor and metonymy in figurative expressions for linguistic action. In Goossens, L. (ed.), By Word of Mouth: Metaphor, Metonymy and Linguistic Action in a Cognitive Perspective, pp. 159–74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goossens, L. (1999). Speaking and thinking with metonymy. In Panther, K.-U. and Radden, G. (eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought, pp. 61–76. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Grady, J. (1997). Foundations of meaning: primary metaphors and primary scenes. Unpublished dissertation. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Berkeley.
Grady, J. (1998). The Conduit Metaphor revisited: a reassessment of metaphors for communication. In Koenig, J. P. (ed.), Discourse and Cognition: Bridging the Gap, pp. 205–18. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications.
Grady, J., Oakley, T., and Coulson, S. (1999). Blending and metaphor. In Steen, G. and Gibbs, R. (eds.), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics, pp. 101–24. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Graff, G. (2003). Clueless in Academe: How Schooling Obscures the Life of the Mind. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Hayes, L. M. (2001). It isn't what you write that makes you a tech writer: a love story. In Savage, G. J. and Sullivan, D. L. (eds.), Writing a Professional Life: Stories of Technical Communicators On and Off the Job, pp. 149–54. Boston: Longman.
Henry, J. (1994). Toward technical authorship. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 24(4), 449–61.
Holmes, E. (2005). Freaking out about the new SAT? Some teens are. Chicago Daily Herald, March 8, Suburban Living, 1.
Hulbert, A. (2005). Unpersuasive. New York Times, May 29, sec. 6, 15.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Hyland, K. (2003). Dissertation acknowledgements: the anatomy of a Cinderella genre. Written Communication, 20(3), 242–68.
Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and Identity: The Discoursal Construction of Identity in Academic Writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Johnson, D. (2007). Personal interview. September 14.
Johnson, M. (1993). The Moral Imagination: Implications of Cognitive Science for Ethics. University of Chicago Press.
Johnson-Eilola, J. and Selber, S. A. (2001). Sketching a framework for graduate education in technical communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 10(4), 403–37.
Journet, D. (2005). Metaphor, ambiguity, and motive in evolutionary biology. Written Communication, 22(4), 379–420.
Katz, S. B. (1992). The ethics of expediency: classical rhetoric, technology, and the Holocaust. College English, 54(3), 255–75.
Katzman, J.et al. (2004). Would Shakespeare get into Swarthmore? How several well-known writers (and the Unabomber) would fare on the new SAT. The Atlantic Monthly, 293(2), 97–99.
Kaufer, D. S. and Butler, B. S. (1996). Rhetoric and the Arts of Design. Mahway, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kaufer, D. S., Ishisaki, S., Butler, B. S., and Collins, J. (2004). The Power of Words: Unveiling the Speaker and Writer's Hidden Craft. Mahway, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Keillor, G. (2006). Listen up, all you whiners. Chicago Tribune, May 4, sec.1, 25.
Kibbee, D. (1998). Review of Language Is Power: The Story of Standard English and Its Enemies by John Honey. Journal of Linguistics, 34(2), 525–30.
Kleinedler, S. (2008). E-mail communication. April 15.
Kövecses, Z. (2000). Metaphor and Emotion: Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling. Cambridge University Press.
Kroll, B. M. (2008). Arguing with adversaries: aikido, rhetoric, and the art of peace. College Composition and Communication, 59(3), 451–72.
Krueger, W. K. (2001). Purgatory Ridge. New York: Pocket Books.
Krzeszowski, T. (2006). Barriers in communication. In Duszak, Anna and Okulska, Urzula (eds.), Bridges and Barriers in Metalinguistic Discourse, pp. 203–16. New York: Peter Lang.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. (1991). Metaphor and war: the metaphor system used to justify war in the Gulf. In Hallet, B. (ed.), Engulfed in War: Just War and the Persian Gulf, pp. 95–111. Honolulu, Hawaii: Matsanaga Institute for Peace.
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Ortony, A. (ed.), Metaphor and Thought, pp. 202–51. Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. (1996). Moral Politics: What Conservatives Know that Liberals Don't. University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.
Lamott, A. (1994). Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life. New York: Anchor Books.
LeFevre, K. B. (1987). Invention as a Social Act. Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press.
Lewis, D. V. (1999). Making your correspondence get results. In Harty, K. J. (ed.), Strategies for Business and Technical Writing, Fourth Edition, pp. 112–21. Needham Heights, Mass.: Allyn and Bacon.
Longo, B. (2000). Spurious Coin: A History of Science, Management, and Technical Writing. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press.
Lyotard, J. F. (1979). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Maaks, B. (2006). Personal interview. March 15.
MacDonald, H. (1995). Why Johnny can't write. Public Interest, 120, 3–13.
Mailer, N. (2004). The Spooky Art: Thoughts on Writing. New York: Random House.
