Article published In:
Describing and assessing interactional competence in a second language: Special issue of the journal of Applied Pragmatics 5:2 (2023)
Edited by Emma Betz, Taiane Malabarba and Dagmar Barth-Weingarten
[Applied Pragmatics 5:2] 2023
► pp. 142168
(2017) NCSSFL-ACTFL Can-Do statements. [Electronic version] [URL]
Barth-Weingarten, D.
(2011) Double sayings of German ja: More observations on their phonetic form and alignment function. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 44 (2), 157–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Betz, E., & Deppermann, A.
(2018) Indexing priority of position: Eben as response particle in German. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51 (2), 171–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Betz, E., & Huth, T.
(2014) Beyond grammar: Teaching interaction in the German language classroom. Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 47 (2), 140–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Betz, E., Taleghani-Nikazm, C., Drake, V., & Golato, A.
(2013) Third-position repeats in German: The case of repair- and request-for-information sequence. Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion, 14 1, 133–166. [URL]
Council of Europe
(2018) Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. [URL]
Couper-Kuhlen, E.
(2009) A sequential approach to affect: The case of ‘disappointment’. In M. Laakso, M. Haakana & J. Lindström (Eds.), Talk in interaction: Comparative dimensions (pp. 94–123). Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar
(2021) The prosody and phonetics of okay in American English. In E. Betz, A. Deppermann, L. Mondada, & M.-L. Sorjonen (Eds.), OKAY across languages: Toward a comparative approach to its use in talk-in-interaction (pp. 132–173). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ducasse, A. M., & Brown, A.
(2009) Assessing paired orals: Raters’ orientation to interaction. Language Testing, 26 (3), 423–443. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
East, M.
(2020) Addressing the possibilities and limitations of implementing a new classroom-based assessment of oral proficiency. In M. Poehner & O. Inbar-Lourie (Eds.), Toward a reconceptualization of second language classroom assessment (pp. 221–240). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Galaczi, E.
(2014) Interactional competence across proficiency levels: How do learners manage interaction in paired speaking tests? Applied Linguistics, 35 (5), 553–574. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Galaczi, E., & Taylor, L.
(2018) Interactional competence: Conceptualisations, operationalisations, and outstanding questions. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15 (3), 219–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gardner, R.
(2007) “Broken” starts: bricolage in turn starts in second language talk. In Z. Hua, P. Seedhouse, L. Wei, & V. Cook (Eds.), Language learning and teaching as social interaction (pp. 58–71). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, H.
(1967) Studies in ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
(2021) Goethe-Zertifikat A2: Modellsatz Erwachsene. Goethe-Institut.Google Scholar
Golato, A.
(2010) Marking understanding versus receipting information in talk: Achso and ach in German interaction. Discourse Studies, 12 (2), 147–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) German oh: marking an emotional change of state. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45 (3), 245–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Golato, A., & Betz, E.
(2008) German ach and achso in repair uptake: Resources to sustain or remove epistemic asymmetry. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 27 (1), 7–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, J. K., & Pekarek Doehler, S.
(2011) L2 interactional competence and development. In J. K. Hall, J. Hellermann & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.), L2 interactional competence and development (pp. 1–18). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heinemann, T., & Koivisto, A.
(2016) Indicating a change-of-state in interaction: Crosslinguistic explorations. Journal of Pragmatics, 104 1, 83–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hellermann, J.
(2009) Practices for dispreferred responses using ‘no’ by a learner of English. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47 (1), 95–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) Members’ methods, members’ competencies: Looking for evidence of language learning in longitudinal investigations of other-initiated repair. In J. K. Hall, J. Hellermann, & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.), L2 Interactional competence and development (pp. 147–172). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Helmer, H., Betz, E., & Deppermann, A.
(2021) Coordination of OKAY, nods, and gaze in claiming understanding and closing topics. In E. Betz, A. Deppermann, L. Mondada, & M-L. Sorjonen (Eds.), OKAY across languages. Toward a comparative approach to its use in talk-in-interaction (pp. 363–393). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J.
(1984) A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 299–345). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2007) Intersubjectivity and progressivity in person (and place) reference. In N. J. Enfield & T. Stivers (Eds.), Person reference in interaction: Linguistic, cultural and social perspectives (pp. 255–280). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) Questioning in medicine. In A. Freed & S. Ehrlich (Eds.), “Why do you ask?”: The function of questions in institutional discourse (pp. 208–230). Sage.Google Scholar
Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R.
(2008) Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Polity Press.Google Scholar
Huth, T.
