author

The authors carefully motivate what they are attempting to accomplish in every section.

According to the authors, a linguistic theory does not characterize the mental object of study but rather the regularities in its external behaviour.

As the authors note, this is a preliminary study with a small data set, and more research should be carried out to substantiate their findings.

The authors have gone to considerable lengths to add to the stock of data in the anglophone linguistics literature.

The strengths of the individual chapters rest with the experience and knowledge of the authors.

According the authors in this stimulating collection, the answer to such questions lies in the realm of the image.

A final observation concerns the author’s emphasis on the ‘ invisibility’ of the monarch.

The authors conclude the book by outlining criteria for successful border institutions.

The authors propose new ways to study and understand social and labour history.

The national cases and topics are very diverse and the authors sometimes resort to very different analytical and interpretative frameworks.

However, the book’s shortcoming is that it does not translate the author’s admirable intentions into analysis.

I will take two examples : their attitude to translations, and their manipulation of the author’s marginalia.

However, the performance information was supplied by the vendors and not confirmed by the authors.

However, the authors also stress the limitations of the market-oriented model that all five republics are trying to emulate.

The authors’ perspective is a ‘constructionist’ one, seeing inquiries as providing accounts to satisfy institutional needs.

These examples are from corpora and from sources on the web. Any opinions in the examples do not represent the opinion of the Cambridge Dictionary editors or of Cambridge University Press or its licensors.