Article published In:
Interactional Linguistics
Vol. 2:1 (2022) ► pp.4278
References (57)
References
Abercrombie, D. (1967). Elements of general phonetics. Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Athanasiadou, A., & Dirven, R. (2011). Typology of If-clauses. In E. H. Casad (Ed.), Cognitive Linguistics in the Redwoods. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Auer, P., Couper-Kuhlen, E. & Müller, F. (1999). Language in Time: The Rhythm and Tempo of Spoken Interaction (Vol. 77, Issue 1). New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Badawi, E. S., & Hinds, M. (1986). A Dictionary of Egyptian Arabic: Arabic-English. Librairie du Liban.Google Scholar
Barth-Weingarten, D. (2009). When to say something – Some observations on prosodic-phonetic cues to the placement and types of responses in multi-unit turns. Studies in Pragmatics, 8 1, 143–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Response tokens in interaction : prosody, phonetics and a visual aspect of German “jaja.” Gesprächsforschung–Online-Zeitschrift Zur Verbalen Interaktion, 12 (12), 301–370.Google Scholar
(2016). Intonation Units Revisited: Cesuras in talk-in-interaction (Vol. 291). John Benjamins Publishing Company. [URL]. DOI logo
Bavelas, J. B., Coates, L. & Johnson, T. (2000). Listeners as co-narrators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (6), 941–952. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. (2020). Praat: doing phonetics by computer (6.1.10). [URL]
Canavan, A., Graff, D., & Zipperlen, G. (1997). Callhome egyptian arabic speech. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1993). English speech rhythm: Form and function in everyday verbal interaction (Vol. 251). John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. & Barth-Weingarten, D. (2011). A System for Transcribing Talk-in-Interaction: GAT 2. English Translation and Adaptation of Selting, Margret et al. (2009): Gesprachsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. & Selting, M. (2018). Interactional linguistics: Studying language in social interaction. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Drummond, K. & Hopper, R. (1993). Some Uses of Yeah. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26 (2), 203–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J. (2011). Sources of asymmetry in human interaction: Enchrony, status, knowledge and agency. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada & J. Steensig (Eds.), The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation (pp. 285–312). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ford, C. E. & Thompson, S. A. (1996). Interactional units in conversation: Syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and Grammar (pp. 134–184). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gadalla, H., Kilany, H., Arram, H., Yacoub, A., ElHabashi, A., Shalaby, A., Karins, K., Rowson, E., MacIntyre, R., Kingsbury, P., Graff, D. & McLemore, C. (1997). Callhome Egyptian Arabic Transcripts. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar
Gardner, R. (1997). The conversation object Mm: A weak and variable acknowledging token. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 30 (2), 131–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). When listeners talk. John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Golato, A. & Fagyal, Z. (2008). Comparing single and double sayings of the German response Token ja and the role of prosody: A conversation analytic perspective. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41 (3), 241–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. (1986). Between and within: Alternative sequential treatments of continuers and assessments. Human Studies, 9 (2–3), 205–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 299–345). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1989). Current developments in conversation analysis. In D. Roger & P. Bull (Eds.), Conversation: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 21–47). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(2007). Intersubjectivity and progressivity in person (and place) reference. In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural, and Social Perspectives (Issue November). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J., & Raymond, G. (2012). Navigating epistemic landscapes: Acquiescence, agency and resistance in responses to polar questions. In J. P. de Ruiter (Ed.), Questions: Formal, functional and interactional perspectives (pp. 179–192). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Houtkoop, H. & Mazeland, H. (1985). Turns and discourse units in everyday conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 9 (5), 595–620. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G. (1984). Notes on the systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens “yeah” and “hm mm”’. Papers in Linguistics, 1 (7), 197–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1990). List construction as a task and resource. In G. Pasthas (Ed.), Interaction Competence (pp. 63–92). University Press of America.Google Scholar
Lerner, G. H. (1996). On the ‘semi-permeable’ character of grammatical units in conversation: Conditional entry into the turn space of another speaker. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 238–276). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. C. (2013). Action formation and ascription. In L. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 103–130). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Local, J. (1996). Conversational phonetics: some aspects of news receipts in everyday talk. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in Conversation (pp. 177–230). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, F. E. (1996). Affiliating and disaffiliating with continuers: prosodic aspects of recipiency. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in Conversation (pp. 131–176). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2011). Emergent grammar for all practical purposes: the on-line formatting of left and right dislocations in French conversation. In P. Auer & S. Pfänder (Eds.), Constructions: Emerging and Emergent (Issue 34, pp. 45–87). De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, A. (1988). Offering a candidate answer : An information seeking strategy. Communications Monographs, 55 (4), 360–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raymond, G. (2003). Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding. American Sociological Review, 68 (6), 939–967. [URL]. DOI logo
Reber, E. (2012). Affectivity in interaction: Sound objects in English. John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H. (1987). On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organisation (pp. 54–69). Clevedon, UK : Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(1995). Lectures on conversation, Volumes I and II. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H. & Schegloff, E. A. (1979). Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (Issue January, pp. 15–21). New York: Irvington Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Analyzing discourse: Text and talk (pp. 71–93). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
(1986). The routine as achievement. Human Studies, 9 (2–3), 111–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1993). Reflections on Quantification in the Study of Conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26 (1), 99–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996). Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action. American Journal of Sociology, 102 (1), 161–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis I (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Word repeats as unit ends. Discourse Studies, 13 (3), 367–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selting, M. (2000). The construction of units in conversational talk. Language in Society, 29 (4), 477–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). Lists as embedded structures and the prosody of list construction as an interactional resource. Journal of Pragmatics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, J. & Stivers, T. (Eds.) (2013). The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorjonen, M. L. (2001). Responding in conversation: A study of response particles in Finnish (Vol. 701). John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sørensen, S. S. (2021). Affiliating in Second Position : Response Tokens with Rising Pitch in Danish. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 00 (00), 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T. (2008). Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41 (1), 31–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). An overview of the question-response system in American English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 42 (10), 2772–2781. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). How We Manage Social Relationships Through Answers to Questions: The Case of Interjections. Discourse Processes, 56 (3), 191–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T. & Rossano, F. (2010). Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43 (1), 3–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Szczepek Reed, B. (2020). Reconceptualizing mirroring: Sound imitation and rapport in naturally occurring interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 167 1, 131–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, S. A., Fox, B. A. & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2015). Grammar in everyday talk: Building responsive actions. In Grammar in Everyday Talk: Building Responsive Actions. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woidich, M. (2006). Das Kairenisch-Arabische: Eine Grammatik. Otto Harrassowitz Verlag.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Dingemanse, Mark
2024. Interjections at the Heart of Language. Annual Review of Linguistics 10:1  pp. 257 ff. DOI logo
Marmorstein, Michal
2023. Waḷḷāhi (‘by God’) as a marker of commitment and involvement in Egyptian Arabic conversation. Lingua 294  pp. 103582 ff. DOI logo
Marmorstein, Michal
2024. Request for confirmation sequences in Egyptian Arabic. Open Linguistics 10:1 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 september 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.