Cover not available

Review published In: Sensory Perceptions in Language and Cognition
Edited by Rosario Caballero and Carita Paradis
[Functions of Language 22:1] 2015
► pp. 142149

Get fulltext from our e-platform
References (31)
References
Barthes, Roland. 1977/1964. The rhetoric of the image. In Stephen Heath (ed.), Image-music-text, 32–51. New York, NY: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bateman, John. 2008. Multimodality and genre: A foundation for the systematic analysis of multimodal documents. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bateman, John & Karl-Heinrich Schmidt. 2012. Multimodal film analysis: How films mean. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohn, Neil. 2013. Beyond speech balloons and thought bubbles: The integration of text and image. Semiotica 1971. 35–63.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fang, Zhihui. 1996. Illustrations, text, and the child reader: What are pictures in children’s storybooks for? Reading Horizons 37(2). 130–142.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forceville, Charles. J. 2009. Non-verbal and multimodal metaphor as a cognitivist framework: Agendas for research. In Charles J. Forceville & Eduardo Urios-Aparisi (eds.), Multimodal metaphor, 19–42. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gaede, Werner. 1981. Vom Wort zum Bild: Kreativ-Methoden der Visualisierung. Munich: Langen-Müller / Herbig.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Groensteen, Thierry. 2007/1999. The System of comics. Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi. [Translated by Bart Beaty & Nick Nguyen from the original French Système de la bande desinée (1999)].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & Ruqayia Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kloepfer, Rolf. 1977. Komplementarität von Sprache und Bild. Am Beispiel von Comic, Karikatur und Reklame. In Roland Posner & Hans-Peter Reinecke (eds.), Zeichenprozesse. Semiotische Forschung in den Einzelwissenschaften, 129–145. Wiesbaden: Athenaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kress, Gunther & Theo van Leeuwen. 1996. Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, Yu & Kay O’Halloran. 2009. Intersemiotic texture: Analyzing cohesive devices between language and images. Social Semiotics 41. 367–388. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maes, Alfons A. & Joost Schilperoord. 2007. Classifying visual rhetoric: Conceptual and structural heuristics. In E. F. McQuarrie & B. J. Phillips (eds.), Go figure! New directions in advertising rhetoric, 67–78. New York, NY: M. E. Sharpe Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McCloud, Scott. 1994. Understanding comics: The invisible art. New York, NY: HarperPerennial.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McQuarrie, Edward F. & David G. Mick. 1996. Figures of rhetoric in advertising language. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(4). 424–438. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. Visual rhetoric in advertising: Text-interpretive, experimental, and reader-response analyses. Journal of Consumer Research 26(1). 37–54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mann, William C. & Sandra A. Thompson. 1988. Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text 8(3). 243–281. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marsh, Emily E. & Marylin D. White. 2003. A taxonomy of relationships between images and text. Journal of Documentation 59(6). 647–672. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martinec, Radan & Andrew Salway. 2005. A system for image-text relations in new (and old) media. Visual Communication 4(3). 337–371. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nikolajeva, Maria & Carole Scott. 2001. How picture books work. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Halloran, Kay L. 1999. Interdependence, interaction and metaphor in multisemiotic texts. Social Semiotics 9(3). 317–354. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Phillips, Barbara J. & Edward F. McQuarrie. 2004. Beyond visual metaphor: A new typology of visual rhetoric in adverting. Marketing Theory 4(1/2). 113–136. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Royce, Terry D. 2007. Intersemiotic complementarity: A framework for multimodal discourse analysis. In Terry D. Royce & Wendy L. Bowcher (eds.), New directions in the analysis of multimodal discourse, 63–110. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schriver, Karen. 1997. Dynamics in document design: Creating texts for readers. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scott, Linda. M. 1994. Images in advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research 21(2). 252–273. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spillner, Bernd. 1982. Stilanalyse semiotisch komplexer Texte. Zum Verhältnis von sprachlicher undbildlicher Information in Werbeanzeigen. Kodikas/Code. Ars Semiotica 4/5(1). 91–106.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stöckl, Hartmut. 1997. Textstil und Semiotik englischsprachiger Anzeigenwerbung. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Leeuwen, Theo. 1991. Conjunctive structure in documentary film and television. Continuum: Journal of media and cultural studies 5(1). 76–114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. Introducing social semiotics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue