[BAKHTIN, M.M., 1986. Speech genres and other late essays. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[BAZERMAN, C., 2004. Intertextuality: How texts rely on other texts. In: C. Bazerman and P. Prior, eds. What writing does and how it does it: An introduction to analyzing texts and textual practices. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers. pp. 83-96.]Search in Google Scholar
[BENNETT, K., 2009. English academic style manuals: A survey. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 43-54.10.1016/j.jeap.2008.12.003]Search in Google Scholar
[BENNETT, K., 2010. Academic discourse in Portugal: A whole different ballgame? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 21-32.10.1016/j.jeap.2009.11.002]Search in Google Scholar
[BENNETT, K., 2015. Towards an epistemological monoculture: Mechanisms of epistemicide in European research publication. In: R. Pló Alastrué and C. Pérez-Llantada, eds. English as a scientific and research language. Debates and discourses. English in Europe, vol. 2, Language and social Life. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9781614516378-004]Search in Google Scholar
[BIBER, D., JOHANSSON, S., LEECH, G., CONRAD, S. and FINEGAN, E., 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.]Search in Google Scholar
[CHAMONIKOLASOVÁ, J., 2005. Comparing the structures of academic texts written in English and Czech. In: M. Huttová, ed. Slovak studies in English 1. Bratislava: Comenius University, pp. 77-84.]Search in Google Scholar
[ČMEJRKOVÁ, S. and DANEŠ, F., 1997. Academic writing and cultural identity: The case of Czech academic writing. In: A. Duszak, ed. Culture and styles of academic discourse. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 40-62.]Search in Google Scholar
[DONTCHEVA-NAVRATILOVA, O., 2007. On coherence in written discourse. In: J. Schmied, C. Haase and R. Povolná, eds. Complexity and coherence. Approaches to linguistics research and language teaching. REAL Studies 3. Göttingen: Cuvillier Verlag, pp. 127-145.]Search in Google Scholar
[DONTCHEVA-NAVRATILOVA, O., 2012. Cross-cultural differences in the construal of authorial voice in the genre of diploma theses. In: C. Berkenkotter, V.K. Bhatia and M. Gotti, eds. Insights into academic genres. Linguistic insights. Studies in language and communication. vol. 160. Bern: Petr Lang, pp. 301-328.]Search in Google Scholar
[DONTCHEVA-NAVRATILOVA, O., 2012. Coherence and persuasion in political speeches: Ideological coherence in coherent discourse. In: O. Dontcheva-Navratilova, R. Jančaříková, G. Miššíková and R. Povolná, eds. Coherence and cohesion in English discourse. Brno: Masaryk University, pp. 129-153.]Search in Google Scholar
[DUSZAK, A., 1997. Cross-cultural academic communication: A discourse-community view. In: A. Duszak, ed. Culture and styles of academic discourse. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 11-39.10.1515/9783110821048]Search in Google Scholar
[DUŠKOVÁ, L., STRNADOVÁ, Z., KNITTLOVÁ, D., PEPRNÍK, J. and TÁRNYIKOVÁ, J., 1988. Mluvnice současné angličtiny na pozadí češtiny. Prague: Academia.]Search in Google Scholar
[FAIRCLOUGH, N., 1995. Critical discourse analysis. London: Longman.]Search in Google Scholar
[FIRBAS, J., 1992. Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511597817]Search in Google Scholar
[FOWLER, R., 1986. Linguistic criticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[HABERLANDT, K., 1982. Reader expectations in text comprehension. In: J.-F. Le Ny and W. Kintsch, eds. Language and comprehension. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 239-249.10.1016/S0166-4115(09)60055-8]Search in Google Scholar
[HALLIDAY, M.A.K. and HASAN, R., 1976. Cohesion in English. London and New York: Longman.]Search in Google Scholar
[HEDGCOCK, J.S., 2005. Taking stock of research and pedagogy in L2 writing. In: E. Hinkel, ed. Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. Mahwah and London: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 597-613.]Search in Google Scholar
[HOEY, M., 2001. Textual interaction. An introduction to written discourse analysis. London and New York: Routledge.]Search in Google Scholar
[HUDDLESTON, R. and PULLUM, G.K., 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316423530]Search in Google Scholar
[HYLAND, K., 2004. Genre and second language writing. Ann Harbor: The University of Michigan Press.10.3998/mpub.23927]Search in Google Scholar
[HYLAND, K., 2005. Metadiscourse. London and New York: Continuum.]Search in Google Scholar
[KORTMANN, B., 1991. Free adjuncts and absolutes in English. London: Routledge.]Search in Google Scholar
[LEECH, G. and SVARTVIK, J., 2002. A Communicative grammar of English. 2nd ed. London: Longman.]Search in Google Scholar
