Creating Social Orientation Through Language

A socio-cognitive theory of situated social meaning

| University of Basel
HardboundAvailable
ISBN 9789027239082 | EUR 95.00 | USD 143.00
 
e-Book
ISBN 9789027268624 | EUR 95.00 | USD 143.00
 
This monograph develops a new socio-cognitive theory of sense-making for analyzing the creative management of situated social meaning. Drawing on cognitive-linguistic and social-interactional heuristics in an innovative way, the book both theorizes and demonstrates how embodied cognizers create complex situated conceptualizations of self and other, which guide and support their interactions. It shows how these sense-making processes are managed through the coordinated social interaction of two (or more) communicative partners.

To illustrate the theory, the book draws on two distinct data sets: front-desk tourist-information transactions and online-workgroup discussions. It scrutinizes how the communicative partners use verbal humour as a powerful strategy to creatively establish a situated social image for themselves.

This book addresses specialists and advanced students in the areas of cognitive linguistics as well as interactional approaches to language. Moreover, it will be of great value to readers interested in verbal humour, business communication, and computer-mediated communication.
Publishing status: Available
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments
ix–xii
List of figures and tables
xiii–xiv
Conventions of data presentation
xv–xx
0. Introduction
1–18
Part I. Social meaning
1. Charting the Dimensions of Social Meaning
21–48
2. Social meaning and language
49–82
3. How to integrate cognitive and interactional views of social sense-making? – Towards a blueprint for a socio-cognitive model of social orientation
83–108
Part II. Towards a socio-cognitive theory of situated social sense- making
4. Dynamic cognition in social practice
111–148
5. Language: The ultimate socio-cognitive technology – towards a socio-cognitive semiotics
149–188
6. Cueing situated social conceptualizations – The epistemic scaffolding of social orientation through language
189–240
Part III. Analysing the creative construction of social meaning
7. The creation of social meaning through humour
243–284
8. The use of humour for creative social positioning in tourist- information and online workgroup communication
285–342
9. Conclusion
343–350
References
351–362
Index
363–366
“[T]his monograph presents itself as a valuable contribution to the study of language and cognition and will interest researchers with diverse academic backgrounds.”
Cited by

Cited by 10 other publications

No author info given
2016. Publications Received. Language in Society 45:1  pp. 161 ff. Crossref logo
No author info given
2018.  In Aspectuality across Languages [Human Cognitive Processing, 62], Crossref logo
Galbraith, Jennifer
2020. Homelessness Workers Negotiating the Relationship between Identity and Practice: How Gender, Age and Background Influence Worker-Service User Relationship. Housing, Theory and Society 37:2  pp. 198 ff. Crossref logo
KNAPTON, OLIVIA
2016. Dynamic conceptualizations of threat in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Language and Cognition 8:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Knapton, Olivia
2020. Negotiating embodied space in anxiety narratives. Metaphor and the Social World 10:2  pp. 233 ff. Crossref logo
LANGLOTZ, ANDREAS
2015. Local meaning-negotiation, activity types, and the current-discourse-space model. Language and Cognition 7:4  pp. 515 ff. Crossref logo
Langlotz, Andreas & Miriam A. Locher
2017.  In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness,  pp. 287 ff. Crossref logo
Roux, Shanleigh, Amiena Peck & Felix Banda
2019. Playful female skinscapes: body narrations of multilingual tattoos. International Journal of Multilingualism 16:1  pp. 25 ff. Crossref logo
Strugielska, Ariadna & Katarzyna Piątkowska
2017. A languacognitive constructionist approach to intercultural competence in educational settings. Language and Intercultural Communication 17:3  pp. 344 ff. Crossref logo
Strugielska, Ariadna & Katarzyna Piątkowska
2017. A plea for a socio-cognitive perspective on the language-culture-cognition nexus in educational approaches to intercultural communicative competence. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 15:1  pp. 224 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 march 2021. 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.

