Article published In:
Functions of Language
Vol. 27:2 (2020) ► pp.113142
References (72)
References
Aijmer, Karin. 1997. I think: An English modal particle. In Toril Swan & Olaf Jansen Westvik (eds.), Modality in Germanic languages, 1–47. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berend, Nina. 2005. Regionale Gebrauchsstandards – Gibt es sie und wie kann man sie beschreiben? In Ludwig M. Eichinger & Werner Kallmeyer (eds.), Standardvariation. Wie viel Variation verträgt die deutsche Sprache?, 143–170. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Betz, Emma & Andrea Golato. 2008. Remembering relevant information and withholding relevant next actions: The German token ‘ach ja’. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41(1). 55–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan. 1989. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 91. 93–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bogaert, Julie van. 2010. A constructional taxonomy of “I think” and related expressions: Accounting for the variability of complement-taking mental predicates. English Language and Linguistics 14(3). 399–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. I think and other complement-taking mental predicates: A case of and for constructional grammaticalization. Linguistics 491. 295–332.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2008. The comment clause in English: Syntactic origins and pragmatic developments. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clift, Rebecca. 2016. Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 2007. Assessing and accounting. In Elizabeth Holt & Rebecca Clift (eds.), Reporting talk: Reported speech in interaction, 81–119. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Dagmar Barth-Weingarten. 2011. A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT2. Translated and adapted for English by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Dagmar Barth-Weingarten. Gesprächsforschung 121. 1–51. [URL]. (21 Dec., 2016.)
Declerck, Renaat & Susan Reed. 2005. What is modal about I thought that…? English Language and Linguistics 9(2). 311–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf, Nadine Proske & Arne Zeschel (eds.). 2017. Verben im interaktiven Kontext. Bewegungsverben und mentale Verben im gesprochenen Deutsch. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf & Silke Reineke. 2017. Epistemische Praktiken und ihre feinen Unterschiede: Verwendungen von ich dachte in gesprochener Sprache. In Arnulf Deppermann, Nadine Proske & Arne Zeschel (eds.), 337–375.Google Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf, Feilke Helmuth & Angelika Linke. 2016. Sprachliche und kommunikative Praktiken: Eine Annäherung aus linguistischer Sicht. In Arnulf Deppermann, Helmuth Feilke & Angelika Linke (eds.), Sprachliche und kommunikative Praktiken, 1–23. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf & Thomas Schmidt. 2014. Gesprächsdatenbanken als methodisches Instrument der Interaktionalen Linguistik – Eine exemplarische Untersuchung auf Basis des Korpus FOLK in der Datenbank für Gesprochenes Deutsch (DGD2). In Mitteilungen des Deutschen Germanistenverbandes 1/2014. 4–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1987. Po-faced receipts of teases. Linguistics 251. 219–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 2007. The stance triangle. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse, 139–182. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, Nicholas J. 2006. Social consequences of common ground. In Nicholas Enfield & Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction, 399–430. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
2008. Common ground as a resource for social affiliation. In István Kecskés & Jacob Mey (eds.), Intention, common ground and the egocentric speaker-hearer, 223–254. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Englebretson, Robert (ed.). 2007. Stancetaking in discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erman, Britt. 1987. Pragmatic expressions in English: A study of you know, you see and I mean in face-to-face conversation. Stockholm: Almquist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
. 2001. Pragmatic markers revisited with a focus on you know in adult and adolescent talk. Journal of Pragmatics 33(10). 1337–1359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, Anita. 2008. ‘And I think that is a very straight forward way of dealing with it’: The communicative function of cognitive verbs in political discourse. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 27(4). 384–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, Anita & Marjut Johansson. 2010. Cognitive verbs in context: A contrastive analysis of English and French argumentative discourse. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15(2). 240–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fox Tree, Jean E. & Josef C. Schrock. 2002. Basic meanings of you know and I mean . Journal of Pragmatics 34(6). 727–747. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1974. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Golato, Andrea. 2010. Marking understanding versus receipting information in talk: Achso. and ach in German interaction. Discourse Studies 12(2). 147–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Golato, Andrea & Emma Betz. 2008. German ach and achso in repair uptake: Resources to sustain or remove epistemic asymmetry. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 271. 7–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles. 1981. Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Günthner, Susanne. 1996. The prosodic contextualization of moral work: An analysis of reproaches in ‘why’-formats. In Margret Selting & Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies, 271–302. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Günthner, Susanne & Paul Hopper. 2010. Zeitlichkeit & sprachliche Strukturen: Pseudoclefts im Englischen und Deutschen. Gesprächsforschung 111. 1–28.Google Scholar
Helmer, Henrike, Silke Reineke & Arnulf Deppermann. 2016. A range of uses of negative epistemic constructions in German: ich weiß nicht as a resource for dispreferred actions. Journal of Pragmatics 1061. 97–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In John Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action, 299–345. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
. 2006. Cognition in Discourse. In Hedwig te Molder & Jonathan Potter (eds.), Conversation and cognition, 184–202. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
. 2010. Conversation Analysis: Practices and methods. In David Silverman (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice, 3rd edn., 208–230. London: Sage.Google Scholar