Mandler, J. M. (2004). The Foundations of Mind: The Origins of the Conceptual System. New York: Oxford University Press.
Marcus, B. (2004). The stack on the stairway. The College Board Review, 202(2), 37–39.
Markel, M. (1997). Ethics and technical communication: a case for foundational approaches. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 40(4), 284–98.
Markel, M. (2003). Technical Communication: Situations and Strategies, Seventh Edition. New York: Bedford/St. Martin's.
Mauk, J. (2003). Location, location, location: the “real” estates of being, writing, and thinking in composition. College English, 6(5), 368–88.
McWhorter, J. (2003). Doing Our Own Thing: The Degradation of Language and Music and Why We Should, Like, Care. New York: Gotham Books.
Menand, L. (2004). Introduction: voices. In Atwan, R. (ed.), The Best American Essays 2004, pp. xiv–xviii. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Miller, C. R. (1979). A humanistic rationale for technical writing. College English, 40(6), 610–17.
Miller, C. R. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 151–67.
Miller, C. R. and Shepherd, D. (2004). Blogging as social action: a genre analysis of the weblog. In Gurak, L. J., Antonijevic, S., Johnson, L., Ratliff, C., and Reyman, J. (eds.), Into the Blogosphere: Rhetoric, Community, and Culture of Weblogs. Available from: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/blogosphere/visual_blogs.html. [Accessed May 8, 2006.]
Mitchell, C. (2004). Writing and Power: A Critical Introduction to Composition Studies. Boulder, Colo.: Paradigm Publishers.
,National Institute for Literacy. (2009). Frequently asked questions. Available from: www.nifl.gov/nifl/faqs.html. [Accessed June 12, 2009.]
Neel, J. (2000). (An) American composition. Liberal Education, 86(1), 40–48.
Newkirk, T. (1997). The Performance of Self in Student Writing. Portsmouth, N.H.: Boynton/Cook.
Norman, D. (2002). The Design of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books.
Oakley, T. (1999). The human rhetorical potential. Written Communication, 16(1), 93–128.
O'Conner, P. T. (1999). Words Fail Me: What Everyone Who Writes Should Know About Writing. San Diego, Calif.: Harcourt.
O'Donnell, T. G. (1994). Speech-acts, conventions and voice: challenges to a Davidsonian conception of writing. Journal of Advanced Composition, 14(2), 570–76.
O'Leary, S. (2002). Personal interview. April 6.
Ong, W. J. (1988). Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. New York: Methuen.
Panther, K. U., and Radden, G. (eds.) (1999). Metonymy in Language and Thought. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Panther, K. U., and Thornburg, L. L. (eds.) (2003). Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing. Philadelphia, Pa.: John Benjamins.
Pauwels, P., Rudzka-Ostyn, B., Simon-Vandenbergen, A. M., Vanparys, J., and Goossens, L. (1995). By Word of Mouth: Metaphor, Metonymy and Linguistic Action in a Cognitive Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Perelman, C. (1982). Kluback, W. (trans.), The Realm of Rhetoric. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press.
Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct. New York: William Morrow.
Prior, P. (1998). Writing/Disciplinarity: A Sociohistoric Account of Literate Activity in the Academy. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Porter, J. E. (1992). Audience and Rhetoric: The Archaeological Composition of the Discourse Community. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Quindlen, A. (2002). The eye of the reporter, the heart of a novelist. New York Times, September 23, B1.
Radden, G. (2000). How metonymic are metaphors? In Barcelona, A. (ed.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A Cognitive Perspective, pp. 93–108. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Radden, G. (2001). The folk model of language. Metaphorik.de, 1, 80–86.
Radden, G. and Kövecses, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. In Panther, K.-U. and Radden, G. (eds.), Metonymy in Language and Thought, pp. 17–60. Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Reddy, M. (1993 [1979]). The conduit metaphor: a case of frame conflict in our language about language. In Ortony, A. (ed.), Metaphor and Thought, Second Edition, pp. 164–201. Cambridge University Press.
Register, C. (2002). Personal interview. April 20.
Reynolds, N. (1998). Composition's imagined geographies: the politics of space in the frontier, city, and cyberspace. College Composition and Communication, 50(1), 12–35.
Romano, T. (2004). Crafting Authentic Voice. Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann.
Rosch, E. (1973). On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. In Moore, T. E. (ed.), Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language, pp. 111–44. New York: Academic Press.
Rude, C. (2002). Technical Editing. New York: Longman.
Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (1988). Semantic extension in the domain of verbal communication. In Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (ed.), Topics in Cognitive Linguistics, pp. 507–53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Russell, D. R. (1997). Rethinking genre in school and society: an activity theory analysis. Written Communication, 14(4), 504–54.
Samson, G. (1996). Writing Systems: A Linguistic Introduction. Stanford University Press.