References

References

Agha, A.
(2007) Language and social relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Alim, S.H.
(2006) Roc the Mic Right: The language of hip hop culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Archakis, A., & Tsakona, V.
(2005) Analyzing conversational data in GTVH terms: A new approach to the issue of identity construction via humor. Humor, 18(1), 41–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aristotle
(2000) Politics. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. Toronto: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Arundale, R.B.
(2005) Pragmatics, conversational implicature, and conversation. In K.L. Fitch, & R.E. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 41–63). Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2010) Relating. In M.A. Locher, & S.L. Graham (Eds.), Interpersonal pragmatics: Handbooks of pragmatics, Vol. 6 (pp. 167–204). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Attardo, S.
(1994) Linguistic theories of humor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(2003) Introduction: The pragmatics of humor. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1287–1294. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) Humor. In J. Verschueren, J-O. Ostman, J. Blommaert, & C. Bulcaen (Eds.), Handbook of pragmatics (pp. 1–18). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2001) Humorous texts: A semantic and pragmatic analysis. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barsalou, L.W.
(1983) Ad hoc categories. Memory and Cognition, 11, 211–227. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1991) Deriving categories to achieve goals. In G.H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 1–64). San Diego etc.: Harcourt Brace Jovanowich. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1999) Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–660.Google Scholar
(2002) Being there conceptually: Simulating categories in preparation for situated action. In N.L. Stein, P.J. Bauer, & M. Rabinowitz (Eds.), Representation, memory, and development: Essays in honor of Jean Mandler (pp. 1–15). Mahwah, NJ.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2003) Situated simulation in the human conceptual system. Language and Cognitive Processes, 5(6), 513–562. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) Situated conceptualization. In H. Cohen, & C. Lefebvre (Eds.), Handbook of categorization in cognitive science (pp. 619–650). Amsterdam: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2010) Grounded cognition: Present, past, and future. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2, 716–724. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barsalou, L.W., & Prinz, J.J.
(1997) Mundane creativity in perceptual symbol systems. In T.B. Ward, S.M. Smith, & J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 267–307). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bakhtin, M.
(1981) The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Ed. by M. Holquist, translated by C. Emerson, & M. Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Bateson, G.
(1953) The position of humor in human communication. In H. von Foerster (Ed.), Cybernetics, 9th Conference (pp. 1–47). New York: Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation.Google Scholar
(1972) A theory of play and fantasy. In G. Bateson (Ed.), Steps to an ecology of mind (pp. 177–193). San Francisco: Chandler.Google Scholar
(1987) Steps to an ecology of mind. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.Google Scholar
Bechtel, W., Abrahamsen, A., & Graham, G.
(1998) The life of cognitive science. In W. Bechtel, & G. Graham (Eds.), A companion to cognitive science (pp. 1–104). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bergson, H.
(1911 [1899]) Laughter: An essay on the meaning of the comic. New York: Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bhatia, V.K.
(1992) Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman.Google Scholar
(2008) Genre analysis, ESP and professional practice. English for Specific Purposes, 27, 161–174. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bless, H., Fiedler, K., & Strack, F.
(2004) Social cognition. How individuals construct social reality. Hove & New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J.
(2004) Discourse: A critical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P.
(1984) Distinction. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Boxter, D., & Cortés-Condé, F.
(1997) From bonding to biting: Conversational joking and identity display. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 275–294. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brône, G.
(2007) Bedeutungskonstitution in verbalem Humor. Ein kognitiv-linguistischer und diskurssemantischer Ansatz. Ph.D. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar
Brône, G., & Feyearts, K.
(2004) Assessing the SSTH and the GTVH: A view from Cognitive Linguistics. Humor, 17(4), 361–372. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S.C.
(1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bruner, J.S.
(1957a) Going beyond the information given. In J.S. Bruner, E. Brunswik, L. Festinger, F. Heider, K.F. Muenzinger, C.E. Osgood, & D. Rapaport (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to cognition (pp. 41–69). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K.
(2005) Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7(4), 584–614. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Burr, V.
(1995) An introduction to social constructionism. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, D.
