Mathematical Discourse: Language, Symbolism and Visual Images

By K. O’Halloran. 2004

471 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Architecture, Mechanical Engineering, Theoretical Computer Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/480d40f100a5780b3a712be9d36d918695b2c51c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Architecture

1. N. Artemeva
2. Paul Thompson
3. Janna Fox
4. Z. Fang
5. Ken Hyland

In Mechanical Engineering

1. N. Artemeva
2. Paul Thompson
3. Janna Fox
4. Z. Fang
5. Ken Hyland

In Theoretical Computer Science

1. N. Artemeva
2. Paul Thompson
3. Janna Fox
4. Z. Fang
5. Ken Hyland

Citations in the corpus

• Language and communication in mathematics education: an overview of research in the field (2014, background): “Developments in the general fields of communication and media studies offer some ways of theorising and analysing this wider range of resources, adding to what may be taken from linguistics, semiotics and theories of discourse (e.g. Kress and van Leeuwen 2001; O’Halloran 2005).”
• The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes (2016, background): “Like the wider critical pedagogy movement, the ‘dream’ of critical EAP is that critical practices in the classroom can lead to ‘reforms in academic institutions’ and improved ‘conditions in the workplace and community’ (Benesch, 2001, p. xviii).”
• Language Correlates of Disciplinary Literacy (2012, background): “However, like science, mathematics texts are “semiotic hybrids” (Lemke, 1998, 2003); they draw on not only linguistic resources (i.e., natural language) but also symbolic and visual resources in the construction of mathematical meanings (O’Halloran, 2005).”
• The Semiotic Structure of Geometry Diagrams: How Textbook Diagrams Convey Meaning (2015, unknown): ““We must have [visual] images; we cannot have [visual] images” (Gallison, 2002, p. 323, as cited in O’Halloran, 2005, pp. 129–130).”
• The Writing’s on the Board (2011, background): “In fact, as O’Halloran (2005) has observed, “The analysis of the mathematical pedagogical discourse must necessarily take into account . . . the shifts between the written/spoken modes and the shifts between the language, symbolism and visual display” (p. 206).”