Epistemic Stance in Dialogue

Knowing, Unknowing, Believing

| University of Macerata
| University of Macerata
| University of Macerata
HardboundAvailable
ISBN 9789027210463 | EUR 105.00 | USD 158.00
 
e-Book
ISBN 9789027265661 | EUR 105.00 | USD 158.00
 
This volume presents a theoretical and practical model for analysing epistemic stance in dialogues, i.e. the positions both epistemic (commitment) and evidential (source of information) which speakers take in the here and now of communication with regard to the information they are conveying and which they express through lexical and morphosyntactic means.

According to the results of our studies of different types of corpora, these positions can be reduced to three basic ones: Knowing, Unknowing, Believing (KUB).

In the first part of the book, we present the KUB model and its psychological and linguistic backgrounds. In the second part, we provide an exemplary application of the model, by presenting the qualitative and quantitative analysis of dialogues belonging to different genres and contexts.

The volume is addressed to scholars concerned with the topical issues from a theoretical and analytical perspective.

[Dialogue Studies, 29]  2017.  xiii, 311 pp.
Publishing status: Available
Table of Contents
Preface
xi–xiii
Introduction
1–8
Part 1. KUB as a theoretical model and a method of analysis
Chapter 1. Psychological background
11–22
Chapter 2. Linguistic background
23–43
Chapter 3. Knowing, Unknowing, Believing positions: The KUB model
45–84
Chapter 4. Are certainty and uncertainty psychological realities?
85–106
Part 2. KUB in dialogues
107–108
Chapter 5. “What should I do?”: Epistemic positions and advice giving activity in troubles talk sequences
109–154
Chapter 6. Confidence attitudes and epistemic management in the clairvoyant-journalist interviews: Extrasensory perception and epistemic authority
155–211
Chapter 7. “Who is the killer?”: Epistemic positions in Italian crime case talk-shows
213–261
Chapter 8. Three epistemic models: A comparison
263–276
Chapter 9. KUB, mind, brain, speech acts: Future perspectives
277–286
References
287–303
Transcription notes
305
Index
307–311
“The book presents a large number of empirically well-researched findings that I would expect to find application in a variety of research traditions in discourse studies.”
References

References

Aijmer, Karin
2009 “Seem and evidentiality.” Functions of Language 16 (1): 63–88. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Akter, Sonia, Jeff Bennett, and Sanzida Akhter
2008 “Preference uncertainty in contingent valuation.” Ecological Economics, 67 (3): 345–351. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Amerio, Piero, and Michele Roccato
2005 “A Predictive Model for Psychological Reactions to Crime in Italy: An Analysis of Fear of Crime and Concern about Crime as Social Problem.” Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 15: 17–28. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Andrich, David
1978a “Application of a psychometric rating model to ordered categories which are scored with successive integers.” Applied Psychological Measurement, 2 (4): 581–594. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1978b “Rating formulation for ordered response categories.” Psychometrika, 43 (4), pp. 561–573. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1982 “An extension of the Rasch model for rating providing both location and dispersion parameters.” Psychometrika, 47 (1): 105–113 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1985 “A latent trait model for items with response dependencies: implications for test construction and analysis.” In Test design. Developments in psychology and psychometrics, ed. by Susan E. Embretson, 245–275. New York: Academic Press,.Google Scholar
2010 “Sufficiency and conditional estimation of person parameters in the polytomous Rasch model.” Psychometrika, 75 (2): 292–308. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Andrich, David, and Guanzhong Luo
1993 “A Hyperbolic cosine latent trait model for unfolding dichotomous single-stimulus responses.” Applied Psychological Measurement, 17 (3): 253–276. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Andrich, David and Leslie Van Schoubroeck
1989 “The General Health Questionnaire: a psychometric analysis using latent trait theory.” Psychological Medicine, 19 (2): 469–485. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Arnheim, Rudolph
1969Visual Thinking. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Austin, John L.
1962How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
19752. How to Do things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Basow, Susan A., and Kimberly Rubenfeld
2003 “ ‘Troubles talk’: effects of gender and gender-typing.” Sex Roles 48 (3–4): 183–187. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bazzanella, Carla, Claudia Caffi, Marina Sbisà
1991 “Scalar dimensions of illocutionary force.” In Speech Acts: Fiction or Reality?, ed. by Igor Zagar, 63–76. Ljubljana: IPrA.Google Scholar
Bertinetto, Pier Marco
1979 “Alcune ipotesi sul nostro futuro (con osservazioni su potere e dovere).” Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 4 (1–2): 77–138.Google Scholar
Bianchi, Ivana, Roberto Burro, Stefania Torquati, and Ugo Savardi
2013 “The middle of the road: perceiving intermediates.” Acta Psychologica, 144 (1): 121–135. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, Ivana, and Ugo Savardi
2008The perception of contraries. Roma: Aracne.Google Scholar
Bianchi, Ivana, Ugo Savardi, and Roberto Burro
2011a “Perceptual ratings of opposite spatial properties: Do they lie on the same dimension?.” Acta Psychologica, 138 (3): 405–418. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, Ivana, Ugo Savardi, and Michael Kubovy
2011b “Dimensions and their poles: A metric and topological theory of opposites.” Language and Cognitive Processes, 26 (8): 1232–1265. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas
2004 “Historical patterns for the grammatical marking of stance: A cross-register comparison.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 5:107–135. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, and Edward Finegan
1989 “Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect.”, Text 9 (1): 93–124.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bierwisch, Manfred
1965 “Rewiew of Z. S. Harris: Discourse Analysis Reprints.” Linguistics 13: 61–73.Google Scholar
Boldrin, Angela, and Lucia Mason
2007 “Conoscenze e credenze sono percepite come due costrutti differenti? Criteri epistemologici di distinzione in studenti di diverso livello scolare”. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia 34 (3): 625–652.Google Scholar
Bond, Trevor G. and Christine M. Fox
2001Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bongelli, Ramona, Carla Canestari, Ilaria Riccioni, Roberto Burro, Andrzej Zuczkowski
2009 “Are Certain and Uncertain epistemic contraries?” In The perception and cognition of contraries, ed. by Ugo Savardi, 175–202. Milano: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Bongelli, Ramona, Ilaria Riccioni, and Andrzej Zuczkowski
2013 “Certain-Uncertain, True-False, Good-Evil in Italian Political Speeches.” In Multimodal Communication in Political Speech. Shaping Minds and Social and Social Action, ed. by Isabella Poggi, Francesca D’Errico, Laura Vincze and Alessandro Vinciarelli, 164–180. Berlin: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bongelli, Ramona, Ilaria Riccioni, Carla Canestrari, Ricardo Pietrobon, and Andrzej Zuczkowski
2014 “BioUncertainty. A historical corpus evaluating uncertainty language over a 167-year span of biomedical scientific articles.” In Communicating Certainty and Uncertainty in Medical, Supportive and Scientific Contexts, ed. by Andrzej Zuczkowski, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni e Carla Canestrari, 309–339. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Bongelli, Ramona and Andrzej Zuczkowski
2008Indicatori linguistici percettivi e cognitivi. Roma: Aracne.Google Scholar
Borillo, Andrée
1982 “Deux aspects de la modalisation assertive: croire et savoir.” Langages 67: 33–53. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Botne, Robert
1997 “Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality in Lega.” Studies in Language 21 (3): 509–532. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bozzi, Paolo
1969Unità, Identità, Causalità. Bologna: Cappelli.Google Scholar
1978 “L’interosservazione come metodo per la fenomenologia sperimentale.” Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 5 (2): 229–239.Google Scholar
Bozzi, Paolo and Lidia Martinuzzi
1989 “Un esperimento di interosservazione.” Rivista di Psicologia, 74: 11–46.Google Scholar
Brandt, Lewis and Wolfgang Metzger
1969 “ ‘Reality’ – What does it mean?Psychological Reports 25: 127–135. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brashers, Dale E., Deana J. Goldsmith, and Elaine Hsieh
2002 “Information seeking and avoiding in health contexts.” Human Communication Research, 28 (2), 258–271. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
1987Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Buttny, Richard
2004Talking problems. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Caffi, Claudia
1999 “On mitigation.” Journal of Pragmatics 31 (7): 881–909. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007Mitigation, Studies in Pragmatics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
2009 “Mezzi linguistici della mitigazione in italiano: risultati e prospettive di ricerca.” SIG, Roma, 24 ottobre 2009 Roma, pp. 1–30.Google Scholar
Canestrari, Carla, and Ivana Bianchi
2009 “The perception of humor: from script opposition to the phenomenological rules of contrariety.” In The perception and cognition of contraries, ed. by Ugo Savardi, 225–246. Milano: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Cappelli, Gloria
2005 “Modulating attitudes via adverbs: A cognitive-pragmatic approach to the lexicalisation of epistemological evaluation.” In Studies of Lexical Combinatory Patterns, ed. by Marcella Bertuccelli Papi, 213–278. Pisa: Plus Pisa University Press.Google Scholar
2007 “I Reckon I Know How Leonardo da Vinci Must Have Felt…” Epistemicity, Evidentiality and English Verbs of Cognitive Attitude. Pari: Pari Publishing.Google Scholar
2008 “Antonymy and verbs of cognitive attitude: When know is the opposite of think and believe.” In reads in the Complex Fabric of Language. Linguistic and Literary Studies in Honour of Lavinia Merlini, ed. by Marcella Bertuccelli Papi, Silvia Bruti, and Antonio Bertacca, 529546. Pisa: Felici Editore.Google Scholar
Cashmore, Jordan
2014 “The ‘Fear of Crime-Media Feedback’ Cycle.” International Journal of Criminology 1–19.Google Scholar
Celle, Agnès
2005 “The French future tense and English will as markers of epistemic modality.” Languages in Contrast 5 (2): 181–218. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace
1986 “Evidentiality in English Conversation and Academic Writing.” In Ev-identiality. e Linguistic Coding of Epistemology, ed. by Wallace Chafe and Johanna Nichols, 261–272. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Chindamo, Massimo, Jens, Allwood, and Elisabeth, Ahlsén
2012 “Some Suggestions for the Study of Stance in Communication.” Proceedings of IEEE SocialCom Amsterdam 2012, 3–5 September 2012.Google Scholar
Chiricos, Tedd, Sarah Eschholz, and Marc Gertz
2000 “Fear, TV News, and the Reality of Crime.” Criminology 38 (3): 755–786. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chiricos, Ted, and Sarah Eschholz
2002 “The racial and ethnic typification of crime and the criminal typification of race and ethnicity in local television news.” Journal of research in crime and delinquency 39 (4): 400–420. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1957Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Chung, Sandra, and Alan Timberlake
1985 “Tense, Aspect and Mood.” In Language typology and syntactic description, ed. by Timothy Shopen, 241–258. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven
2014 “Turn-Constructional Units and the Transition-Relevance Place.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell e Tanya Stivers, 150–166. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Clift, Rebecca
2006 “Indexing stance: Reported speech as an interactional evidential.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 10 (5): 569–595. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Thomas
1996 “Racism, Hoaxes, epistemology, and News as Form of Knowledge: The Stuart Case as Fraud or Norm?The Harvard Journal of Communication 7: 75–95.Google Scholar
Cornillie, Bert
2007Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality in Spanish (Semi-) Auxiliaries. A Cognitive-Functional Approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cruse, D. Alan
1986Lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DeCapua, Andrea, and Lisa Huber
1995 “ ‘If I were you…’: Advice in American English.” Multilingua-Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication 14 (2): 117–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
De Haan, Ferdinand
1999 “Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality: Setting Boundaries.” South-west Journal of Linguistics 18 (1): 83–101.Google Scholar
Del Mar Vanrell, Maria, Ignasi Mascaró, Francesc Torres-Tamarit, and Pilar Prieto
2012 “Intonation as an Encoder of Speaker Certainty: Information and Confirmation Yes-No Questions in Catalan.” Language and Speech 1–28.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott
2001 “The mirative and evidentiality.” Journal of Pragmatics 33: 369–382. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dendale, Patrick
1990 “A propos de la vérité linguistique. Analyse argumentative et épistémique des prédicats vrai et certain.“ Travaux de linguistique 20: 5–21.Google Scholar
Dendale, Patrick, and Liliane Tasmowski
2001 “Introduction. Evidentiality and related notions.” Journal of Pragmatics 33 (3): 349–357. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Travis
2006a “Psychological Reactions to Crime News. Portrayals of Black Criminals: Understanding the Moderating Roles of Prior News Viewing and Stereotype Endorsement.” Communication Monographs 73 (2): 162–187. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006b “Schemas as average Conceptions: Skin Tone, Television News Exposure, And Culpability Judgments.” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 83 (1): 131–149. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 “Crime News and Racialized Beliefs: understanding the Relationship Between Local News Viewing and Perceptions of African Americans and Crime.” Journal of Communication 58: 106–125. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Travis, Cristina Azocar, and Michael Casas
2003 “The Portrayal of race and Crime on Television Network News.” Journal of Broadcasting abd Electronic Media 47 (4): 498–523. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Travis, and Cristina Azocar
2007 “Priming Crime and Activating Blackness: Understanding the Psychological Impact of the Overrepresentation of Blacks as Lawbreakers on Television News.” Journal of Communication 57: 229–253 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Travis, and Keith Maddox
2005 “Skin Tone, Crime News, and Social Reality Judgments: Priming the Stereotype of the Dark and Dangerous Black Criminal.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 35 (8): 1555–1570. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Donabédian, Anaïd
