Intercultural Communication. Her PhD thesis was awarded the title of Best Dissertation in the field of American Studies. She was a member of two national research projects focused on the language of participatory democracy and on corporate social responsibility. She has presented the results of her research at more than 50 conferences. Her fields of expertise are: translation studies, intercultural communication, 20th munication in English, and academic writing. The book under review is actually a collection of S. Chiper's papers published starting from 2006, going through 2011, 2012, 2014 up to 2018 and 2019 all about a relatively innovative method, namely, that of discourse analysis. In one of my recent reviews, I mention the latter to be a challenging endeavor, given that discourse itself - ever since the origin of the notion in the second half of the twentieth century - shuns both a universal approach and definition [1. P. 780]. Out of quite a few perspectives, the author has chosen one of the latest developments, that is, Critical Discourse Analysis, which aims to explore the relations of causality and determination between (a) discursive practices, events and texts, and (b) wider social and cultural structures, relations and processes; as well as to investigate how such practices, events and texts arise out of and are ideologically shaped by relations of power and struggles over power [Fairclough as referred to in Chiper. P. 16]. The volume contains a wealth of discursive linguistic material from areas such as politics, economy, ideology and translation as institutional branding. The latter topic looks one of the most attractive, since S. Chiper touches upon a problem of translator's invisibility, which may make him/her unaccountable for the quality of his/her work. In this respect, the author quite reasonably emphasizes that "an increased awareness of translator's contribution to institutional branding and institutional image could... lead to an increased concern for quality, with the added effect of higher translator's status and visibility" [Chiper. P. 202], which is praiseworthy, since we talk about translation craft where the Two indubitably interesting articles investigate into the discursive frames and discursive actions through which different institutions have been constructing arguments to legitimize a large gold and silver mining transnational development project funded by a Canadian company in central Transylvania, Romania. The paper is in fact part of a support to save Rosia Montana, a millennia-old settlement that could disappear should the mining operations begin. Chiper dwells on the texts, discourses and genres used in pleading for or against Rosia Montana project. She is good at bringing together economy, economics and linguistics through the notions of performatives, signifiers and primary frameworks, that is, socially constructed schemata that allow humans to construct the meaning of situations and
