This paper explores crime reports on verdicts and sentences in child/teenager murder cases in the British press with a view to demonstrating that ‘simplifi cation’ is one of the signifi cant values of crime reporting, regardless of the type of newspaper (Jewkes 2004). The analysis illustrates how both quality and popular British newspapers employ ‘binary oppositions’ (i.e. a typical feature of simplifi cation), such as good vs. evil, in order to communicate to their audiences the social status of victims and killers and at the same time traditional social values and norms. The employment of ‘binary oppositions’ in noun phrases that introduce and/or classify victims and killers thus enables newspapers to appeal to the public and act, or at least try to act, as moral guardians.

The present paper is based on a wider research study (Válková 2012) aimed at language means used to regulate discourse, or, more specifi cally, signposting the discourse and creating “some space for social interaction” (Povolná 2005: 49). In my view, discourse markers (henceforth DMs) fall under the heading of interpersonal signposts, which are to be distinguished from textual signposts that give the interpretative clues to various textshaping processes (cf. Figure 1 below). The study demonstrates the possibilities of using parallel English-Czech and Czech-English corpora to reveal quantitative differences in the ways the chosen English DMs co-occur with expressions of agreement and disagreement (narrowed in this analysis to yes and no) and gives evidence of the qualitative preferences of Czech equivalents along the syntagmatic axis.

This paper aims at extending the analysis of ELF discourse to the domain of intimate interactions and to explore how partners with different linguacultural backgrounds accomplish their “coupleness” through English as a lingua franca with a focus on the hybrid features of couples’ ELF. For this purpose fi ve European couples with different fi rst languages were asked to audio-record their ELF home interactions and comment on selected excerpts of their recordings so as to gain some insights about how these interactions were perceived from a participant viewpoint. The investigation of the data suggests that ELF partners use hybrid forms to activate and ratify particular contexts (schematic constructs), and to achieve a particular pretext (an interactive purpose) of domestic intimacy and togetherness.

It is widely acknowledged that hedges form an indispensable part of academic writing in general and research articles (RAs) in particular. There has been a lot of research done attempting to describe and classify this language device, address its complex nature and understand its functions in different types of texts. This paper presents the results of a small-scale comparative study carried out on a corpus of research articles in two scientific fields – applied linguistics and literary criticism. The analysis was based on a revised classification of Hyland (1998) and Dontcheva-Navratilova (2009) and with special regard to the role they play in reader-writer interaction. The aim of the investigation was to determine which features in the text function as writer-protective, i.e. hedging writer commitment to the propositional content of the message, and to what extent these features differ in the examined texts. The results of the study show that there are significant differences in both the variety and frequency of use of hedges in applied linguistics and literary criticism research articles, which suggests that there is a connection between particular types of hedges and differences in the type of argumentation and interaction with the intended readership in the two respective communities.

The parameters of ‘explicit reflexivity’ have been used as an analytical tool for examining English and Serbian academic research articles in order to depict their characteristics concerning this language phenomenon. Since the employment of discourse reflexivity in academic writing is seen as the writer’s readiness to facilitate the readers’ path through the text, its presence in the two academic discourses will be interpreted in the light of Hinds’s language typology (1987), which distinguishes writing cultures with respect to the writer’s vs. the reader’s responsibility for successful written communication. Therefore, the degree of the writer’s awareness of his/her role in the process of communicating will be mirrored by the number of reflexive elements identified, and the two types of discourses will be described on the same basis.

The paper explores the discourse strategies used in academic discourse in the informal setting of a personal web page. The aim is to study a digital variation of academic discourse that blends features of spoken and written academic discourse. It typically provides spontaneous responses using direct ways of expressing ideas. Unlike scholarly discussions at conferences, academic etiquette and diplomatic language are not always maintained and personal attacks and emotive statements occur; participants tend to express their preferences, professional standpoints, ideas and personal attitudes frankly and openly. Expressing criticism and disagreement, the participants may or may not use politeness strategies to mitigate face-threatening responses. Mapping the variety of these strategies, I work with those parts of academic web pages that are devoted to vivid and uncensored discussions of the subject matter. The analysis is theoretically rooted in the conception of interpersonal rhetoric as defined by Leech (1983). The research draws from a corpus of articles and related responses randomly chosen from personal and institutional academic web pages.