2001 “Towards a semasiological account of evidentials: An enunciative approach of -er in Modern Western Armenian”. Journal of Pragmatics 33 (3): 421–442. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dorigato, Laura, Gill Philip, Ramona Bongelli, and Andrzej Zuczkowski
2015 “Knowing, Unknowing, Believing stances and characters’ dialogic identities in the Harry Potter books.” Language and Dialogue 5 (1): 62–89. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang
1972Einführung in die Textlinguistik. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Du Bois, John
2007 “The stance triangle”. In Stancetaking in Discourse, ed. by Robert Englebretson, 139–182. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Duncker, Karl
1935Zur Psychologie des produktiven Denkens. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Embretson, Susan E. and Steven P. Reise
2000Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Enfield, N. J., Penelope Brown, and Jan de Ruiter
2012 “Epistemic dimensions of polar questions: sentence-final particles in comparative perspective.” In Questions: Format, Functional and Interactional Perspectives, ed. by Jan de Ruiter, 193–221. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J., Tanya Stivers, and Stephen C. Levinson
2010 “Question – response sequences in conversation across ten languages: An introduction.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (10): 2615–2619. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Englebretson, Robert
2007Stancetaking in Discourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Feng, Bo
2009 “Testing an Integrated Model of Advice Giving in Supportive Interactions.” Human Communication Research 35 (1): 115–29. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014 “When Should Advice Be Given?: Assessing the Role of Sequential Placement of Advice in Supportive Interactions in Two Cultures.” Communication Research 41 (7): 913–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Feng, Bo, and Eran Magen
2015 “Relationship Closeness Predicts Unsolicited Advice Giving in Supportive Interactions.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1–17.Google Scholar
Fitneva, Stanka
2001 “Epistemic Marking and Reliability Judgments. Evidence from Bulgarian.” Journal of Pragmatics 33 (3): 401–420. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Bruce
1980 “Mitigation.” Journal of Pragmatics 31: 341–350. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frawley, William
1992Linguistic semantics. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Galli, Giuseppe
(ed.) 2009La Persona in Relazione. Sviluppi della psicologia della Gestalt. Napoli: Liguori.Google Scholar
Gnisci, Augusto, and Pontecorvo Clotilde
2004 “The organization of questions and answers in the thematic phases of hostile examination: Turn-by-turn manipulation of meaning.” Journal of Pragmatics 36: 965–995. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, Daena J.
1999 “Content-based resources for giving face sensitive advice in troubles talk episodes.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 32 (4): 303–336. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000 “Soliciting advice: The role of sequential placement in mitigating face threat.” Communications Monographs 67 (1): 1–19. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004Communicating social support. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, Deana J., and Erina L. MacGeorge
2000 “The impact of politeness and relationship on perceived quality of advice about a problem.” Human Communication Research 26 (2): 234–263. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
González, Montserrat
2005 “An Approach to Catalan Evidentiality.” Intercultural Pragmatics 2 (4): 515–540. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
1987 “Concurrent Operations on Talk: Notes on the Interactive Organization of Assessments.” IPRA Papers in Pragmatics 1 (1): 1–54. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 “Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities.” Discourse & Society 18 (1): 53–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gorham, Bradley
2006 “News Media’s Relationship With Stereotyping: The Linguistic Intergroup Bias in Response to Crime News.” Journal of Communication 56: 289–308. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grabe, Maria Elizabeth
1996 “Tabloid and Traditional Television News Magazine Crime Stories: Crime Lessons and Reaffirmation of Social Class Distinctions.” Journal and Mass Communication Quarterly 73 (4): 926–946. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grabe, Elizabeth, and Dan Drew
2007 “Crime Cultivation: Comparison Accross Media Genres and Channels.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 51 (1): 147–171. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Guttman, Louis
1950 “The basis for scalogram analysis.” In Measurement and prediction of Studies in social psychology in world war II, ed. by Samuel A. Stouffer, 60–90. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael
1976 “Modality and modulation in English.” In System and function in language−Selected papers, ed. by Gunther Kress, 189–213. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2014Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar fourth edition. Revised by Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Han, Chung-hye
2002 “Interpreting interrogatives as rhetorical questions.” Lingua, 112: 201–229 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hartmann, Peter
1964 “Text, Texte, Klassen von Texten.” Bogawus 2: 15–25.Google Scholar
Harweg, Roland
1974 “Textlinguistik.” In Perspektiven der Linguistik, vol. 2, ed. by Walter Koch, 88–116. Stuttgard: Kröner.Google Scholar
Haverkate, Henk
1979Impositive Sentences in Spanish. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
1984Speech acts, speakers and hearers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hayano, Kaoru
2014 “Question Design in Conversation.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 395–414. Oboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Hayashi, Makoto
2014 “Turn Allocation and Turn Sharing.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 167–190. Oboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Heritage, John
2002 “The limits of questioning: negative interrogatives and hostile question content.” Journal of Pragmatics 34: 1427–1446. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 “Territories of knowledge, territories of experience: empathich moments in interaction.” In The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, ed. by Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada e Jakob Steensig, 159–183. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012a “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 1–29. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012b “The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 30–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012c “Beyond and behind the words: some reactions to my commentators.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 45 (1): 76–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 “Action formation and its epistemic (and other) backgrounds.” Discourse Studies, 15 (5) 551–578. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Anna Lindström
1998 “Motherhood, medicine, and morality: Scenes from a medical encounter.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 31 (3–4): 397–438. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012 “Advice giving-terminable and interminable: The case of British health visitors.” In Advice in discourse, ed. by H. Limberg, and M. A. Locher, 169–193. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond
2005 “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68 (1): 15–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012 “Navigating Epistemic Landscapes: Acquiescence, Agency and Resistance in Responses to Polar Questions.” In Questions: Formal, Functional and Interactional Perspectives, ed. by John De Ruiter, 179–192. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Sue Sefi
1992 “Dilemmas of advice: Aspects of the delivery and reception of advice in interactions between health visitors and first-time mothers.” In Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings, ed. by P. Drew, and J. Heritage, 359–417. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hölker, Klaus
2014 “On being certain whether”. A puzzle about indirect interrogatives”. In Communicating Certainty and Uncertainty in Medical, Supportive and Scientific Contexts, ed. by Andrzej Zuczkowski, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni and Carla Canestrari, 79–98. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet
1984 “Modifying illocutionary force”. Journal of Pragmatic 8 (3): 345–365. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ippolito, Michela
2013 “Counterfactuals and Conditional Questions under Discussion.” Proceedings of SALT 23: 194–211. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Irwin, Harvey
1993 “Belief in the Paranormal: A Review of the Empirical Literature.” Journal of American Society for Psychical Research 87: 1–39.Google Scholar
2009The Psychology of Paranormal Belief: A Researcher’s Handbook. Hertfordshire: University of Hertfordshire Press.Google Scholar
Isaacs, James, and Rawlins, Kyle
2008 “Conditional Questions.” Journal of Semantics 25: 269–319. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Isenberg, Horst
1971 “Überlegungen zur Texttheorie.” In Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, vol. 2, ed. by Jens Ihwe, 150–173. Frankfurt: Athenäum.Google Scholar
Jaffe, Alexandra
2009Stance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
James, William
1890The Principles of Psychology. New York: Henry Holt and Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail, and John R. E. Lee
1981 “The rejection of advice: Managing the problematic convergence of a ‘troubles-telling’ and a ‘service encounter’.” Journal of Pragmatics 5 (5), 399–422; also in Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings, ed. by P. Drew, and J. Heritage, 521–548. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jermyn, Deborah
2007Crime Watching. Investigating Real Crime TV. London/New York: I. B. TAURIS.Google Scholar
Kamio, Akio
1979 “On the notion speaker’s territory of information: A functional analysis of certain sentence-final forms in Japanese.” In Exploration in linguistics. Papers in honor of Kazuko Inoue, ed. by George Bedell, Eichi Kobayashi and Masatake Muraki, 213–231. Tokyo: Kenkyusha.Google Scholar
1994 “The theory of territory of information. The case of Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 21(1): 67–10. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1995 “Territory of information in English and Japanese and psychological utterances.” Journal of Pragmatics 24: 235–264. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997aTerritory of Information. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997b “Evidentiality and Some Discourse Characteristics in Japanese.” In Directions in Functional Linguistics, ed. by Akio Kamio, 145–171. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kanizsa, Gaetano
1980Grammatica del vedere. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Kärkkäinen, Elise
2003Epistemic Stance in English Conversation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 “The role of I guess in conversational stancetaking.” In Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, ed. by Robert Englebretson, 183–219. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Katona, George
1940Organizing and memorizing. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Kawanishi, Yumiko
1994 “On the ‘Theory of Territory of Information’. An interview with Akio Kamio.” Issue in Applied Linguistics 5(2): 437–448.Google Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo
2011 “The terms of not knowing.” In The morality of knowledge in conversation, ed. by Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig, 184–206. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keisanen, Tiina
2007 “Stancetaking as an interactional activity. Challenging the prior speaker.” In Stancetaking in Discourse. Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, ed. by Robert Englebretson, 253–281. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kinnell, Ann Marie, and Douglas W. Maynard
1996 “The delivery and receipt of safer sex advice in pre-test counseling sessions for HIV and AIDS.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 24 (4): 405–437. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koffka, Kurt
1935Principles of gestalt psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Köhler, Wolfgang
1947Gestalt psychology: an introduction to new concepts in modern psychology. New York: Liveright.Google Scholar
Korobov, Neil, and Avril Thorne
2007 “How late-adolescent friends share stories about relationships: the importance of mitigating the seriousness of romantic problems.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 24 (6): 971–992. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 “The negotiation of compulsory romance in young women friends’ stories about romantic heterosexual experiences.” Feminism & Psychology 19 (1), 49–70. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koshik, Irene
2003 “Wh-questions used as challenges.” Discourse Studies 5 (1): 51–77. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005 “Alternative questions used in conversational repair.” Discourse Studies 7 (2): 193–211. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Labinaz, Paolo and Marina Sbisà
2014 “Certainty and uncertainty in assertive speech acts.” In Communicating Certainty and Uncertainty in Medical, Supportive and Scientific Contexts, ed. by A. Zuczkowski, R. Bongelli, I. Riccioni and C. Canestrari, 31–56. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson
1980Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lamont, Peter, Claudia Coelho, and Andrew McKinlay
2009 “Explaining the unexplained: warranting disbelief in the paranormal.” Discourse Studies 11 (5): 543–559. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larreya, Paul
2000 “Modal verbs and the expression of futurity in English, French and Italian.” In Modal Verbs in Germanic and Romance Languages [Belgian Journal of Linguistics 22], ed. by Johan van der Auwera, and Patrick Dendale, 115–129. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
1983Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Lewin, Kurt
1935A dynamic theory of personality: Selected papers. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
1936Principles of topological psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1938The conceptual representation and the measurement of psychological forces. Durham: Duke University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1939 “Field theory and experiment in social psychology: Concepts and methods.” American journal of sociology 44 (6): 868–896. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1943 “Defining the ‘field at a given time.’Psychological review 50 (3): 292. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1951Field Theory in Social Sciences. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
1952Selected theoretical papers. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
Limberg, Holger, and Miriam A. Locher
(Eds.) 2012Advice in discourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam A.
