CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 142Discourse Analysis in Language StudiesCultural and political discourse analysisLinguistics and Discourse Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Discourse-Knowledge Interface

van Dijk, Teun A.·2003·Critical Discourse Analysis
DOI 10.1057/9780230288423_5
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

One of the major challenges of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is to make explicit the relations between discourse and knowledge. Both discourse and knowledge are very complex phenomena studied in virtually all disciplines of the humanities and social sciences. Thus, we may expect that also a theory of their relationships has philosophical, linguistic, psychological, sociological and anthropological dimensions. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1057/9780230288423_5

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 50 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Dijkstra, T. and Smedt, K. (eds) (1996) Computational Psycholinguistics. AI and Connectionist Models of Human Language Processing. London: Taylor & Francis.
  2. Farr, R.M. and Moscovici, S. (eds) (1984) Social Representations. Cambridge; New York/Paris: Cambridge University Press/Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.
  3. Fiske, S.T. and Taylor, S.E. (1991) Social Cognition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  4. Gumperz, J.J. and Levinson, S.C. (eds) (1996) Rethinking Linguistic Relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1983) Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference and Consciousness. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
  6. van Oostendorp, H. and Goldman, S.R. (eds) (1999) The Construction of Mental Presentations during Reading. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–142 of 142

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
van Dijk, T. A.
Corresponding author
van Dijk, Teun A.
ORCID
van Dijk, Teun A.
Venue
Critical Discourse Analysis
Publisher
Palgrave Macmillan UK
Published
2003
Pages
85-109
DOI
10.1057/9780230288423_5
OpenAlex
W2398544988
Cited by
142
References
50
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
FWCI
60.54
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (unspecified)
Locations
Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Cultural and political discourse analysis
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
Keywords
critical discourse analysis, epistemology, philosophy of language, sociology of knowledge

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review