. 2012a. Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(1). 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(1). 30–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013a. Epistemics in conversation. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis, 370–394. Malden, MA: Wiley.Google Scholar
. 2013b. Action formation and its epistemic (and other) backgrounds. Discourse Studies 15(5). 551–578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John & Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 68(1). 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Imo, Wolfgang. 2005. A Construction Grammar approach to the phrase “I mean” in spoken English. InLiSt (Interaction and Linguistic Structure) 421. 1–37.Google Scholar
. 2007. Construction Grammar und Gesprochene-Sprache-Forschung. Konstruktionen mit zehn matrixsatzfähigen Verben im Gesprochenen Deutsch. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Konstruktion oder Funktion? Erkenntnisprozessmarker (change-of-state-token) im Deutschen. In Susanne Günthner & Jörg Bücker (eds.), Grammatik im Gespräch, 57–86. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Das Adverb jetzt zwischen Zeit- und Gesprächsdeixis. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 38(1). 25–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 2004. ‘At first I thought’: A normalizing device for extraordinary events. In Gene H. Lerner (ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation, 131–167. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity. Text & Talk 26(6). 699–731. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. I thought it was pretty neat: Social action formats for taking a stance. In Stef Slembrouck, Miriam Taverniers & Mieke Van Herreweghe (eds.), From ‘Will’ to ‘Well’: Studies in Linguistics, 293–304. Gent: Academia.Google Scholar
. 2012. I thought it was very interesting: Conversational formats for taking a stance. Journal of Pragmatics 44(15). 2194–2210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo. 2011. The terms of not knowing. In Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig (eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, 184–206. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William & Joshua Waletzky. 1967. Narrative analysis. In June Helm (ed.), Essays on the verbal and visual Arts, 12–44. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Laury, Ritva & Marja-Liisa Helasvuo. 2016. Disclaiming epistemic access with ‘know’ and ‘remember’ in Finnish. Journal of Pragmatics 1061. 80–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindström, Jan & Susanna Karlsson. 2016. Tensions in the epistemic domain and claims of no-knowledge: A study of Swedish medical interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 1061. 129–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Östman, Jan-Ola. 1981. You know: A discourse functional approach. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, Simona. 2011. Clause-combining and the sequencing of actions: Projector constructions in French talk-in-interaction. In Ritva Laury & Ryoko Suzuki (eds.), Subordination in conversation, 103–148. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. More than an epistemic hedge: French je sais pas ‘I don’t know’ as a resource for the sequential organization of turns and actions. Journal of Pragmatics 1061. 148–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1980. Telling my side: “Limited access” as a “fishing” device. Sociological Inquiry 501. 186–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1986. Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies 9(2–3). 219–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Potter, Jonathan. 1997. Discourse analysis as a way of analysing naturally occurring talk. In David Silverman (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice, 144–160. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Quasthoff, Uta. 1980. Erzählen in Gesprächen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on conversation. 21 Vols. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1996a. Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In Elinor Ochs, Emmanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar, 52–133. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheibmann, Joanne. 2000. I dunno: A usage-based account of the phonological reduction of don’t in American English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 32(1). 105–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selting, Margret, Peter Auer, Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, Jörg Bergmann, et al. 2009. Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT2). Gesprächsforschung 101. 353–402. [URL]. (21 Dec., 2016.)
Smith, Michael Sean. 2013. “I thought” initiated turns: Addressing discrepancies in first-hand and second-hand knowledge. Journal of Pragmatics 571. 318–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. 2002. “Object complements” and conversation: Towards a realistic account. Studies in Language 26(1). 125–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & Anthony Mulac. 1991. The discourse conditions for the use of the complementizer that in conversational English. Journal of Pragmatics 15(3). 237–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weatherall, Ann. 2011. I don’t know as a prepositioned epistemic hedge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 44(4). 317–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weinrich, Harald. 1993. Textgrammatik der deutschen Sprache. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Wooffitt, Robin. 1991. ‘I was just doing X ... when Y’: Some inferential properties of a device in accounts for paranormal experiences. Text 11(2). 267–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zeschel, Arne. 2017. Denken und wissen im gesprochenen Deutsch. In Arnulf Deppermann, Nadine Proske & Arne Zeschel (eds.), 249–335.Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Pino, Marco & Laura Jenkins
2024. Inviting the Patient to Talk About a Conversation They Had with Another Healthcare Practitioner: A Way of Promoting Discussion About Disease Progression and End of Life in Palliative Care Interactions. Health Communication 39:4  pp. 778 ff. DOI logo
Schirm, Sam
Smith, Michael Sean & Lucas M. Seuren
2022. Re-apprehending misapprehensions: A practice for disclosing troubles in understanding in talk-in-interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 193  pp. 43 ff. DOI logo
Laury, Ritva, Marja-Liisa Helasvuo & Janica Rauma
2020. Chapter 6. When an expression becomes fixed. In Fixed Expressions [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 315],  pp. 133 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 july 2024. 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.