2006Advice Online. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam A., and Holger Limberg
2012 “Introduction to advice in discourse.” In Advice in discourse, ed. by H. Limberg, and M. A. Locher, 2–27. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, John
1968Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. London: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1977Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacGeorge, Erina L., Bo Feng, Ginger L. Butler, Sara K. Budarz
2004 “Understanding advice in supportive interactions.” Human Communication Research 30 (1): 42–70.Google Scholar
MacGeorge, Erina L., Bo Feng, Elizabeth R. Thompson
2008 “ ‘Good’ and ‘Bad’ Advice.” In Studies in applied interpersonal communication, ed. by M. T. Motley, 146–163. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
MacGeorge, Erina L., Lisa M. Guntzviller, Sara E. Branch, and Liliya Yakova
2016 “Paths of Resistance: An Interpretive Analysis of Trajectories in Less Satisfying Advice Interactions.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 35 (5): 548–568. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
MacGeorge, Erina L., and Elizabeth D. Hall
2014 “Relationship advice.” In Social influences on romantic relationships: Beyond the dyad, ed. by C. R. Agnew, 188–208. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mari, Alda
2009aDisambiguating the Italian future. 〈http://​lumiere​.ens​.fr​/~amari​/Papers​-Online​/GL09Paper​_revised​.pdf〉(13 December 2013).
2009cThe future: How to derive the temporal interpretation. 〈http://​jsm​.linguist​.univ​-paris​-diderot​.fr​/jsm09​/abstracts​/Mari​-JSM09​.pdf〉(13 December 2013).
2009dThe polisemy of Italian future and di erent types of knowledge. 〈http://​www​.docstoc​.com​/docs​/18738848​/The​-polysemy​-of​-the​-Italian​-future​-and​-different​-types〉(13 December 2013).
Martínez-Flor, Alicia
2005 “A Theoretical Review of the Speech Act of Suggesting : Towards a Taxonomy for Its Use in FLT 1.” Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingles, 18: 167–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Masini, Francesca, and Paola Pietrandrea
2010 “Magari.” Cognitive Linguistics 21 (1): 75–121. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Masters, Geofferey N.
1988 “The analysis of partial credit scoring.” Applied Measurement in Education, 1 (4): 279–297. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mastro, Dana, Maria Knigh Lapinski, Maria Kopacz, and Elizabeth Behm-Morawitz
2009 “The Influence of Exposure to Depictions of race and Crime in TV News on Viewer’s Social Judgments.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 53 (4): 615–635. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, Janice, and Dan Goodley
2008Seeking and rejecting certainty: Exposing the sophisticated life worlds of parents of disables babies. Sociology, 42 (2): 317–335. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mehan, Hugh
1979Learning lessons: social organization in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard Univeristy Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Metzger, Wolfgang
1971I principi della psicologia della Gestalt. Firenze: Giunti-Barbera.Google Scholar
19755. Psychologie – Die Entwicklung ihrer Grundannahmen seit der Einführung des Experiments. Darmstadt: Steinkopff.Google Scholar
2006Laws of seeing. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Michaud, Shari L., and Rebecca M. Warner
1997 “Gender differences in self-reported response to troubles talk.” Sex Roles 37 (7/8): 527–540. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Michotte, Albert
1954La perception de la causalité. Louvain: Publications Universitaires.Google Scholar
1962Causalité, permanence et réalité phénoménales. Louvain: Publications Universitaires.Google Scholar
Miecznikowski-Fuenfschilling, Johanna, Andrea Rocci, and Gergana Zlatkova
2013 “Le funzioni inferenziali e polifoniche dell’avverbio epistemico italiano forse.” In Dialogizität in der Argumentation. Eine multidisziplinäre Betrachtung, ed. by D. Pirazzini, and A. Schiemann, 201–230. Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang. Bonner Romanistische Arbeiten 108Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza
2011 “The management of knowledge discrepancies and of epistemic changes in institutional interactions.” In The morality of knowledge in conversation, ed. by Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig, 27–57. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 “Displaying, Contesting and Negotiating Epistemic Authority in Social Interaction: Descriptions and Questions in Guided Visits.” Discourse Studies 15 (5): 597–626. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Muehleisen, Victoria L.
1997Antonymy and semantic range in English. Doctoral dissertation in philosophy, field of linguistics. Illinois: Evanston.Google Scholar
Nicolini, Paola
2000Mente e linguaggio. La proposizione costitutiva di mondo. Bologna: CLUEB.Google Scholar
Nuyts, Jan
2001 “Subjectivity as an Evidential Dimension in Epistemic Modal Expressions.” Journal of Pragmatics 33 (3): 383–400. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ochs, Elinor
1996 “Linguistic Resources for Socializing Humanity”. In Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, ed. by John Gumperz and Stephen Levinson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ohashi, Yasushi, Jackson, Clare Woofitt Robin, and Nixon Yumi
2013 “Discourse, Culture, and Extraordinary Experiences: Observations from a Comparative, Qualitative Analysis of Japanese and UK English Accounts of Paranormal Phenomena.” Western Journal of Communication 77 (4): 466–488. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Oishi, Etsuko
2014 “Discursive functions of evidentials and epistemic modals.” In Certainty-uncertainty-and the Attitudinal Space in Between, ed. by Sibilla Cantarini, Werner Abraham, Elisabeth Leiss, 239–262. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Peffley, Mark, Todd Shield, and Bruce Williams
1996 “The intersection of Race and Crime in Television News Stories: An Experimental Study.” Political Communication 13: 309–327. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Penrod, Janice
2001 “Refinement of the concept of uncertainty.” Journal of Advanced Nursing, 34 (2): 238–245. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Petőfi, János Sándor
1973 “Towards an Empirically Motivated Grammar Theory of Verbal Texts.” In Studies in Text Grammar, ed. by János Sándor Petöfi and Hannes Rieser, 205–275. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1977a “Semantica, pragmatica, teoria del testo.” In La linguistica testuale, ed. by Elisabeth Conte, 195–223. Milano: Feltrinelli.Google Scholar
1977b “Osservazione sul componente grammaticale di una teoria semiotica integrata dei testi.” In La linguistica testuale, ed. by Elisabeth Conte, 224–247. Milano: Feltrinelli.Google Scholar
1980 “Interpretazione e teoria del testo.” In Interpretazione e contesto, ed. by Giuseppe Galli, 21–43. Torino: Marietti.Google Scholar
1981 “La struttura della comunicazione in Atti 20, 17–38.” In Interpretazione e strutture, ed. by Giuseppe Galli, 101–157. Torino: Marietti.Google Scholar
1985a “Untersuchungen zur semiotischen Textologie in Europa. Eine historische, thematische und bibliographische Übersicht.” Finlance. The Finnisch Journal of Language Learning and Language Teaching 4: 1–30.Google Scholar
1985b “Aspetti procedurali dell’interpretazione del testo. Interazione tra testo e interprete nel processo di costituzione del significato.” In Interpretazione e cambiamento, ed. by Giuseppe Galli, 81–98. Torino: Marietti.Google Scholar
Petőfi, János S.