(2000) Good to talk? Living and working in a communication culture. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Chafe, W.
(2007) The importance of not being earnest: The feeling behind laughter and humor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, J.K.
(2003) Sociolinguistic theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Chappell, D.
(2005) Opportunities for negotiation at the interface of phone calls and service-counter interaction: A case study. In C.D. Baker, M. Emmison, & A. Firth (Eds.), Calling for help: Language and social interaction in telephone helplines (pp. 237–256). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chilton, P.
(2004) Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Clark, A.
(1995) I am John’s Brain. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(2), 144–148.Google Scholar
(1997) Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(1998) Embodied, situated, and distributed cognition. In W. Bechtel, & G. Graham (Eds.), A companion to cognitive science (pp. 506–517). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
(2008) Supersizing the mind. Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H.H.
(1996) Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) Social actions, social commitments. In S.C. Levinson, & N.J. Enfield (Eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition, and human interaction. Oxford: Berg Press.Google Scholar
Cicourel, A.V.
(1974) Cognitive sociology: Language and meaning in social interaction. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
(1985) Text and discourse. Annual Review of Anthropology, 14, 159–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cienki, A., & Müller, C.
(Eds.) 2008Metaphor and gesture. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coulson, S.
(2001) Semantic leaps: Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) Extemporaneous blending: Conceptual integration in humorous discourse from talk radio. Style, 39(2), 107–122.Google Scholar
Coulson, S., & Oakley, T.
(2000) Blending basics. Cognitive Linguistics, 11(3), 175–196.Google Scholar
Coulter, J.
(1991) Cognition: Cognition in an ethnomethodological mode. In G. Button (Ed.), Ethnomethodology and the human sciences (pp. 176–195). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crystal, D.
(2006) Language and the internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) English as a global language. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Croft, W.
(2000) Explaining language change: An evolutionary approach. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruse, D.A.
(2004) Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cutting, J.
(2003) Pragmatics and discourse: A resource book for students. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Damasio, A.
(1994) Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Davies, B., & Harré, R.
(1990) Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal of the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20, 43–65. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, A.
(2007) Grammatik und Semantik aus gesprächsanalytischer Sicht. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Douglas, M.
(1968) The social control of cognition: Some factors in joke perception. Man, 3, 361–376. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, P.
(2005a) Conversation analysis. In K.L. Fitch, & R.E. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 71–102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2005b) Is confusion a state of mind? In H. Te Molder, & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition (pp. 161–183). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, P., & Heritage, J.
(1992) Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 3–65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1992) Talk at work: Interaction in institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Du Bois, J.W.
(2003) Discourse and grammar. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, Vol. 2. (pp. 47–87). London: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2011) Co-opting intersubjectivity: Dialogic rhetoric of the self. In C. Meyer, & F. Girke (Eds.), The rhetorical emergence of culture (pp. 52–83). Oxford: Berghahn.Google Scholar
Du Bois, J., Schuetze-Coburn, S., Cumming, S., & Paolino, D.
(1993) Outline of discourse transcription. In J. Edwards, & M. Lampert (Eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research (pp. 45–89). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Eastman, M.
(1937) Enjoyment of laughter. London: Hamish Hamilton.Google Scholar
Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S.
(1992) Communities of practice: Where language, gender, and power all live. In K. Hall, M. Bucholtz, & B. Moonwomon (Eds.), Locating power: Proceedings of the second Berkeley women and language conference (pp. 89–99). Berkeley: Berkeley Women and Language Group, University of California.Google Scholar
Edwards, D.
(1997) Discourse and cognition. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Enfield, N.J., & Levinson, S.C.
(Eds.) 2006Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction. Oxford: Berg Publishers.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y., & Middleton, D.
(1998) Introduction: Studying work as mindful practice. In Y. Engeström, & D. Middleton (Eds.), Cognition and communication at work (pp. 1–14). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Englebretson, R.
(Ed.) (2007) Stancetaking in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Evans, V., & Green, M.
(2006) Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G.