[MALÁ, M., 2006. Contrastive markers and dialogicality. In: R. Povolná and O. Dontcheva- Navratilova, eds. Discourse and interaction 2. Brno: Masaryk University, pp. 97-107.]Search in Google Scholar
[MAURANEN, A., 1993. Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Finnish-English economics texts. English for Specific Purposes, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 3-22.10.1016/0889-4906(93)90024-I]Search in Google Scholar
[MAURANEN, A., 2012. Exploring ELF. Academic English shaped by non-native speakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[MAURANEN, A., HYNNINEN, N. and RANTA, E., 2010. English as an academic lingua franca: The ELFA project. English for Specific Purposes, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 183-190.10.1016/j.esp.2009.10.001]Search in Google Scholar
[MIŠŠÍKOVÁ, G., 2012a. Coherence in literary discoure. In: O. Dontcheva-Navratilova, R. Jančaříková, G. Miššíková and R. Povolná. Coherence and cohesion in English discourse. Brno: Masaryk University, pp. 79-102.]Search in Google Scholar
[MIŠŠÍKOVÁ, G., 2012b. Politeness strategies in academic digital discourse. Discourse and Interaction, vol. 5 no. 1, pp. 49-62. 10.5817/DI2012-1-49]Search in Google Scholar
[MUR-DUEŇAS, P., 2008. Analysing engagement markers cross-culturally: The case of English and Spanish business management research articles. In: S. Burgess and P. Martín-Martín, eds. English as an additional language in research publication and communication. Linguistic insights. Studies in language and communication. vol. 61. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 197-213.]Search in Google Scholar
[PÉREZ-LLANTADA, C., 2011. Constructing the ideal readership: Heteroglossic (dis)engagement in research writing practices across cultures. In: V. K. Bhatia, P. Hernández and P. Pérez-Paredes, eds. Researching specialised languages. Studies in corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 25-45.10.1075/scl.47.05aur]Search in Google Scholar
[POVOLNÁ, R., 2009. Exploring interactive discourse markers in academic spoken discourse. In: O. Dontcheva-Navratilova and R. Povolná, eds. Coherence and cohesion in spoken and written discourse. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 60-80.]Search in Google Scholar
[POVOLNÁ, R., 2012. Cross-cultural differences in the use of discourse markers by Czech and German students of English in the genre of Master’s theses. In: C. Berkenkotter, V.K. Bhatia and M. Gotti, eds. Insights into academic genres. Linguistic insights. Studies in language and communication. vol. 160. Bern: Petr Lang, pp. 329-351.]Search in Google Scholar
[POVOLNÁ, R., 2015. On cross-cultural variation in the use of conjuncts in the research articles by Czech and native speakers of English: Can conjuncts contribute to the interactive and dialogic character of academic texts? In: R. Pló Alastrué and C. Pérez-Llantada, eds. English as a scientific and research language. Debates and discourses. English in Europe, vol. 2, Language and social Life. Berlin and Boston: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 115-140.10.1515/9781614516378-008]Search in Google Scholar
[QUIRK, R., GREENBAUM, S., LEECH, G. and SVARTVIK, J., 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.]Search in Google Scholar
[SCHMIED, J., 2011. Academic writing in Europe: A survey of approaches. In: J. Schmied, ed. Academic writing in Europe: Empirical perspectives. REAL Studies 5. Göttingen: Cuvillier Verlag, pp. 1-22.]Search in Google Scholar
[STAŠKOVÁ, S., 2005. Options of identity: Authorial presence in research article abstracts. In: M. Huttová, ed. Slovak studies in English 1. Bratislava: Comenius University, pp. 201-207.]Search in Google Scholar
[SWALES, J., 1990. Genre analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[SWALES, J., 2004. Research genres. Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524827]Search in Google Scholar
[TANSKANEN, S.K., 2006. Collaborating towards coherence: Lexical cohesion in English discourse. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.146]Search in Google Scholar
[VOGEL, R., 2008. Sentence linkers in essays and papers by native vs. non-native writers. Discourse and Interaction, vol. 1 no. 2, pp. 119-126.]Search in Google Scholar
[VOGEL, R., 2013. Sentence adverbials in academic texts: Preferences of native vs. non-native writers. In: J. Schmied and C. Haase, eds. English for academic purposes: Practical and theoretical approaches. REAL Studies 7. Göttingen: Cuvillier Verlag, pp. 81-93.]Search in Google Scholar
[WAGNER, S., 2011. Concessives and contrastives in student writing: L1, L2 and genre differences. In: J. Schmied, ed. Academic writing in Europe: Empirical perspectives. REAL Studies 5. Göttingen: Cuvillier Verlag, pp. 23-48. 10.4304/tpls.2.3.637-641]Search in Google Scholar
