Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Genes of Difficulty: The Indicators

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Difficulty in Poetry

  • 302 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter minutely describes the model that subtitles the book, enabling other scholars to apply it consistently. The skeleton of the model rests on an intuitive distinction between RIDs (Readerly Indicators of Difficulty) and LIDs (Linguistic Indicators of Difficulty). Within an experimental setting, these may be conceived of as the two global variables of difficulty. RIDs are, for instance, statements of rejection, longer reading times and markers of interpretive hesitation. A total of thirty-three LIDs are identified and discussed, ranging from orthography to discourse (e.g. misspelt words, syntactic ambiguity and lack of narrativity ). Prototypical effects are suggested for each LID based on the processing operations they are most likely to challenge. This implies that the model allows to predict readerly reactions based on linguistic description.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Adamson, S. (1999). The Literary Language. In S. Romaine (Ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language, 4, 1776–The Present Day (pp. 589–692). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alonso, P. (2014). The Role of Cognitive Coherence in Non-Expert Processes of Literary Discourse Reception. Journal of Literary Semantics, 43(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altieri, C. (1999 [1978]) The Objectivist Tradition. In R. Blau DuPlessis & P. Quartermain (Eds.), The Objectivist Nexus: Essays in Cultural Poetics (pp. 25–36). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. R., & Davison, A. (1988). Conceptual and Empirical Bases of Readability Formulas. In A. Davison & G. M. Green (Eds.), Linguistic Complexity and Text Comprehension: Readability Issues Reconsidered (pp. 23–53). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Attridge, D. (1988). Unpacking the Portmanteau, or Who’s Afraid of Finnegans Wake? In J. Culler (Ed.), On Puns (pp. 140–155). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, T. R. (1986). (In)transitives. Some Thoughts on Ambiguity in Poetic Texts. Journal of Literary Semantics, 15(1), 23–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, C. (2004 [1987]). The Sophist. Cambridge: Salt Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, Genre, and Style. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Biber, D., Finegan, E., Johansson, S., Conrad, S., & Leech, G. (2002). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, H. (1973). The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, M. (1978). Mallarmé and the Art of Being Difficult. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooke-Rose, C. (1958). A Grammar of Metaphor. London: Secker and Walburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caink, A. (2014). The Art of Repetition in Muriel Spark’s Telling. In S. Chapman & B. Clark (Eds.), Pragmatic Literary Stylistics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carney, J. (2008). “Unweaving the Rainbow”: The Semantic Organization of the Lyric. Journal of Literary Semantics, 37, 33–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, G., Conklin, K., Guy, J., & Scott, R. (2015). Processing Punctuation and Word Changes in Different Editions of Prose Fiction. Scientific Study of Literature, 5(2), 200–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, R. (1998 [1987]). Vocabulary. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castiglione, D. (2013). The Semantics of Difficult Poems: Deriving a Checklist of Linguistic Phenomena. Journal of Literary Semantics, 42(1), 115–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castiglione, D. (2017). Difficult Poetry Processing: Reading Times and the Narrativity Hypothesis. Language and Literature, 26(2), 99–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chafe, W. (1991). Sources of Difficulty in the Processing of Written Language. In A. C. Purves (Ed.), The Idea of Difficulty in Literature (pp. 7–22). New York: State University of New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claus, B., & Kelter, S. (2006). Comprehending Narratives Containing Flashbacks: Evidence for Temporally Organized Representations. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(5), 1031–1044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC Psycholinguistic Database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 497–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2012). The Processing of Formulaic Language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 45–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cremer, M., & Schoonen, R. (2013). The Role of Accessibility of Semantic Word Knowledge in Monolingual and Bilingual Fifth-Grade Reading. Applied Psycholinguistics, 34(6), 1195–1217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cruse, D. A. (2000). Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cureton, D. R. (1979). E. E. Cummings: A Study of the Poetic Use of Deviant Morphology. Poetics Today, 1(1–2), 213–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, M., & Gardner, D. A. (2010). Frequency Dictionary of Contemporary American English: Word Sketches, Collocates, and Thematic Lists. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Beaugrande, R., & Dressler, W. U. (1981). Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. (1992). Acts of Literature (D. Attridge, Ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, G. L. (1978). Language Processing and the Reading of Literature. Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, P., Bortolussi, M., Twilley, L. C., & Leung, A. (1993). Literary Processing and Interpretation: Towards Empirical Foundations. Poetics, 22, 5–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douthwaite, J. (2000). Towards a Linguistic Theory of Foregrounding. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du, P., Liu, D., Zhang, L., Hitchman, G., & Lin, C. (2014). The Processing of Contradictory and Noncontradictory Negative Sentences. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 26(4), 461–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmott, C., Sanford, A. J., & Morrow, L. I. (2006). Capturing the Attention of Readers? Stylistic and Psychological Perspectives on the Use and Effect of Text Fragmentation in Narratives. Journal of Literary Semantics, 35, 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eva-Wood, A. (2004). Thinking and Feeling Poetry: Exploring Meanings Aloud. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 182–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabb, N. (1995). The Density of Response: A Problem for Literary Criticism. In J. Payne (Ed.), Linguistic Approaches to Literature: Papers in Literary Stylistics (pp. 143–157). Birmingham: English Language Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabb, N. (1999). Verse Constituency and the Locality of Alliteration. Lingua, 108(4), 223–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faust, M., & Mashal, N. (2007). The Role of the Right Cerebral Hemisphere in Processing Novel Metaphorical Expressions Taken from Poetry: A Divided Field Visual Study. Neuropsychologia, 45, 860–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fois-Kaschel, G. (2002). Analyse Linguistique de l’Hermetisme et des Libertés Poétiques dans Hölderlin, Trakl et Celan. Paris: Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, R. (1971). The Languages of Literature. Some Linguistic Contributions to Criticism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L. (1988). The Study of Linguistic Complexity. In A. Davison & G. M. Green (Eds.), Linguistic Complexity and Text Comprehension: Readability Issues Reconsidered (pp. 193–221). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genette, G. (1980). Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goatly, A. (1997). The Language of Metaphors. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Goodblatt, C., & Glickson, J. (1993). Metaphor and Gestalt: Interaction Theory Revisited. Poetics Today, 14(1), 83–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodblatt, C., & Glickson, J. (2010). Conversations with I. A. Richards: the Renaissance in Cognitive Literary Studies. Poetics Today, 31(3), 387–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Hoffman, N. L., & Clark, L. F. (1980). Structural Components of Reading Times. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(2), 135–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, K. (2015). Deixis in Literature. In V. Sotirova (Ed.), The Bloomsbury Companion to Stylistics (pp. 400–415). London and New York: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1999). Construing Experience through Meaning. A Language-Based Approach to Cognition. London and New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd ed.). London: Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanauer, D. (1998). The Genre-Specific Hypothesis of Reading: Reading Poetry and Encyclopedic Items. Poetics, 26, 63–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harley, T. A. (2008). The Psychology of Language (3rd ed.). London: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hühn, P. (2005). Plotting the Lyric: Forms of Narration in Poetry. In E. M. Zettelmann & M. Rubik (Eds.), Theory into Poetry: New Approaches to the Lyric (pp. 147–172). Amsterdam: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hühn, P., Goerke, B., Plooy, H., & Schenk-Haupt, S. (2016). Facing Loss and Death: Narrative and Eventfulness in Lyric Poetry. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, H., & Ze Amvela, E. (2007). Words, Meaning and Vocabulary: An Introduction to Modern English Lexicology. London and New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffries, L. (1993). The Language of Twentieth Century Poetry. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jeffries, L. (2008). The Role of Style in Reader-Involvement: Deictic Shifting in Contemporary Poems. Journal of Literary Semantics, 37(1), 69–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kövecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamarque, P. (2009). The Elusiveness of Poetic Meaning. Ratio (New Series), 27(4), 398–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G. (1993). The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (pp. 202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leech, G. (1969). A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry. Harlow: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leech, G., & Short, M. (2007 [1981]). Style in Fiction. London and New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, S. R. (1977). The Semantics of Metaphor. Baltimore and London: John Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez, T. (2006). Meaning Performance: Essays on Poetry. Cambridge: Salt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Martindale, C. (1991). The Clockwork Muse: The Predictability of Artistic Change. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHale, B. (2000). How (Not) to Read Postmodernist Long Poems: The Case of Ashbery’s “The Skaters”. Poetics Today, 21(3), 561–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McHale, B. (2004). The Obligation Toward the Difficult Whole: Postmodernist Long Poems. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHale, B. (2009). Beginning to Think About Narrative in Poetry. Narrative, 17(1), 11–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miall, S. D., & Kuiken, D. (1994). Foregrounding, Defamiliarization, and Affect: Response to Literary Stories. Poetics, 22, 389–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moen, H. S. (2010). Chi È Questa?—‘Who is She?’ Transformation, Displacement, and Narrative Refraction as Structural Procedures in The Cantos of Ezra Pound. Textual Practice, 24(2), 287–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadel, I. B. (2007). The Cambridge Introduction to Ezra Pound. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nahajec, L. (2009). Negation and the Creation of Extra Meaning in Poetry. Language and Literature, 18(2), 109–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neel, E. (1999). The Talking Being Listening: Gertrude Stein’s “Patriarchal Poetry” and the Sound of Reading. Style, 33(1), 88–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paivio, A., Yuille, J. C., & Madigan, S. A. (1968). Concreteness, Imagery, and Meaningfulness Values for 925 Nouns. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 76(1–2), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perloff, M. (1981). The Poetics of Indeterminacy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perloff, M. (1991). Radical Artifice: Writing Poetry in the Age of Media. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peskin, J. (1998). Constructing Meaning When Reading Poetry: An Expert-Novice Study. Cognition and Instruction, 16(3), 235–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilkington, A. (2000). Poetic Effects. A Relevance Theory Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Quartermain, P. (1992). Disjunctive Poetics: From Gertrude Stein and Louis Zukofsky to Susan Howe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver’s Processing Experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(4), 364–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riffaterre, M. (1973). Interpretation and Descriptive Poetry: A Reading of Wordsworth’s “Yew-Trees”. New Literary History, 4(2), 229–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riffaterre, M. (1984 [1978]). Semiotics of Poetry. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rives, R. (2012). Modernist Impersonalities. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rodger, T. (1971). The Concept of Linguistic Difficulty. Working Papers in Linguistics, 3(4), 109–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero, E., & Soria, B. (2013). Anomaly in Novel Metaphor and Experimental Tests. Journal of Literary Semantics, 42(1), 31–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • San, D. (2005). Hiatus of Subject and Verb in Poetic Language. Style, 39(2), 137–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanford, A. J., & Emmott, C. (2012). Mind, Brain and Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schmauder, A. R., Morris, R. K., & Poynor, D. V. (2000). Lexical Processing and Text Integration of Function and Content Words: Evidence from Priming and Eye-Fixations. Memory and Cognition, 28(7), 1098–1108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, S. J., & Groeben, N. (1989). How to Do Thoughts with Words: On Understanding Literature. In D. Meutsch & R. Viehoff (Eds.), Comprehension of Litrary Discourse (pp. 16–46). Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N., & Schmitt, D. (2014). A Reassessment of Frequency and Vocabulary Size in L2 Vocabulary Teaching. Language Teaching, 47(4), 484–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semino, E. (1995). Schema Theory and the Analysis of Text Worlds in Poetry. Language and Literature, 4(2), 79–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semino, E. (2002). Stylistics and Linguistic Variation in Poetry. Journal of English Linguistics, 30(1), 28–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen, Y. (2007). Foregrounding in Poetic Discourse: Between Deviance and Cognitive Constraints. Language and Literature, 16(2), 169–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen, Y., & Giora, R. (1994). Degrees of Narrativity and Strategies of Semantic Reduction. Poetics, 22, 447–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short, M. (1996). Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays, and Prose. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, P. (2014 [1993]). Stylistics: A Resource Book for Students. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sotirova, V. (2005). Repetition in Free Indirect Style: A Dialogue of Minds? Style, 39(2), 123–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiro, J. (2011). Reader Response and the Formulation of Literary Judgment. In J. Swann, R. Pope, & R. Carter (Eds.), Creativity in Language and Literature—The State of the Art (pp. 231–243). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, G. (1978). On Difficulty. In G. Steiner (Ed.), On Difficulty and Other Essays (pp. 18–47). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stockwell, P. (1992). The Metaphorics of Literary Reading. Liverpool Papers in Language and Discourse, 2, 18–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stockwell, P. (2002a). Cognitive Poetics: An Introduction. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stockwell, P. (2002b). Miltonic Texture and the Feeling of Reading. In E. Semino & J. Culpeper (Eds.), Cognitive Stylistics. Language and Cognition in Text Analysis (73–94). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stockwell, P. (2009). Texture—A Cognitive Aesthetics of Reading. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stubbs, M. (2001). Word and Phrases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tartakovsky, R. (2009). E. E. Cummings’s Parentheses: Punctuation as Poetic Device. Style, 43(2), 215–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tate, A. (2008 [1994]). Bakhtin, Addressivity, and the Poetics of Objectivity. In R. Carter & P. Stockwell (Eds.), The Language and Literature Reader (pp. 137–146). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Testa, E. (1999). Per Interposta Persona. Lingua e Poesia nel Secondo Novecento. Rome: Bulzoni.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toolan, M. (1993). Approaching Hill’s “Of Commerce and Society” Through Lexis. In P. Verdonk (Ed.), Stylistic Criticism of Twentieth-Century Poetry: From Text to Context (pp. 32–45). Florence, KY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toolan, M. (2001 [1988]). Narrative: A Critical Linguistic Introduction. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toolan, M. (2014). The Theory and Philosophy of Stylistics. In P. Stockwell & S. Whiteley (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Stylistics (pp. 13–31). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toolan, M. (2016). Making Sense of Narrative Texts: Situation, Repetition, and Picturing in the Reading of Short Stories. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, T., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York and London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Peer, W. (1993). Typographic Foregrounding. Language and Literature, 2(1), 49–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wales, K. (2011 [1990]). A Dictionary of Stylistics (3rd ed.). Harlow: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, K. (1995). How Coherent is Cohesion? In J. Payne (Ed.), Linguistic Approaches to Literature: Papers in Literary Stylistics (pp. 102–116). Birmingham: English Language Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, J. (2007). The Lyric Touch: Essays on the Poetry of Excess. Cambridge: Salt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yaron, I. (2002). Processing of Obscure Poetic Texts: Mechanisms of Selection. Journal of Literary Semantics, 31(2), 133–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwaan, R. A. (1993). Aspects of Literary Comprehension. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zwaan, R. A. (1996). Processing Narrative Time Shifts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(5), 1196–1207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwaan, R. A. (2004). The Immersed Experiencer: Toward an Embodied Theory of Language Comprehension. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 44, 35–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zyngier, S., van Peer, W., & Hakemulder, F. (2007). Complexity and Foregrounding: In the Eye of the Beholder? Poetics Today, 28(4), 653–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of English Philology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania

    Davide Castiglione

Authors
  1. Davide Castiglione
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Castiglione, D. (2019). Genes of Difficulty: The Indicators. In: Difficulty in Poetry. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97001-1_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97001-1_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97000-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-97001-1

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation