Thesis (M.A.)--University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 2003. / Title from title page screen (viewed Sept. 18, 2003). Thesis advisor: Janis Appier. Document formatted into pages (iii, 119 p.). Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 102-113).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Illinois State University, 2004. / Title from title page screen, viewed Dec. 9, 2004. Dissertation Committee: Beverly S. Rich (chair), Sharon M. Soucy McCrone, Sherrie L. Meier, Lawrence E. Spence. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 120-123) and abstract. Also available in print.

Typescript (photocopy). / Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries / Department: Computer Science.

published_or_final_version / Architecture / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 1998. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 144-150). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 1998. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 144-150). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 70-76). Also available in print.

This study was designed 1) to reveal the structural characteristics of an electronic discourse text, namely InterChange, and 2) to associate the characteristics with underlying functional factors in comparison with spoken and written discourse. The characteristics of Interchange were examined in terms of frequency and discourse functions.This comparative analysis has revealed that the structure of Interchange is characteristically different from spoken and written discourse. Comparatively speaking, in Interchange electronic discourse, interpersonal involvement is far higher than in written discourse, but slightly lower than in spoken discourse. The fragmentary quality is generally higher than spoken discourse as well as than written. Syntactic and semantic variation falls between spoken and written discourse.Three distinctive feature distribution patterns emerged in the analysis of Interchange features, with which the underlying discourse mechanism of Interchange was interpreted. The linguistic features in Pattern I occur with higher frequency than in written discourse, but lower than in spoken. It was posited that this occurrence pattern of Interchange features reflects the mutual interaction of elements of speaking and writing. The linguistic features in Pattern II occur with higher frequency than in both spoken discourse and written discourse, and the linguistic features in Pattern III occur less often than in both spoken discourse and written discourse. It was suggested that this may be due to functional needs. / Department of English

Thesis (M. Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 2003. / Also available in print.

Thesis (M.S.) -- Mississippi State University. Department of Physics and Astronomy. / Title from title screen. Includes bibliographical references.