Apostel J. (ed.). 1972. Interdisciplinarity: Problems of teaching and research in universities. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Bakhtin M.M. 1981. The dialogic imagination. [transl. by C. Emerson and M. Holquist] Austin: University of Texas Press.

Barry A., Born G. 2013. Chapter 1. Interdisciplinarity: Reconfigurations of the social and natural sciences. – Barry A., Born G. (eds.). Interdisciplinarity: Reconfigurations of the social and natural sciences. London, New York: Routledge: 1–56.

Bondi M., Hyland K. (eds.). 2006. Academic discourse across disciplines. Bern: Peter Lang.

Bucchi M. 1998. Science and the media: Alternative routes in scientific communication. London, New York: Routledge.

Carayol N. 2005. Why do academic scientists engage in interdisciplinary research? – Research Evaluation 14.1: 70–79.

Choi B.C., Pak A.W. 2006. Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. – Clinical and Investigative Medicine 29.6: 351–364.

Choi S., Richards K. 2017. Interdisciplinary discourses. Communicating across disciplines. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Corbacho A.M., Minini L., Pereyra M., González-Fernández A.E., Echániz R., Repetto L., Cruz P., Fernández-Damonte V., Lorieto A., Basile M. 2021. Interdisciplinary higher education with a focus on academic motivation and teamwork diversity. – International Journal of Educational Research Open 2.2: 1–10.

Crossick G. 2018. Why monographs matter. – Against the Grain 28.3, article 12.

Fløttum K., Dahl T., Kinn T. 2006. Academic voices: Across languages and disciplines. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Haraway D.J. 2007. When species meet. Minneapolis, London: University of Minnesota Press.

Harwood N. 2005. We do not seem to have a theory. The theory I present here attempts to fill this gap: Inclusive and exclusive pronouns in academic writing. – Applied Linguistics 26.4: 343–373.

Hyland K. 2001a. Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles. – Written Communication 18.4: 549–574.

Hyland K. 2001b. Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mentions in research articles. – English for Specific Purposes 20: 207–226.

Hyland K. 2004. Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Ann Arbor (MI): University of Michigan Press.

Hyland K. 2005. Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum. Hyland K. 2007. Writing in the academy: Reputation, education and knowledge. London: University of London.

Hyland K. 2008. Disciplinary voices: Interactions in research writing. – English Text Construction 1.1: 5–22.

Hyland K. 2010. Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional science. – Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9: 116–127.

Hyland K. 2015. Genre, discipline and identity. – Journal of English for Academic Purposes 19: 32–43.

Hyland K., Zou H. 2020. In the frame: Signalling structure in academic articles and blogs. – Journal of Pragmatics 165: 31–44.

Klein J.T. 2017. Typologies of interdisciplinarity: The boundary work of definition. – Frodeman R., Klein J.T., Pacheco R.C.S. (eds.). The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (2nd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press: 21–34.

Lattuca L.R. 2001. Creating interdisciplinarity: Interdisciplinary research and teaching among college and university faculty. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.

Martin J.R., White P.R.R. 2005. The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Houndmills, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

McGrath L. 2016. Self-mentions in anthropology and history research articles: Variation between and within disciplines. – Journal of English for Academic Purposes 21: 86–98.

Muguiro N.F. 2019. Interdisciplinarity and academic writing: A corpus-based case study of three lished doctoral dissertation, University of Birmingham].

Pennycook A. 2017. Posthumanist applied linguistics. London, New York: Routledge.

Pilkington O.A. 2018. Presented discourse in popular science: Professional voices in books for lay audiences. Leiden, Boston: Brill.

Swales J.M., Ahmed U., Chang Y., Chavez D., Dressen D., Seymour R. 1998. Consider this: The role of imperatives in scholarly writing. – Applied Linguistics 19.1: 97–121.

Teich E., Holtz M. 2009. Scientific registers in contact: An exploration of the lexico-grammatical properties of interdisciplinary discourses. – International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14.4: 524–548.

Thompson P., Hunston S. 2020. Interdisciplinary research discourse: Corpus investigations into environment journals. Abingdon, New York: Routledge.

Triki N. 2021. Exemplification in research articles: Structural, semantic and metadiscursive properties across disciplines. – Journal of English for Academic Purposes 54: 1–13.

Turney J. 2007. Boom and bust in popular science. – Journal of Science Communication 6.1: 1–3.

Turner S. 2017. Knowledge formations: An analytic framework. – Frodeman R., Klein J.T., Pacheco R.C.S. (eds.). The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. [2nd edition]. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 9–20.

Weingart T. 2010. A short history of knowledge formations. – Frodeman R., Klein J.T., Mitcham C. (eds.). The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 3–15.

Williams P., Stevenson I., Nicholas D., Watkinson A., Rowlands I. 2009. The role and future of the monograph in arts and humanities research. – Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives 61.1: 67–82.

Wolfe C. 2003. American culture, the discourse of species, and posthumanist theory. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Xie J. 2020. A review of research on authorial evaluation in English academic writing: A methodological perspective. – Journal of English for Academic Purposes 47: 1–20.

Zou H., Hyland K. 2020. “Think about how fascinating this is”: Engagement in academic blogs across disciplines. – Journal of English for Academic Purposes 43: 1–12.