Article published in:
Interpreting
Vol. 21:2 (2019) ► pp. 220244
References

References

Agentschap Integratie & Inburgering
Allwood, J. & Cerrato, L.
(2003) A study of gestural feedback expressions. In P. Paggio, K. Jokinen & A. Jönsson (Eds.), Proceedings of the First Nordic Symposium on Multimodal Communication (CST Working Papers 6). Copenhagen: Center for Sprogteknologi, 7–22.Google Scholar
Argyle, M. & Cook, M.
(1976) Gaze and mutual gaze. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Auer, P.
(2018) Gaze, addressee selection and turn-taking in three-party interaction. In G. Brône & B. Oben (Eds.), Eye-tracking in interaction: Studies on the role of eye gaze in dialogue. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 197–232. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bänninger-Huber, E.
(1992) Prototypical affective microsequences in psychotherapeutic interaction. Psychotherapy Research 2 (4), 291–306. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baraldi, C. & Gavioli, L.
(2007) Dialogue interpreting as intercultural mediation: An analysis in healthcare multicultural settings. In M. Grein & E. Weigand (Eds.), Dialogue and culture. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 155–175. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Unterstanding coordination in interpreter-mediated interaction. In C. Baraldi & L. Gavioli (Eds.), Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, J., Coates, L. & Johnson, T.
(2002) Listener responses as a collaborative process: The role of gaze. Journal of Communication 52 (3), 566–580. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 240 ]
Bot, H.
(2003) The myth of the uninvolved interpreter in mental health and the development of a three-person psychology. In L. Brunette, G. Bastin, I. Hemlin & H. Clarke (Eds.), The critical link 3. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 27–35. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) Dialogue interpreting in mental health. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Brône, G. & Oben, B.
(2015) InSight interaction. A multimodal and multifocal dialogue corpus. Language Resources and Evaluation 49 (1), 195–214. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E.
(2012) Exploring affiliation in the reception of conversational complaint stories. In M.-E. Sorjonen & A. Peräkylä (Eds.), Emotion in interaction. London: Oxford University Press, 113–146. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davitti, E.
(2013) Dialogue interpreting as intercultural mediation: Interpreter’s use of upgrading moves in parent-teacher meetings. Interpreting 15 (2), 168–199. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drummond, K. & Hopper, R.
(1993) Backchannels revisited: Acknowledgment tokens and speakership incipiency. Research on Language and Social Interaction 26 (2), 157–177. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J.
(2008) Common ground as a resource for social affiliation. In I. Kecskes & J. L. Mey (Eds.), Intention, common ground and the egocentric speaker-hearer. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 223–254.Google Scholar
Englund Dimitrova, B.
(1997) Degree of interpreter responsibility in the interaction process in community interpreting. In S. E. Carr, R. Roberts, A. Dufour & D. Steyn (Eds.), The critical link: Interpreters in the community. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 147–164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, R.
(2001) When listeners talk: Respon se tokens and listener stance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gavioli, L.
(2012) Minimal responses in interpreter-mediated medical talk. In L. Baraldi & C. Gavioli (Eds.), Coordinating participation in dialogue interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 201–208. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gerhardt, J. & Beyerle, S.
(1997) What if Socrates had been a woman? The therapist’s use of acknowledgment tokens (mm-hm, yeah, sure, right) as a nonreflective means of intersubjective involvement. Contemporary Psychoanalysis 33 (3), 367–410. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, E.
(1981) Forms of talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C.
(1980) Restarts, pauses, and the achievement of a state of mutual gaze at turn-beginning. Sociological Inquiry 50, 272–302. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1981) Conversational organization. Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York/London: Academic.Google Scholar
(1986) Between and within: alternative treatments of continuers and assessments. Human Studies 9, 205–217. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heath, C.
(1992) Gesture’s discreet tasks: Multiple relevancies in visual conduct and in the contextualization of language. In P. Auer & A. di Luzio (Eds.), The contextualization of language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 101–128. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J.
(2011) Territories of knowledge, territories of experience: Empathic moments in interaction. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 159–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 241 ]
Jokinen, K.
(2010) Non-verbal signals for turn-taking & feedback. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Language Resources & Evaluation (LREC) International Universal Communication Symposium. Mediterranean Conference Centre, Valletta, Malta 17–23 May. Paris: European Language Resources Association.Google Scholar
Kendon, A.
(1967) Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction. Acta Psychologica 26, 22–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kita, S. & Ide, S.
(2007) Nodding, aizuchi, and final particles in Japanese conversation: How conversation reflects the ideology of communication and social relationships. Journal of Pragmatics 39 (7), 1242–1254. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krystallidou, D.
(2014) Gaze and body orientation as an apparatus for patient inclusion into exclusion from a patient-centred framework of communication. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 8 (3), 399–417. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lang, R.
(1978) Behavioral aspects of liaison interpreters in Papua New Guinea: Some preliminary observations. In D. Gerver & H. W. Sinaiko (Eds.), Language interpretation and communication. New York/London: Plenum Press, 231–244. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S.-H. & Tanaka, H.
(2016) Affiliation and alignment in responding actions. Journal of Pragmatics 100, 1–7. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, A. & Sorjonen, M. L.
(2013) Affiliation in conversation. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, 350–369.Google Scholar
Mandelbaum, J.
(2013) Storytelling in Conversation. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, 493–507.Google Scholar
Mason, I.