(1994) Mental spaces. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1997) Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M.
(1998) Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, 22(2), 133–187. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2002) The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Ch. J.
(1975) An alternative to checklist theories of meaning. In H. Cogen, G. Thurgood, & K. Whistler (Eds.), Proceedings of the Berkeley linguistic society (pp. 123–131). Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
(1985) Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, 5(2), 222–254.Google Scholar
(2006 [1982]) Frame semantics. In D. Geeraerts (Ed.), Cognitive linguistics: Basic readings (pp. 373–400). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fine, G.A.
(1987) With the boys: Little league baseball and preadolescent culture. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Fine, G.A., & de Soucey, M.
(2005) Joking cultures: Humor themes as social regulation in group life. Humor, 18(1), 1–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fitch, K.L.
(2006) Cognitive aspects of ethnographic enquiry. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 51–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Flor, N.V., Coulson, S., & Maglio, P.P.
(2006) Schema blending and stable structure in online social systems. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 2(2), 143–159. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J.A.
(1975) The language of thought. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fowler, H.W.
(1965) A dictionary of modern English usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fox, S.
(1990) The ethnography of humor and the problem of social reality. Sociology, 24(3), 431–446. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, H.
(1967) Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, N.Y.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Gee, J.P.
(1999) An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Giora, R.
(1991) On the cognitive aspects of the joke. Journal of Pragmatics, 16, 465–485. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language. New York: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, E.
(1955) On face work. Psychiatry, 18, 213–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goffman. E.
(1967) Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
Goffman, E.
(1974) Frame analysis. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
(1981) Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
(1983) The interaction order. American Sociological Review, 48, 1–17. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez-Marquez, M., Becker, R., & Cutting, J.E.
(2007) An introduction to experimental methods for language researchers. In M. Gonzalez-Marquez, I. Mittelberg, S. Coulson, & M.J. Spivey (Eds.), Methods in cognitive linguistics (pp. 53–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Graesser, A.C.
(2006) Views from a cognitive scientist: Cognitive representations underlying discourse are sometimes social. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 59–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Graham, S.L.
(2007) Disagreeing to agree: Conflict, (im)politeness and identity in a computer-mediated community. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 742–759. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grice, P.
(1989) Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J.J.
(1982) Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) Interactional sociolinguistics. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (pp. 724–729). Amsterdam: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harnad, S.
(2005) To cognize is to categorize: Cognition is categorization. In H. Cohen, & C. Lefebvre (eds.), Handbook of categorization in cognitive science (pp. 19–43). Amsterdam: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harré, R.
(2001) The discursive turn in social psychology. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H.E. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 688–707). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hay, J.
(2000) Functions of humor in the conversations of men and women. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 709–742. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heidegger, M.
(1961 [1927]) Being and time. Translated by J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Heritage, J.
(2001) Goffman, Garfinkel and conversation analysis. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S.J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse theory and practice: A reader (pp. 47–56). London: Sage.Google Scholar
(2005a)Conversation analysis and institutional talk. In K.L. Fitch, & R.E. Sanders (eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (103–147). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2005b) Cognition in discourse. In H. Te Molder, & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition (pp. 184–202). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hobbes, Th
(1840 [1650]) Human nature (The English works of Thomas Hobbes, Vol. 4). London: John Bohn.Google Scholar
Holmes, J.
(2000a) Doing collegiality and keeping control at work: Small talk in government departments. In J. Coupland (Ed.), Small talk (pp. 32–61). Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
(2000b) Politeness, power and provocation. How humor functions in the workplace. Discourse studies, 2(2), 159–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, J., & Marra, M.