2004Scrittura e Interpretazione. Introduzione alla Testologia Semiotica dei Testi Verbali. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
Philip, Gill, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni, Carla Canestrari, and Andrzej Zuczkowski
2013 “Negotiating Narrative. Dialogic Dynamics of Known, Unknown and Believed in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.” Language and Dialogue 3 (1): 6–32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pietrandrea, Paola
2004 “L’articolazione semantica del dominio epistemico dell’italiano.” Lingue e Linguaggio 2: 171–206.Google Scholar
2007 “The grammatical nature of some epistemic-evidential adverbs in spoken Italian.” Italian Journal of Linguistics 19 (1): 39–63.Google Scholar
2008 “Certamente and sicuramente. Encoding dynamic and discursive aspects of commitment.” Belgiam Journal of Linguistics 19: 221–246. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Plungian, Vladimir A.
2001 “The Place of Evidentiality within the Universal Grammatical Space.” Journal of Pragmatics 33 (3): 349–357. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pudlinski, Christopher
2002 “Accepting and rejecting advice as competent peers: caller dilemmas on a warm line.” Discourse Studies 4 (4): 481–500. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005 “The mitigation of advice”. In Calling for Help. Language and Social Interaction in Telephone Helplines, ed. by Carolyn Baker, Michael Emmison, and Alan Firth, 109–131. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita, and John Heritage
2014 “Preference.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell e Tanya Stivers, 210–228. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, and Geoffrey, Svartvik, Jan Leech
1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey, and John Heritage
2006 “The epistemics of social relations: owning grandchildren.” Language in Society 35: 677–705. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Riccioni, Ilaria
2008 “The informal counselling sequences as dialogic Gestalt.” Gestalt Theory 30 (3): 241–249.Google Scholar
2015La percezione della sintonia dialogica. Fano: Aras Edizioni.Google Scholar
Riccioni, Ilaria, Ramona Bongelli, and Andrzej Zuczkowski
2013a “The Communication of Certainty and Uncertainty in Italian Political Media Discourses.” In Thee Pragmatics of Political Discourse, ed. by Anita Fetzer, 125–165. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Riccioni, Ilaria, Ramona Bongelli, Silvia Lo Bue, Andrzej Zuczkowski
2013b “Self-disclosure in troubles talk sequences. Italian young adults talk about romantic problems.” Language Discourse & Society 2 (2): 134–164.Google Scholar
Riccioni, Ilaria, Ramona Bongelli & Andrzej Zuczkowski
2014 “Mitigation and epistemic positions in troubles talk: The giving advice activity in close interpersonal relationships. Some examples from Italian.” Language & Communication 39 (2014): 51–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Riccioni, Ilaria, Ramona Bongelli, Andrzej Zuczkowski
2015 “Consigli per dare consigli: salvaguardare il benessere relazionale nelle interazioni informali d’aiuto.” Ricerche di psicologia XXVIII, (1): 193–206.Google Scholar
Rocci, Andrea
1997 “Inferenza ed. enunciazione nella semantica dei modali.” L’Analisi Linguistica e Letteraria 4 (2): 535–553.Google Scholar
2000 “L’interprétation épistémique du futur en italien et en français: Une analyse procédurale.” In Inférences directionnelles, représentations mentales et subjectivité, ed. by Jacques Moeschler, Cahiers de Linguistique Française 22: 241–274.Google Scholar
2005a “Epistemic readings of modal verbs in Italian: e relationship between propositionality, theme-rheme articulation an inferential discourse relations.” In Crosslinguistic Views on Tense, Aspect and Modality, ed. by Bart Hollebrandse, Angeliek van Hout, and Co Vet, 229–246. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
2005bLa modalità epistemica tra semantica e argomentazione. Milano: Pubblicazioni dell’ISU Università Cattolica.Google Scholar
2006 “Le modal italien dovere au conditionnel: Évidentialité et contraintes sur l’inférence des relations de discours argumentatives.” Travaux Neuchâtelois de Linguistique (TRANEL) 45: 71–98.Google Scholar
2010 “Modals as lexical indicators of argumentation. A study of Italian economic-financial news.” L’Analisi Linguistica e Letteraria 16: 577–619.Google Scholar
Romer, Daniel, Kathleen Hall Jamieson, and Sean Aday
2003 “Television News and the Cultivation of Fear of Crime.” Journal of Communication 88–104. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rubin, Edgar
1921Visuell wahrgenommene Figuren. Copenaghen: Gyldendals.Google Scholar
Rubin-Damari, Rebecca
2010 “Intertextual stancetaking and the local negotiation of cultural identities by a binational couple.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 14 (5): 609–629. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sadock, Jerry
1971Queclaratives.” In Papers from the 7th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, ed. by Douglas Adams, Mary Ann Campbell, Victor Cohen, Julie Lovins, Edward Maxwell, Carolyn Nygren, and John Reighard, 223–232. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
1974Towards a Linguistic Theory of Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
2012 “Formal features of questions.” In Questions. Formal, Functional and Interactional Perspectives, ed. by Jan De Ruiter, 103–122. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Samnaliev, Mihail, Thomas H. Stevens, and Thomas More
2006 “A comparison of alternative certainty calibration techniques in contingent valuation.” Ecological Economics, 57 (3): 507–519. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, José, and Wilbert Spooren
1996 “Subjectivity and Certainty in Epistemic Modality: A Study of Dutch Epistemic Modifiers.” Cognitive Linguistics 7 (3): 241–264. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Savardi, Ugo, and Ivana Bianchi
2003 “Metodo interosservativo ed eventi sotto osservazione: l’ostensione dell’esperienza di spazio nella fenomenologia sperimentale della percezione [The method of inter-observation and events under observation: the ostensive characterization of the experience of space in the experimental phenomenology of perception]”. In Figura e sfondo. Temi e variazioni per Paolo Bozzi [Figure and background: Themes and variations for Paolo Bozzi], ed. by Ugo Savardi, Alberto Mazzocco, 107–130. Padova: Cleup.Google Scholar
2009 “The spatial path to contraries.” In The perception and cognition of contraries, ed. by Savardi, 62–92. Milano: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Sbisà, Marina
2001 “Illocutionary force and degrees of strenght in language usage”. Journal of Pragmatic 33 (12):1791–1814. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel
2000 “Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation.” Language in Society 29 (1): 1–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007Sequence Organization in Interaction. London: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel, Gail Jefferson, and Harvey Sacks
1977 “The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation.” Language 53 (2): 361–382. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, Siegfried
1973 “Texttheorie/Pragmalinguistik.” In Lexikon der germanistischen Linguistik, ed. by Hans Peter Althaus, Helmut Henne, Herbert Ernst Wiegand, 233–244. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Searle, John R.
