Article published In:
New Perspectives on Utterance Interpretation and Implicit Contents
Edited by Daniela Rossi and Nicolas Ruytenbeek
[Belgian Journal of Linguistics 28] 2014
► pp. 4570
Bach, Kent and Robert M. Harnish
1979Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bayraktaroğlu, Arin
2001 “Advice-giving in Turkish: ‘Superiority’ or ‘Solidarity’.” In Linguistic Politeness across Boundaries: The Case of Greek and Turkish, ed. by A. Bayraktaroğlu and M. Sifianou, 177–208. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bax, Marcel
1999 “Ritual Levelling: The balance between the Eristic and the Contractual Motive in Hostile Verbal encounters in Medieval Romance and Early Modern Drama.” In Historical Dialogue Analysis, ed. by A.H. Jucker, G. Fritz, and F. Lebsanft, 35–80. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002 “Rites of Rivalry. Ritual Interaction and the Emergence of Indirect Language Use.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 31: 61–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Binkley, Timothy
1979 “The Principle of Expressibility.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 39 (3): 307–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre
1990The Logic of Practice. Translated by R. Nice. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan and Jane Demmen
2011 “Nineteenth-century English PolitenessJournal of Historical Pragmatics 12 (1/2): 49–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, Susan
1976 “Is Sybil There? Some American English Directives.” Language in Society 51: 25–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1977Wait for me Roller-skate. In Child Discourse, ed. by C. Mitchell-­Kernan and S. Ervin-Tripp, 165–188. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, Sam
2003 “The Psycholinguistics of Metaphor.” Trends in Cognitive Science 71: 92–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, Herbert Paul
1975 “Logic and conversation.” In Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3: Speech acts, ed. by P. Cole and J. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hall, Edward
1977Beyond Culture. Garden City, New York: Anchor/Doubleday.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Sarah and Smith, Rachel
2001 “Polysp: A Polysystemic, Phonetically-Rich Approach to Speech Understanding.” Italian Journal of Linguistics – Rivista di Linguistica 131: 99–188.Google Scholar
Healey, Patrick
1997 “Expertise or Expert-ese?: The Emergence of Task-oriented Sub-languages.” In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 7th–10th August, Stanford University, California, ed. by M.G. Shafto and P. Langley, 301–306.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R.
1984 “A New Taxonomy for Pragmatic Inference: Q-based and R-based Implicature.” In Meaning, Form and Use in Context, ed. by D. Schiffrin, 11–42. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Huls, Erica and Wijk, Carel van
2012 “The Development of a Directive Repertoire in Context: A Case Study of a Dutch Speaking Young Child.” Journal of Pragmatics 441: 83–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiesling, Scott & Gosh Johnson, Erica
2010 “Four Forms of Interactional Indirection.” Journal of Pragmatics 421: 292–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, Robin
1973“‘The Logic of Politeness or Minding your p’s and q’s.’” Papers from the 9th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society , 292–305.
Lee, James, and Pinker, Steven
2010Rationales for Indirect Speech: The Theory of the Strategic Speaker. Psychological Review 1171: 785–807. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
1983Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
2014The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lempert, Michael
2012“Indirectness.” In The Handbook of Intercultural Discourse and Communication, ed. by C. Bratt Paulston, S.F. Kiesling & E.S. Rangel, 180–204. Oxford: Wiley-­Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C.
1995“Three levels of meaning.” In Grammar and meaning: Essays in honour of Sir John Lyons, ed. by F. Palmer, 90–115. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lumsden, Joanne, Miles, Lynden, Richardson, Michael, Smith, Carlene & Macrae, Neil
2012 “Who syncs?: Social Motives and Interpersonal Coordination.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48 (3): 746–751. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McElree, Brian and Johanna Nordlie
1999 “Literal and Figurative Interpretations Are Computed in Equal Time.” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 61: 486–494. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miles, Lynden, Nind, Louise, Henderson, Zoe & Macrae, Neil
2010 “Moving memories: Behavioral Synchrony and Memory for Self and Others.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology46 (2): 457–460. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mills, Gregory
2007The Development of Semantic Co-ordination in Dialogue: The Role of Direct Interaction. PhD diss., Department of Computer Science, Queen Mary University of London.