(2002a) Over the edge? Subversive humour between colleagues and friends. Humor, 15, 65–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2002b) Having a laugh at work: How humour contributes to workplace culture. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1683–1710. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, J., & Stubbe, M.
(2003) Power and politeness in the workplace. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hopper, R.
(2005) A cognitive agnostic in conversation analysis: When do strategies affect spoken interaction. In H. Te Molder, & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition (pp. 134–160). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hougaard, A.
(2005) Conceptual disintegration and blending in interactional sequences: A discussion of new phenomena, processes vs. products, and methodology. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1653–1685. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hutchins, E.
(1995) Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2005) Material anchors for conceptual blends. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1555–1577. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hutchins, E., & Clausen, T.
(1998) Distributed cognition in an airline cockpit. In Y. Engeström, & D. Middleton (Eds.), Cognition and communication at work (pp. 15–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R.
(1960) Linguistics and poetics. In T. Sebeok (Ed.), Style in language (pp. 350–377). Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Johansson, P., & Gärdenfors, P.
(2005) Introduction to cognition, education, and communication technology. In P. Gärdenfors, & P. Johansson (Eds.), Cognition, education, and communication technology (pp. 1–20). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Johnson, M.
(1987) The body in the mind: The bodily basis of reason and imagination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jones, T.S.
(2001) Emotional communication in conflict: Essence and impact. In W.F. Eadie, & P.E. Nelson (Eds.), The language of conflict and resolution (pp. 81–104). Thousand Oaks: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jucker, A.
(2009) Speech act research between armchair, field and laboratory. The case of compliments. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 1611–1635. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kalcik, S.
(1975) Like Anne’s gynecologist or the time I was almost raped: Personal narratives in women’s rap groups. In C.R. Farrar (Ed.), Women and folklore (pp. 3–11). Austin: University of Texas Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kerres, M., & de Witt, C.
(2003) A didactical framework for the design of blended learning arrangements. Journal of Educational Media, 28, 101–114. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kirsch, D., & Maglio, P.
(1994) On distinguishing epistemic from pragmatic action. Cognitive Science, 18, 513–549. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kitzinger, C.
(2006) After post-cognitivism. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 67–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koester, A.
(2004) Relational sequences in workplace genres. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(8), 1405–1428. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) Investigating workplace discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Koestler, A.
(1964) The act of creation. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kotthoff, H.
(2000) Gender and joking: On the complexities of women’s image politics in humorous narratives. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(1), 55–80. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) Pragmatics of performance and the analysis of conversational humor. Humor, 19(3), 271–304. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kunda, Z.
(1999) Social cognition: Making sense of people. Cambridge, M.A.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kuiper, K.
(2009) Formulaic genres. London: Palgrave MacMillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1987)Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R.W.
(1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(1991) Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume II: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(2001) Discourse in cognitive grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 12(2), 143–188. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langlotz, A.
(2008) Contextualisation cues as mental-space builders. In J.-R. Lapaire, G. Desagulier, & J.-B. Guignard (Eds.), Du Fait Grammatical au Fait Cognitif – From Gram to Mind: Grammar as Cognition (pp. 347–366). Bordeaux: Presses Universitaires de Bordeaux.Google Scholar
(2009) The creative construction of social orientation – Situated positioning with English as a lingua franca. In H. Pishwa (Ed.), Language and social cognition: Expression of the social mind (pp. 203–235). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(2010) Social cognition. In M.A. Locher, & S.L. Graham (Eds.), Interpersonal pragmatics. Handbook of pragmatics Vol. 6, (pp. 167–204). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(2013)  Yo, who be the main gangsta in our phat gang? – Linguistic creativity and the construction of hyperpersonal identity. In T. Veale, Ch. Forceville, & K. Feyaerts (Eds.), Creativity and the agile mind: A multi-disciplinary study of a multi-faceted phenomenon (pp. 159–178). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
accepted). Local meaning-negotiation, activity types, and the current-discourse-space model. Language & Cognition.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E.