(2006) Negotiating structure and culture: L2 learners’ realization of L2 compliment-response sequences in talk-in-interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 38 1, 2025–2050. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019) Adding and rethinking: Interactional competency and proficiency. Interactional competencies and practices in a second language (ICOP L2), Mälardalen University, Västerås, Sweden. May 29–31, 2019.Google Scholar
(2021) Conceptualizing interactional learning targets for the second language curriculum. In S. Kunitz, N. Markee, & O. Sert (Eds.), Classroom-based conversation analytic research: Theoretical and applied perspectives on pedagogy (pp. 359–381). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huth, T., & Taleghani-Nikazm, C.
(2006) How can insights from conversation analysis be directly applied to teaching L2 pragmatics? Language Teaching Research, 10 (1), 53–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ikeda, N.
(2017) Measuring L2 oral pragmatic abilities for use in social contexts: Development and validation of an assessment instrument for L2 pragmatics performance in university settings (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Imo, W.
(2011) Nein sagen, ‘wow’ meinen … Die Reaktion auf Informationen durch inszeniertes Infragestellen als sequenzielles Muster einer interaktionalen Grammatik [Saying no, meaning ‘wow’ … Reacting to information with show questioning as a sequential pattern in an interactional grammar]. In J. C. Freienstein, J. Hagemann, & S. Staffelt (Eds.), Äußern und Bedeuten (pp. 251–264). Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G.
(1993) Caveat speaker: Preliminary notes on recipient topic-shift implicature. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 26 (1), 1–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004) Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–23). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koivisto, A.
(2019) Repair receipts: On their motivation and interactional import. Discourse Studies, 21 (4), 398–420. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, S. H.
(2013) Response design in conversation. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 415–432). Blackwell.Google Scholar
May, L., Nakatsuhara, F., Lam, D., & Galaczi, E.
(2020) Developing tools for learning oriented assessment of interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice. Language Testing, 37 (2), 165–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mondada, L.
(2019) Conventions for multimodal transcription. [URL]
Oloff, F.
(2017) Genau als redebeitragsinterne, responsive, sequenzschließende oder sequenzstrukturierende Bestätigungspartikel im Gespräch. In H. Blühdorn, A. Deppermann, H. Helmer, & T. Spranz-Fogasy, T. (Eds.), Diskursmarker im Deutschen. Reflexionen und Analysen (pp. 207–232). Verlag für Gesprächsforschung.Google Scholar
(2019) Okay as a neutral acceptance token in German conversation. Lexique, 25 1, 197–225.Google Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, S.
(2019) On the nature and the development of L2 interactional competence: State of the art and implications for praxis. In M. R. Salaberry & S. Kunitz (Eds.), Teaching and testing L2 interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice (pp. 25–59). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, S., & Berger, E.
(2018) L2 interactional competence as increased ability for context-sensitive conduct: A longitudinal study of story-openings. Applied Linguistics, 39 (4), 555–578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, S., & Pochon-Berger, E.
(2011) Developing ‘methods’ for interaction: A cross-sectional study of disagreement sequences in French L2. In J. K. Hall, J. Hellermann & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.), L2 interactional competence and development (pp. 206–243). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roever, C., & Kasper, G.
(2018) Speaking in turns and sequences: Interactional competence as a target construct in testing speaking. Language Testing, 35 (3), 331–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H., & Schegloff, E. A.
(1979) Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 15–21). Irvington.Google Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G.
(1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation. Language, 50 (4), 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salaberry, M. R., & Kunitz, S.
(2019) Teaching and testing L2 interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandlund, E. & Greer, T.
(2020) How do raters understand rubrics for assessing L2 interactional engagement? A comparative study of CA- and non-CA-formulated performance descriptors. Papers in Language Testing and Assessment, 9 (1), 128–163.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.
(1979) The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation. In T. Givón (Ed.), Syntax and semantics: Discourse and syntax (pp. 261–286). Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) Sequence organization in interaction. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H.
(1977) The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53 (1–2), 361–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taleghani-Nikazm, C.
(2015) On reference work and issues related to the management of knowledge: An analysis of the Farsi particle dige in turn-final position. Journal of Pragmatics, 87 1, 267–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019) Ohja. Ja. Ja. (‘Oh yes. Yes. Yes.’): Providing the appropriate next relevant action in L2 interaction. In M. R. Salaberry & S. Kunitz (Eds.), Teaching and testing L2 interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice (pp. 125–141). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taleghani-Nikazm, C., & Huth, T.
(2010) L2 requests: Preference structure in talk-in-interaction. Multilingua: Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication, 29 (2), 185–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, S. A., Fox, B. A., & Couper-Kuhlen, E.
(2015) Grammar in everyday talk: Building responsive actions. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Youn, S. J.
(2015) Validity argument for assessing L2 pragmatics in interaction using mixed methods. Language Testing, 32 (2), 199–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Young, R. F.
(2011) Interactional competence in language learning, teaching, and testing. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (2nd ed., pp. 426–443). Routledge.Google Scholar