Schaeffer, J. D. (1990). Sensus Communis: Vico, Rhetoric, and the Limits of Relativism. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.
Schryer, C. (1993). Records as genre. Written Communication, 10(2), 200–34.
Seitz, J. (1999). Motives for Metaphor: Literacy, Curriculum Reform, and the Teaching of English. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Selzer, J. (2003). Rhetorical analysis: Understanding how texts persuade readers. In Bazerman, C. and Prior, P. A. (eds.), What Writing Does and How It Does It: An Introduction to Analyzing Texts and Textual Practices, pp. 279–308. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Semino, E. (2005). The metaphorical construction of complex domains: the case of speech activity in English. Metaphor and Symbol, 20(1), 35–70.
Shannon, C. and Weaver, W. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press.
Sharoff, R. (2002). Personal interview. October 19.
Sheils, M. (1975). Why Johnny can't write. Newsweek, December 8, 58–65.
Slack, J. D., Miller, D. J., and Doak, J. (1993). The technical communicator as author: meaning, power, authority. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 7(1), 12–36.
Smith, E. O. (1997). Intertextual connections for “a humanistic rationale for technical writing.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 11(2), 192–221.
Smith, S. (1997). The genre of the end comment: conventions in teacher responses to student writing. College Composition and Communication, 48(2), 249–69.
Spigelman, C. (2001). Argument and evidence in the case of the personal. College English, 64(1), 63–87.
Sprague, C. J. (2004). Personal interview. February 3.
Steinberg, J. (2003). Times reporter steps down amid criticism. New York Times, May 29, A20.
Steinberg, N. (2002). Personal interview. November 19.
Strunk, W. and White, E. B. (2008). The Elements of Style: 50th Anniversary Edition. New York:Longman.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge University Press.
Sweetser, E. (1992). English metaphors for language: motivations, conventions, and creativity. Poetics Today, 13(4), 705–23.
Talmy, L. (1988). Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12(1), 49–100.
Tardy, C. M. (2003). A genre system view of the funding of academic research. Written Communication, 20(1), 7–36.
Tobin, L. (1989). Bridging gaps: analyzing student metaphors for composing. College Composition and Communication, 40(4), 444–58.
Tomlinson, B. (2005). Authors on Writing: Metaphors and Intellectual Labor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Trimbur, J. (2008). The Dartmouth conference and the geohistory of the native speaker. College English, 71(2), 142–69.
Turner, M. (1987). Death Is the Mother of Beauty: Mind, Metaphor, Criticism. University of Chicago Press.
Turner, M. (1991). Reading Minds: The Study of English in the Age of Cognitive Science. Princeton University Press.
Turner, M. (1992). Language is a virus. Poetics Today, 13(4), 725–36.
Turner, M. (2000). Backstage cognition in reason and choice. In Lupia, A., McCubbins, M., and Popkin, S. L. (eds.), Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality, pp. 264–86. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Turner, M. (2001). Cognitive Dimensions of Social Science: The Way We Think About Politics, Economics, Law, and Society. New York:Oxford University Press.
Twain, M. (1990). Neider, C. (ed.), The Autobiography of Mark Twain. New York: HarperPerennial.
Vanparys, J. (1995). A survey of metalinguistic metaphors. In Goossens, L., Pauwels, P., Rudzka-Ostyn, B., Simon-Vandenbergen, A. M., and Vanparys, J. (eds.), By Word of Mouth: Metaphor, Metonymy and Linguistic Action in a Cognitive Perspective, pp. 1–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Varghese, S. A. and Abraham, S. A. (2004). Book-length scholarly essays as a hybrid genre in science. Written Communication, 21(2), 201–31.
Wegner, D. (2004). The collaborative construction of a management report in a municipal community of practice: text and context, genre and learning. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 18(4), 411–51.
Weiss, T. (1997). Reading culture: professional communication as translation. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 11(3), 321–38.
Wiegand, C. (2007). Neighbourhood watcher: Harlan Coben, master of the soft-centered suburban thriller, talks to Chris Wiegand. www.guardian.co.uk, July 31.
Williams, J. M. and Colomb, G. G. (2002). The Craft of Argument. Boston: Longman.
Winerip, M. (2005). SAT essay test rewards length and ignores errors of fact. New York Times, May 4, B9.
Winsor, D. (1999). Genre and activity systems: the role of documentation in maintaining and changing engineering activity systems. Written Communication, 16(2), 200–24.
Winsor, D. (2003). Writing Power: Communication in an Engineering Center. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical Investigations. New York: Macmillan.
Worobec, C. (2002). Personal interview. May 23.
Zinsser, W. (1998). On Writing Well: The Classic Guide to Writing Nonfiction. New York: HarperPerennial.
Zorn, E. (2002). Personal interview. October 29.