(1991) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Laver, J.D.
(1975) Communicative functions of phatic communion. In A. Kendon, R. Harris, & M. Key (Eds.), The organization of behaviour in face-to-face interaction (pp. 215–238). The Hague: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1981) Linguistic routines and politeness in greeting and parting. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Conversational routines: Explorations in standardized communication situations and prepatterned speech (pp. 289–304). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Levinson, S.C.
(1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1992) Activity types and language. In P. Drew, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 66–100). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2006a) Cognition at the heart of human interaction. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 85–93. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006b) On the human ‘interaction engine’. In N.J. Enfield, & S.C. Levinson (Eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction (pp. 39–69). Oxford: Berg Publishers.Google Scholar
Lewis, D.K.
(1969) Convention: A philosophical study. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Locher, M.A.
(2004) Power and politeness in action: Disagreements in oral communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Relational work, politeness and identity construction. In G. Antos, E. Ventola, & T. Weber (Eds.), Handbooks of applied linguistics: Interpersonal communication (pp. 509–540). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Locher, M.A., & Watts, R.J.
(2005) Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), 9–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Relational work and impoliteness: Negotiating norms of linguistic behaviour. In D. Bousfield, & M.A. Locher (Eds.), Impoliteness in language: Studies on its interplay with power in theory and practice (pp. 77–99). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Locher, M.A., & Graham, S.L.
(Eds.) (2010) Interpersonal pragmatics. Handbooks of pragmatics, Vol. 6. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lynch, M.
(2006) Cognitive activities without cognition? Ethnomethodological investigations of selected ‘cognitive’ topics. Discourse Studies, 8(1): 95–104. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lytra, V.
(2007) Play frames and social identities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Malinowski, B.
(1923) The problem of meaning in primitive languages. In C.K. Ogden, & I.A. Richards (Eds.), The meaning of meaning (pp. 296–336). New York: Harcourt, Brace and World; excerpt reprinted as ‘Phatic communion’, in J. Laver, & S. Hutcheson (Eds.). (1972). Communication in face to face interaction (pp. 146–52). Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Marmaridou, S.S.A.
(2000) Pragmatic meaning and cognition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maynard, D.W.
(2006) Cognition on the ground. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 105–115. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mech, L.D., & Boitani, L.
(2003) Wolves: Behaviour, ecology and conservation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mondada, L.
(2006) Participants’ online analysis and multi-modal practices: Projecting the end of the turn and the closing of the sequence. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 117–129. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mumby, D.K., & Clair, R.P.
(1997) Organizational discourse. In T. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social action (pp. 181–203). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Noë, A.
(2009) Out of our heads: Why you are not your brain, and other lessons from the biology of consciousness. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
Norrick, N.R.
(1993) Conversational joking. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
(2003) Issues in conversational joking. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1333–1359. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) Humor in language. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (pp. 425–426). Amsterdam: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Norrick, N.R., & Spitz, A.
(2008) Humor as a resource for mitigating conflict in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 1661–1686. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Oakley, T., & Hougaard, A.
(Eds.) (2008) Mental spaces in discourse and interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ochs, E.
(1992) Indexing gender. In A. Duranti, & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 335–358). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pfeifer, R., & Bongard, J.
(2007) How the body shapes the way we think: A new view of intelligence. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pickering, M.J., & Garrod, S.
(2004) The interactive-alignment model: Developments and refinements. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 212–225. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) Alignment as the basis for successful communication. Research on Language and Computation, 4(2–3), 203–228. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pishwa, H.
(ed.) (2009)Language and social cognition: Expression of the social mind. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, A.
(2005) Using participants’ video-stimulated comments to complements analyses of interactional practices. In H. Te Molder, & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition (pp. 93–113). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Potter, J.