1969Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1975 “A taxonomy of illocutionary acts.” In Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. VII: Language, Mind and Knowledge, ed. by K. Gunderson, 344–389. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
1976 “The classification of illocutionary acts.” Language in Society 5: 1–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Serianni, Luca
1988Grammatica italiana. Italiano comune e lingua letteraria. Suoni, forme, costrutti. Torino: UTET.Google Scholar
Shaw, Chloe, and Alexa Hepburn
2013 “Managing the moral implications of advice in informal interactions.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 46 (4): 344–362. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack
2012 ““Who knows best?”. Evidentiality and Epistemic asymmetry in conversation.” Pragmatics and Society 3 (2): 294–320. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Silverman, David
1997Discourses of counselling: HIV counselling as social interaction. London: SageGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, John, and Malcom Coulthard
1975Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Squartini, Mario
2001 “The internal structure of evidentiality in Romance.” Studies in language 25 (2): 297–334. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004 “La relazione semantica tra futuro e condizionale nelle lingue romanze.” Revue Romane 39: 68–96. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 “Lexical vs. grammatical evidentiality in French and Italian.” Linguistics 46 (5): 917–947. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 “Evidentiality, epistemicity, and their diachronic connections to non-factuality.” In Current trends in diachronic semantics and pragmatics, ed. by Maj-Britt Mosegaard Hansen, and Jacqueline Visconti, 211.226. Leiden: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 “Mood in Italian.” In Mood in the Languages of Europe, ed. by Björn Rothstein, and & Rolf Tieroff, 237–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Steensig, Jacob, and Paul Drew
2008 “Introduction: questioning and affiliation/disaffiliation in interaction.” Discourse Studies 10(1) 5–15. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya
2005 “Modified Repeats: One Method for Asserting Primary Rights From Second Position.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 38 (2): 131–158. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
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
2010 “An overview of the question-response system in American English conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (10): 2772–2781. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig
2011 “Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction.” In The morality of knowledge in Conversation, ed. by Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig, 3–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Swan, Michael
2005Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah
1990You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
Thaler, Verena
2012 “Mitigation as modification of illocutionary force”. Journal of Pragmatics 44 (2): 907–919. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tiedens, Larissa Z., and Susan Linton
2001 “Judgment under emotional certainty and uncertainty: The effects of specific emotions on information processing.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81 (6): 973–988. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tormala, Zakary L., and Victoria De Sensi
2001 “The effects of minority-majority source status on attitude certainty: A matching perspective.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35 (1): 114–125. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trautman, Todd
2004 “Concerns about Crime and local Television News.” Communication Research Reports 21 (3): 310–315. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Traverso, Véronique
1996La conversation familière. Analyse pragmatique des interactions. Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon,.Google Scholar
Vaihinger, Hans
1952The philosophy of ‘as if’: A System of the Theoretical, Practical and Religious Fictions of Mankind. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published 1911, Die Philosophie des Als Ob).Google Scholar
Venier, Federica
1986 “Gli avverbi modali.” Lingua e stile 21 (4): 459–483.Google Scholar
1991La modalizzazione assertiva. Avverbi modali e verbi parentetici. Milano: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
Vincze, Laura, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni, and Andrzej Zuczkowski
2016 “Ignorance Unmasking Questions in Royal-Sarkozy Presidential Debate: a Resource to Claim Epistemic Authority.” Discourse Studies 18 (4): 430–453. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wales, Katie
2009 “Unnatural conversations in unnatural conversations: speech reporting in the discourse of spiritual mediumship.” Language and Literature 18 (4): 347–356. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Waring, Hansun Z.
