Difference between revisions of "Whittle2016"
ElliottHoey (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=INCOLLECTION |Author(s)=Eric Whittle |Title=The Question of Reported Speech: Identifying an Occupational Hazard |Editor(s)=Alessandro Capone; Ferenc Kiefer...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|Title=The Question of Reported Speech: Identifying an Occupational Hazard | |Title=The Question of Reported Speech: Identifying an Occupational Hazard | ||
|Editor(s)=Alessandro Capone; Ferenc Kiefer; Franco Lo Piparo | |Editor(s)=Alessandro Capone; Ferenc Kiefer; Franco Lo Piparo | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Quotation; Reported Speech; Pragmatics; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Quotation; Reported Speech; Pragmatics; |
|Key=Whittle2016 | |Key=Whittle2016 | ||
| + | |Publisher=Springer | ||
|Year=2016 | |Year=2016 | ||
| + | |Language=English | ||
| + | |Address=Cham | ||
|Booktitle=Indirect Reports and Pragmatics: Interdisciplinary Studies | |Booktitle=Indirect Reports and Pragmatics: Interdisciplinary Studies | ||
| − | + | |Pages=265–288 | |
| − | |Pages= | ||
|URL=http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-21395-8_14 | |URL=http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-21395-8_14 | ||
|DOI=10.1007/978-3-319-21395-8_14 | |DOI=10.1007/978-3-319-21395-8_14 | ||
|Abstract=This essay is a short survey of several everyday concepts. It illustrates their inherent slipperiness and the futility of trying to secure them for formal academic purposes. In our studies, the concepts of ‘direct reporting’ and ‘indirect reporting’ are taken to be scientifically authoritative in some sense, but the terms used to underpin them are not. ‘Quoting’, ‘paraphrasing’, ‘reporting’, ‘saying’, ‘telling’, ‘speaking’, and ‘using language’ are employed from an everyday lexicon, which invites the quasi-scientific question: “What really are these things?” The question becomes redundant before it can be answered. | |Abstract=This essay is a short survey of several everyday concepts. It illustrates their inherent slipperiness and the futility of trying to secure them for formal academic purposes. In our studies, the concepts of ‘direct reporting’ and ‘indirect reporting’ are taken to be scientifically authoritative in some sense, but the terms used to underpin them are not. ‘Quoting’, ‘paraphrasing’, ‘reporting’, ‘saying’, ‘telling’, ‘speaking’, and ‘using language’ are employed from an everyday lexicon, which invites the quasi-scientific question: “What really are these things?” The question becomes redundant before it can be answered. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 13:01, 19 December 2019
| Whittle2016 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | INCOLLECTION |
| Key | Whittle2016 |
| Author(s) | Eric Whittle |
| Title | The Question of Reported Speech: Identifying an Occupational Hazard |
| Editor(s) | Alessandro Capone, Ferenc Kiefer, Franco Lo Piparo |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Quotation, Reported Speech, Pragmatics |
| Publisher | Springer |
| Year | 2016 |
| Language | English |
| City | Cham |
| Month | |
| Journal | |
| Volume | |
| Number | |
| Pages | 265–288 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1007/978-3-319-21395-8_14 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | Indirect Reports and Pragmatics: Interdisciplinary Studies |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This essay is a short survey of several everyday concepts. It illustrates their inherent slipperiness and the futility of trying to secure them for formal academic purposes. In our studies, the concepts of ‘direct reporting’ and ‘indirect reporting’ are taken to be scientifically authoritative in some sense, but the terms used to underpin them are not. ‘Quoting’, ‘paraphrasing’, ‘reporting’, ‘saying’, ‘telling’, ‘speaking’, and ‘using language’ are employed from an everyday lexicon, which invites the quasi-scientific question: “What really are these things?” The question becomes redundant before it can be answered.
Notes