(2001) Wittgenstein and Austin. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S.J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse theory and practice: A reader (pp. 39–46). London & Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
(2006) Cognition and conversation. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 131–140. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Potter, J., & Te Molder, H.
(2005) Talking cognition: Mapping and making the terrain. In H. Te Molder, & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition (pp. 1–56). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Raskin, V.
(1985) Semantic mechanisms of humor. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Raskin, V., & Attardo, S.
(1991) Script theory revis(it)ed: Joke similarity and joke representational model. Humor, 4(3), 293–347.Google Scholar
(1994) Non-literalness and non-bona-fide in language. Pragmatics and Cognition, 2, 31–69. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reddy, M.J.
(1993) The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought. 2nd edition (pp. 164–201). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reznikova, Z.I.
(2007) Animal intelligence: From individual to social cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Ross, A.
(1998) The language of humour. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Russell Hochschild, A.
(1983) The managed heart. Berkeley: The University of California Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, H.
(1974) An analysis of the course of a joke’s telling. In R. Baumann, & J. Sherzer (Eds.), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking (pp. 337–353). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A., & Jefferson, G.
(1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language, 50, 696–735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Saferstein, B.
(1998) Ethnomethodology. In W. Bechtel, & G. Graham (Eds.), A companion to cognitive science (pp. 391–402). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sanders, R.E.
(2005) Validating ‘observations’ in discourse studies: A methodological reason for attention to cognition. In H. Te Molder, & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition (pp. 57–78). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sarangi, S., & Roberts, C.
(1999) The dynamics of interactional and institutional orders in work-related settings. In S. Sarangi, & C. Roberts (Eds.), Talk, work and institutional order (pp. 1–57). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schank, R.C., & Abelson, R.P.
(1977) Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding. Hillsdale/N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E.A.
(1968) Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70(4), 1075–1095. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1996) Issues of relevance for discourse analysis: Contingency in action, interaction, and co-participant context. In E.H. Hovy, & D.R. Scott (Eds.), Computational and conversational discourse: Burning issues – an interdisciplinary account (pp. 3–35). New York: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) On possibles. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 141–157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E.A., & Sacks, H.
(1973) Opening up closings. Semiotica 8(4), 289–327. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schelling, T.C.
(1960) The strategy of conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schiltz, G., & Langlotz, A.
(2006) The COLAC model: Collaborative paper writing in the humanities. In R. Mizoguchi, P. Dillenbourg, & Z. Zhiting, (Eds.), Learning by effective utilization of technologies: Facilitating intercultural understanding (pp. 119–122). Amsterdam, etc.: IOS Press.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, D.
(1999)  Oh as a marker of discourse management. In A. Jaworski, & N. Coupland (Eds.), The discourse reader (pp. 275–288). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schnurr, S.
(2010) Humour. In M.A. Locher, & S.L. Graham (Eds.), Interpersonal pragmatics. Handbooks of pragmatics, Vol. 6 (pp. 307–328). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sherzer, J.
(1985) Puns and jokes. In T.A. van Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis, Vol. 3: Discourse and dialogue (pp. 213–221). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sinha, C.
(2005) Blending out of the background: Play, props and staging in the material world. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1537–1554. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Smith, L.B., & Samuelson, L.K.
(1997) Perceiving and remembering: Category stability, variability and development. In K. Lamberts, & D. Shanks (Eds.), Knowledge, concepts, and categories (pp. 161–195). Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Smith, E.R., & Mackie, D.M.
(2000) Social psychology. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D.
(1986) Relevance. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
(1995) Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
Streeck, J., & Mehus, S.
(2005) Microethnography: The study of practices. In K.L. Fitch, & R.E. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 381–404). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Tajfel, H.
(1969) Cognitive aspects of prejudice. Journal of Social Issues, 25, 79–97. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1978) Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup behaviour. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Talbot, M., Atkinson, K., & Atkinson, D.