2007 “Complex advice acceptance as a resource for managing asymmetries.” Text and Talk 27 (1): 107–137. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012 “The advising sequence and its preference structures in graduate peer tutoring at an American university.” In Advice in discourse, ed. by H. Limberg, and M. A. Locher, 97–118. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Weigand, Edda
2010The mixed game. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weinrich, Harald
1964Tempus Besprochene und erzählte Welt. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
Weitzer, Ronald, and Charis Kubrin
2004 “Breaking news: how local TV news and real-world conditions affect fear of crime.” Justice Quarterly 21 (3): 497–520. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wertheimer, Max
1912 “Experimentelle Studien über das Sehen von Bewegung”. Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane 61 (1): 162–262.Google Scholar
1923 “Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt.” Psychologische Forschung 4: 301–350. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1959Productive Thinking. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Willett, Thomas
1988 “A Cross-linguistic Survey of the Grammaticalization of Evidentiality.” Studies in Language 12 (1): 51–97. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Paul, and Julie Dickinson
1993 “Fear of crime: read all about it? The Relationship between Newspaper Crime Reporting and Fear of Crime.” British Journal of Criminology 33 (1): 33–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wiseman, Richard, and Caroline Watt
2006 “Belief in Psychic Ability and the Misattribution Hypothesis: A Qualitative Review.” British Journal of Psychology 97: 323–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wolffram, Heather
2009 “Crime, Clairvoyance and the Weimar Police.” Journal of Contemporary History 44 (4): 581–601. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wooffitt, Robin
2000 “Some Properties of Interactional Organisation of Displays of Paranormal Cognition in Psychic-Sitter Interaction.” Sociology 34 (3): 457–479.Google Scholar
2001a “Researching Psychic Practitioners: Conversation Analysis.” In Discourse as Data. A Guide for Analysis, ed. by Margaret Wetherell, Stephanie Taylor and Simeon J. Yates, 49–92. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
2001b “A socially organized basis for displays of cognition: Procedural orientation to evidential turns in psychic-sitter interaction.” British Journal of Social Psychology 40: 545–563. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006The Language of Mediums and Psychics. Burlington, USA: Ashgate.Google Scholar
2007 “Epistemic Authority and Neutrality in the Discourse of Psychic Practitioners: Toward a Naturalistic Parapsychology.” Journal of Parapsychology 71 (1/2): 69–104.Google Scholar
Wooffitt, Robin, and Simon Allistone
2005 “Towards a Discursive Parapsychology. Language and the Laboratory Study of Anomalous Communication.” Theory & Psychology 15 (3): 325–355. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 “Participation, procedure and accountability: ‘you said’ specch markers in negotiating reports of ambiguous phenomena.” Discourse Studies 10 (3): 407–427. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Benjamin D., and Geofferey N. Masters
1982Rating scale analysis. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Wright, Benjamin D., and Mark H. Stone
1979Best Test Design. Chicago: MESA Press.Google Scholar
Wu, Margaret, and Ray Adams
2007Applying the Rasch model to psycho-social measurement: A practical approach. Melbourne, Australia: Educational Measurement Solutions.Google Scholar
Zuczkowski, Andrzej
1995Strutture dell’esperienza e strutture del linguaggio. Bologna: Clueb.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1998I sistemi cognitivi nei primi anni di vita: isomorfismi e derivazioni. Pisa/Roma: Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1999aSemantica percettiva: rapporti tra percezione visiva e linguaggio. Pisa/Roma: Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1999bAlbert Michotte: percezione della causalità e linguaggio. Bologna: Clueb.Google Scholar
2003 “I fondamenti visivi del linguaggio.” In Figura e Sfondo. Temi e variazioni per Paolo Bozzi, ed. by Ugo Savardi and Alberto Mazzocco. Padova: Cleup.Google Scholar
2005 “Percezione visiva e linguaggio.” Teorie & Modelli 9 (2–3): 107–126.Google Scholar
2006 “Koffka dialoga con Musil.” Ricerche di Psicologia 3: 19–38.Google Scholar
Zuczkowski, Andrzej, Ramona Bongelli, and Ilaria Riccioni
2011 “Proposizione costitutiva di mondo e indicatori linguistici percettivi e cognitivi.” In Dimensionen der Analyse von Texten und Diskursen. Festschrift für János Sándor Petőfi zum achtzigsten Geburstag. Dimensioni dell’analisi di testi e discorsi. Festschrift für János Sándor Petőfi in occasione del suo ottantesimo compleanno, ed. by Klaus Hölkerm and Carla Marello, 41–61. Berlin: Lit.Google Scholar
Zuczkowski, Andrzej, Ramona Bongelli, Laura Vincze, and Ilaria Riccioni
2014a “Epistemic Stance: Knowing, Unknowing, Believing (KUB) positions.” In Communicating Certainty and Uncertainty in Medical, Supportive and Scientific Contexts, ed by Andrzej Zuczkowski, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni e Carla Canestrari, 115–138. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Zuckowski, Andrzej, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni, Massimiliano Valotto, and Roberto Burro
2016 “Writers’ uncertainty in a corpus of scientific biomedical articles with a diachronic perspective.” In Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics 2016. Global Implications for Society and Education in the Networked Age, ed. by Jesús Romero-Trillo. 203–241. New York: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zuczkowski, Andrzej, Gianluca Colella, Ilaria Riccioni, Ramona Bongelli, and Carla Canestrari
2014b “Italian come se “as if”: Evidential and epistemic aspects.” In Certainty-uncertainty- and the Attitudinal Space in Between, ed. by Sibilla Cantarini, Werner Abraham and Elisabeth Leiss, 297–326. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Zuczkowski, Andrzej, and Ilaria Riccioni
2009 “Linguaggio e comunicazione: realismo critico, analisi strutturale e approccio dialogico.” In La Persona in Relazione. Sviluppi della psicologia della Gestalt, ed. by Giuseppe Galli, 105–121. Napoli: Liguori.Google Scholar
2010L’ascolto nel counselling amicale. In L’ascolto, ed. by L. Lugli, and M. Mizzau, 83–116. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
2013 “The Gestalt approach to dialogues: an integrated model of analysis. In Dialogue: State of the Art, Studies in Memory of Sorin Stati, ed. by S. Cantarini, 168–185. München: LINCOM Studies in Pragmatics.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

No author info given
2020. Demonstrative questions and epistemic authority management in medium-sitter interactions. Language and Dialogue 10:2 Crossref logo
Bongelli, Ramona, Ilaria Riccioni, Roberto Burro, Andrzej Zuczkowski & Miguel A. Andrade-Navarro
2019. Writers’ uncertainty in scientific and popular biomedical articles. A comparative analysis of the British Medical Journal and Discover Magazine. PLOS ONE 14:9  pp. e0221933 ff. Crossref logo
Hübscher, Iris, Laura Vincze & Pilar Prieto
2019. Children’s Signaling of Their Uncertain Knowledge State: Prosody, Face, and Body Cues Come First. Language Learning and Development 15:4  pp. 366 ff. Crossref logo
Omero, Paolo, Massimiliano Valotto, Riccardo Bellana, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni, Andrzej Zuczkowski & Carlo Tasso
2020. Writer’s uncertainty identification in scientific biomedical articles: a tool for automatic if-clause tagging. Language Resources and Evaluation Crossref logo
Scardigno, Rosa & Giuseppe Mininni
2020. Un-Certainty as a Pragmatic Resource for Psychiatric Argumentation: a Diachronical and Diatextual Approach. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 august 2020. 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.

Subjects
BIC Subject: CFG – Semantics, Pragmatics, Discourse Analysis
BISAC Subject: LAN009030 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / Pragmatics