2011 “The Emergence of Procedural Conventions in Dialogue.” In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society . Boston, USA. [URL]
Morgan, Marcyliena
Pinker, Stephen, Nowak, Martin and Lee, James
2008 “The Logic of Indirect Speech.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 1051: 833–838. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pugmire, David
1998Rediscovering Emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Récanati, François
1994 “Contextualism and Anti-Contextualism in the Philosophy of Language.” In Foundations of Speech Act Theory, ed. by S. Tsohatzidis, 156–166. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rampton, Ben
1995Crossing: Language and Ethnicity Among Adolescents. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Searle, John
1975 “Indirect Speech Acts.” In Syntax and semantics. Vol. III: Speech acts, ed. by P. Cole and J. Morgan, 59–82. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Amy and Gregory Murphy
1993 “Can you Answer a Question for me? Models of Processing Indirect Speech Acts.” Journal of Memory and Language321: 211–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sifianou, Maria
1997 “Politeness and Off-Record Indirectness.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 1261: 163–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael
2010“‘Direct’ and ‘indirect’ communicative acts in semiotic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2): 337–353. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John
1969Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soltys, Jessica, Marina Terkourafi and Napoleon Katsos
2014 “Disentangling Politeness Theory and the Strategic Speaker Approach: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Predictions.” Intercultural Pragmatics 11 (1): 31–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tannen, Deborah
2010 “Abduction and Identity in Family Interaction: Ventriloquizing as Indirectness.” Journal of Pragmatics421: 307–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Terkourafi, Marina
2011a “The puzzle of indirect speech.” Journal of Pragmatics 431: 2861–2865. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011b “Why direct speech is not a natural default: Rejoinder to Steven Pinker’s ‘Indirect Speech, Politeness, Deniability, and Relationship Negotiation’.” Journal of Pragmatics 431: 2869–2871. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Jennifer
1986The dynamics of discourse: A pragmatic analysis of confrontational interaction. PhD Diss. University of Lancaster.
Trosborg, Ann
1995Interlanguage Pragmatics: Requests, Complaints and Apologies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walker, Traci, Paul Drew and John Local
2011 “Responding Indirectly.” Journal of Pragmatics 431: 2434–2451. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 17 other publications

Ameka, Felix K. & Marina Terkourafi
2019. What if…? Imagining non-Western perspectives on pragmatic theory and practice. Journal of Pragmatics 145  pp. 72 ff. DOI logo
Chen, Xi & Jiayi Wang
2021. First order and second order indirectness in Korean and Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics 178  pp. 315 ff. DOI logo
Culpeper, Jonathan & Marina Terkourafi
2017. Pragmatic Approaches (Im)politeness. In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness,  pp. 11 ff. DOI logo
Elder, Chi-Hé
2021. Speaker Meaning, Commitment and Accountability. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics,  pp. 48 ff. DOI logo
Filipović, Luna
2022. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: Miscommunication in UK Police Interviews and US Police Interrogations. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology 37:2  pp. 297 ff. DOI logo
Meibauer, Jörg
2019. What is an indirect speech act?. Pragmatics & Cognition 26:1  pp. 61 ff. DOI logo
Morady Moghaddam, Mostafa
2019. Preliminaries. In The Praxis of Indirect Reports [Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology, 21],  pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Morady Moghaddam, Mostafa
2019. Politeness in Indirect Reporting. In The Praxis of Indirect Reports [Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology, 21],  pp. 137 ff. DOI logo
Ruytenbeek, Nicolas
2020. Do indirect requests communicate politeness?An experimental study of conventionalized indirect requests in French email communication. Journal of Politeness Research 16:1  pp. 111 ff. DOI logo
Sifianou, Maria & Garcés-Conejos Blitvich
2017. (Im)politeness and Cultural Variation. In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness,  pp. 571 ff. DOI logo
Terkourafi, Marina
2021. Inference and Implicature. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics,  pp. 30 ff. DOI logo
Terkourafi, Marina
2023. A Speech-Act Theoretic Analysis of White (Prosocial) Lies. In Sbisà on Speech as Action [Philosophers in Depth, ],  pp. 245 ff. DOI logo
Tosun, Sümeyra & Luna Filipović
2022. Lost in translation, apparently: Bilingual language processing of evidentiality in a Turkish–English Translation and judgment task. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 25:5  pp. 739 ff. DOI logo
Wang, Keyuan, Ling Zhou & Shaojie Zhang
2023. Explicit and implicit (im)politeness: A corpus-based study of the Chinese formulaic expression “Nikezhen+X”. Lingua 291  pp. 103560 ff. DOI logo
Yuan, Wen, Francis Y. Lin & Richard P. Cooper
2019. Relevance theory, pragmatic inference and cognitive architecture. Philosophical Psychology 32:1  pp. 98 ff. DOI logo
Zhou, Ling & Shaojie Zhang
2022. A multifunctional analysis of off-record indirectness in Chinese interactions. Language Sciences 90  pp. 101459 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Fundamentals of Sociopragmatics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics,  pp. 13 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 november 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.