Article published in:
Dialogue across Media
Edited by Jarmila Mildorf and Bronwen Thomas
[Dialogue Studies 28] 2017
► pp. 95116
References

References

Atkinson, J. Maxwell, and John Heritage
(eds) 1984Structures of Social Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Button, Graham, and Neil Casey
1984 “Generating Topic: The Use of Topic Initial Elicitors.” In Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 167-190. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1985 “Topic Nomination and Topic Pursuit.” Human Studies 8: 3-55. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Judy
1984 “Subsequent Versions of Invitations, Offers, Requests, and Proposals Dealing with Potential or Actual Sequences.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 102-128. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul
1984 “Speakers’ Reportings in Invitation Sequences.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 129-151. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, and John Heritage
1992 “Analyzing Talk at Work: An Introduction.” In Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. by Paul Drew and John Heritage, 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(eds) 1992Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ford, Cecilia
2001 “At the Intersection of Turn and Sequence: Negation and What Comes Next.” In Studies in Interactional Linguistics, ed. by Margret Selting and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 51-79. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Giles, David, Wyke Stommel, Trena Paulus, Jessica Lester, and Darren Reed
2015 “Microanalysis of Online Data: The Methodological Development of ‘Digital CA.’Discourse, Context and Media 7: 45–51. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
1984aHarold Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
1984b “A Change-of-State Token and Aspects of Its Sequential Placement.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 299-345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hepburn, Alexa, and Galina Bolden
2013 “The Conversation Analytic Approach to Transcription.” In Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 57-76. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hopper, Robert
1992Telephone Conversation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
1981The Abominable ‘ne’?: A Working Paper Exploring the Phenomenon of Post-Response Pursuit of Response. Department of Sociology, University of Manchester.Google Scholar
Koivisto, Aino
2013 “On the Preference for Remembering: Acknowledging an Answer with Finnish ai nii(n) (“Oh that’s right”).” Research on Language and Social Interaction 46: 277-297. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015 “Dealing with Ambiguities in Informings. Finnish aijaa as a “Neutral” News Receipt.” Research on Language and Social Interaction. 48(4): 365–387. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koivisto, Aino and Nykänen, Elise
(eds) 2016Approaches to fictional dialogue. Special issue. International journal of literary linguistics 5 (2).Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey, and Short Mick
2007[1981]Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose. 2nd ed. Harlow: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen
1992 “Activity Types and Language.” In Talk at Work. Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. by Paul Drew and John Heritage, 66-100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2013 “Action Formation and Ascription.” In Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 103-130. Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Maynard, Douglas
2003: Bad News, Good News: Conversational Order in Everyday Talk and Clinical Settings. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2013 “Everyone and No One to Turn to: Intellectual Roots and Contexts for Conversation Analysis.” In Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 11-31. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza
2013 “The Conversation Analytic Approach to Data Collection.” In Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 32-56. Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Raevaara, Liisa, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
2006 “Vuorovaikutuksen Osanottajien Toiminta ja Genre. Keskustelunanalyysin näkökulma [The Participant Activity in Interaction and Genre. Conversation Analytic perspective].” In Genre – tekstilaji, ed. by Anne Mäntynen, Susanna Shore, and Anna Solin, 122-150. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1975 “Everyone Has to Lie.” In Sociocultural Dimensions of Language Use, ed. by Mary Sanches and Ben G. Blount, 57-80. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1984 “Notes on Methodology.” In Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 21-27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1992Lectures on Conversation, Vol. 2. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, and Emanuel Schegloff
1979 “Two Preferences in the Organization of Reference to Persons in Conversation and Their Interaction.” In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas, 15-21. New York, NY: Irvington Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-taking for Conversation.” Language 50: 696-735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel
1968 “Sequencing in Conversational Opening.” American anthropologist 70 (6): 1076-1095. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1986 “The Routine as an Achievement.” Human Studies 9 (2/3): 111-151. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1995 “Discourse as an Interactional Achievement III: The Omnirelevance of Action.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 28: 185-211. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996 “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson, 52-133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis, Vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel, and Harvey Sacks
1973 “Opening Up Closings.” Semiotica 8: 289-327. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel, Gail Jefferson, and Harvey Sacks
1977 “The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation.” Language 53: 361-382. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack
2010Conversation Analysis: An Introduction. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena
2001Responding in Conversation: A Study of Response Particles in Finnish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya
2008 “Stance, Alignment, and Affiliation During Storytelling: When Nodding is a Token of Affiliation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 41 (1): 31-57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Bronwen
1997 “ ‘It’s Good to Talk?’ An Analysis of a Telephone Conversation from Evelyn Waugh’s Vile Bodies .” Language and Literature 6 (2): 105-119. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012Fictional Dialogue: Speech and Conversation in the Modern and Postmodern Novel. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra, Barbara Fox, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
2015Grammar and Everyday Talk: Building Responsive Actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toolan, Michael
1985 “Analyzing Fictional Dialogue.” Language and Communication 5 (3): 193-206. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, Sue, and Celia Kitzinger
2006 “Surprise as an Interactional Achievement: Reaction Tokens in Conversation.” Social Psychology Quarterly 69: 150-182. CrossrefGoogle Scholar