(2003) Language and power in the modern world. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, L.
(1988) Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12, 49–100. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2000) Toward a cognitive semantics. 2 vols. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tannen, D.
(1984) Conversational style. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
(ed.) (1993) Framing in discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(1993) The relativity of linguistic strategies: Rethinking power and solidarity in gender and dominance. In D. Tannen (ed.), Gender and conversational interaction (pp. 165–188). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, J.R.
(2003) Linguistic categorization. Oxford: Oxfird University Press.Google Scholar
Te Molder, H., & Potter, J.
(Eds.) (2005) Conversation and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M.
(1999) The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, M.A.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
(2003) Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, M.A.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
(2008) Origins of human communication. Cambridge, M.A.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., & Moll, H.
(2005) Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 675–729. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tuckman, B.W., & Jensen, M.A.C.
(1977) Stages of small group development revisited. Group and Organizational Studies, 2, 419–427. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Dijk, T.A.
(1990) Social cognition and discourse. In H. Giles, & W.P. Robinson (Eds.), Handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 163–183). Oxford: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
(2006a) Discourse, interaction and cognition. Discourse Studies, 8(1), Special issue .Google Scholar
(2006b) Introduction: Discourse, interaction and cognition. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 5–7. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006c) Discourse, context, and cognition. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 159–177. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Varela, F.J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E.
(1991) The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Varenne, H.
(1992) Ambiguous harmony: Family talk in America. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
Veale, T., Feyaerts, K., & Brône, G.
(2006) The cognitive mechanisms of adversarial humor. Humor, 19(3), 305–338. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ventola, E.
(1979) The structure of casual conversation in English. Journal of Pragmatics, 3, 267–268. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Verhagen, A.
(2005) Constructions of intersubjectivity: Discourse, syntax, and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2008) Intersubjectivity and the architecture of the language system. In J. Zlatev, T.P. Racine, C. Sinha, & E. Itkonen (Eds.), The shared mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity (pp. 307–331). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Verschueren, J.
(1999) Understanding pragmatics. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Waskan, J.A.
(2006) Models and cognition. Cambridge, M.A.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Watts, R.
(2008) Rudeness, conceptual blending theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research, 4, 289–317. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wenger, E.
(1998) Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wertsch, J.V.
(1998) Mediated action. In W. Bechtel, & G. Graham (Eds.), A companion to cognitive science (pp. 518–525). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wetherell, M., Taylor, S., & Yates, S.J.
(Eds.) (2001)Discourse theory and practice: A reader. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Williams, R.F.
(2008) Guided conceptualization: Mental spaces in instructional discourse. In T. Oakley, & A. Hougaard (Ed.), Mental spaces in discourse and interaction (pp. 209–234). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wooffitt, R.
(2005) Conversation analysis and discourse analysis: A comparative and critical introduction. London: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wootton, A.J.
(2006) Children’s practices and their connections with ‘mind’. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 191–198. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zima, E., Brône, G., Feyaerts, K., & Sambre, P.
(2008) Resonance activation in interactional parliamentary discourse. In W. Ramm, & C. Fabricius-Hansen (Eds.), Linearisation and Segmentation in Discourse. Oslo: University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Zima, E.
(2013) Kognition in der Interaktion – Eine kognitivlinguistische und gesprächsanalytische Untersuchung von Zwischenrufsequenzen in österreichischen Parlamentsdebatten. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.Google Scholar
Zinken, J.
(Ed.) (2009) Aspects of cognitive ethnolinguistics. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Zlatev, J., & Sinha, C.
(Eds.) (2008) The shared mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zlatev, J.
(2007) Intersubjectivity, mimetic schemas and the emergence of language. Intellectica, 2–3(46–47), 123–152.Google Scholar
Subjects

Communication Studies

Communication Studies

Sociology

Sociology
BIC Subject: CFG – Semantics, Pragmatics, Discourse Analysis
BISAC Subject: LAN009000 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / General
U.S. Library of Congress Control Number:  2015004253 | Marc record