Article published in:
The Conversation Frame: Forms and functions of fictive interaction
Edited by Esther Pascual and Sergeiy Sandler
[Human Cognitive Processing 55] 2016
► pp. 303322


Arcand, R., & Bourbeau, N.
(1995) La communication efficace. De l’intention aux moyens d’expression. Anjou (Québec): CEC.
Brandt, L.
(2008) A semiotic approach to fictive interaction as a representational strategy in communicative meaning construction. In T. Oakley, & A. Hougaard (Eds.), Mental spaces in discourse and interaction (pp. 109–148). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref link
(2010) Language and enunciation – A cognitive inquiry with special focus on conceptual integration in semiotic meaning construction. PhD dissertation. Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
(2013) The communicative mind: A linguistic exploration of conceptual integration and meaning construction. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Brandt, P.A.
(2004) Spaces, domains, and meaning: Essays in cognitive semiotics. Bern: Peter Lang.
Charteris-Black, J.
(2005) Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Crossref link
Goffman, E.
(1974) Frame analysis – An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row.
Fauconnier, G.
(1997) Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossref link
Jakobson, R.
(1960) Closing statements: Linguistics and poetics. In T.A. Sebeok (Ed.), Style in language (pp. 350–377). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Langacker, R.W.
(2001) Dynamicity in grammar. Axiomathes, 12, 7–33. Crossref link
Leushuis, M.
(2015) De conversationele metafoor als communicatiestrategie: Een onderzoek naar de weergave hiervan in product – en ideële reclame. Master’s thesis, University of Groningen.
McGregor, W.B.
(1994) The grammar of reported speech and thought in Gooniyandi. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 14(1), 63–92. Crossref link
Pascual, E.
(2002) Imaginary trialogues: Conceptual blending and fictive interaction in criminal courts. Utrecht: LOT Dissertation Series 68.
(2006) Fictive interaction within the sentence: A communicative type of fictivity in grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(2), 245–267. Crossref link
(2014) Fictive interaction: The conversation frame in thought, language, and discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref link
Pascual, E., Królak, E., & Janssen, T.A.J.M.
(2013) Direct speech compounds: Evoking socio-cultural scenarios through fictive interaction. Cognitive Linguistics, 24(2), 345–366. Crossref link
Scollo, M.
(2007) Mass media appropriations: Communication, culture, and everyday social life. PhD dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA.
Tannen, D.
(1989) Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cited by

Cited by other publications

No author info given
2020. “Hi, Mr. President!”. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 18:1 Crossref logo
Pascual, Esther, Aline Dornelas & Todd Oakley
2017. When “Goal!” means ‘soccer’. Pragmatics & Cognition 24:3  pp. 315 ff. Crossref logo
Pascual, Esther & Emilia Królak
2018. The ‘listen to characters thinking’ novel. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 16:2  pp. 399 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 05 july 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.