(2012) Gaze, positioning and identity in interpreter-mediated dialogues. In L. Baraldi & C. Gavioli (Eds.), Coordinating participation in dialogue interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 177–199. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Merlini, R. & Favaron, R.
(2005) Examining the “voice of interpreting” in speech pathology. Interpreting 7 (2), 263–302. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mondada, L.
(2007) Multimodal resources for turn-taking: pointing and the emergence of possible next speakers. Discourse Studies 9 (2), 195–226. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Muntigl, P., Knight, N. & Watkins, A.
(2012) Working to keep aligned in psychotherapy: using nods as a dialogic resource to display affiliation. Language and Dialogue 2 (1), 9–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Muntigl, P. & Horvath, A. O.
(2014) The therapeutic relationship in action: How therapists and clients co-manage relational disaffiliation. Psychotherapy Research 24 (3), 327–345. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Oben, B. & Brône, G.
(2015) What you see is what you do. On the relationship between gaze and gesture in multimodal alignment. Language and Cognition 7, 546–562. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pasquandrea, S.
(2011) Managing multiple actions through multimodality: Doctors’ involvement in interpreter-mediated interactions. Language in Society 40 (4), 455–481. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Co-constructing dyadic sequences in healthcare interpreting: A multimodal account. New Voices in Translation Studies 8, 132–157.Google Scholar
Peräkylä, A.
(2013) Conversation analysis in psychotherapy. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.) The handbook of conversation analysis. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, 251–274.Google Scholar
[ p. 242 ]
Peräkylä, A., Henttonen, P., Voutilainen, L., Kahri, M., Stevanovic, M., Sams, M., & Ravaja, N.
(2015) Sharing the emotional load: recipient affiliation calms down the storyteller. Social Psychology Quarterly 78 (4), 301–323. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peräkylä, A. & Ruusuvuori, J.
(2012) Facial expression and interactional regulation of emotion. In A. Peräkylä & M. L. Sorjonen (Eds.), Emotion in interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 64–91. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pfeiffer, U. J., Vogeley, K. & Schilbach, L.
(2013) From gaze cueing to dual eye-tracking: Novel approaches to investigate the neural correlates of gaze in social interaction. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 37, 2516–2528. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pöchhacker, F. & Shlesinger, M.
(Eds.) (2007) Healthcare interpreting: discourse and interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rossano, F.
(2012) Gaze behavior in face-to-face interaction. PhD Thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
(2013) Gaze conversation. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.) The handbook of conversation analysis. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, 308–329.Google Scholar
Ruusuvuori, J.
(2001) Looking means listening: coordinating displays of engagement in doctor-patient interaction. Social Science & Medicine 52, 1093–1108. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G.
(1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language 50, 696–735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E.A., Jefferson, G. & Sacks, H.
(1977) The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language 53, 361–382. CrossrefGoogle 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. Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics 1981. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 71–93.Google Scholar
Selting, M., Auer, P., Barth-Weingarten, D., Bergmann, J. R., Bergmann, P., Birkner, K. & Hartung, M.
(2009) Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT 2). Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 10, 353–402. http://​www​.gespraechsforschung​-ozs​.de​/heft2009​/px​-gat2​.pdf
Stivers, T.
(2008) Stance, alignment and affiliation during story telling: when nodding is a token of preliminary affiliation. Research on Language in Social Interaction 41, 29–55. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T. & Rossano, F.
(2010) Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43 (1), 3–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T., Mondada, L. & Steensig, J.
(2011) Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Suchman, A., Markakis, K., Beckman, H. B. & Frankel, R.
(1997) A model of empathic communication in the medical review. Journal of the American Medical Association 277 (8), 678–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vertegaal, R., Slagter, R., Van der Veer, G. & Nijholt, A.
(2001) Eye gaze patterns in conversations: There is more to conversational agents than meets the eyes. Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Seattle, WA, 31 March 31–5 April, 301–308. New York City, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.
[ p. 243 ]
Vranjes, J., Brône, G. & Feyaerts, K.
(2018) Dual feedback in interpreter-mediated interactions: on the role of gaze in the production of listener responses. Journal of Pragmatics 134, 15–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wadensjö, C.
(1998) Interpreting as interaction. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar
(2001) Interpreting in crisis: The interpreters’ position in therapeutic encounters. In Mason, I. (Ed.) (2001) Triadic exchanges. Studies in dialogue interpreting. Manchester: St. Jerome, 71–85.Google Scholar
Wittenburg, P., Brugman, H., Russel, A., Klassmann, A. & Sloetjes, H.
(2006) ELAN: A professional framework for multimodality research. In Proceedings of LREC 2006, Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Genoa 22–28 May. Paris: European Language Resources Association.Google Scholar
Yngve, V. H.
(1970) On getting a word in edgewise. In Papers from the Sixth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 567–577.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 8 other publications

Abdel Latif, Muhammad M. M.
2020.  In Translator and Interpreter Education Research [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ],  pp. 125 ff. Crossref logo
Gilbert, Andrew Simon, Samantha Croy, Kerry Hwang, Dina LoGiudice & Betty Haralambous
2021. Video remote interpreting for home-based cognitive assessments. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting Crossref logo
Gryesten, Jasmin Rejaye, Kathrine Jastrup Brodersen, Laura Glahder Lindberg, Jessica Carlsson & Stig Poulsen
2021. Interpreter-mediated psychotherapy – a qualitative analysis of the interprofessional collaboration between psychologists and interpreters. Current Psychology Crossref logo
Klammer, Martina & Franz Pöchhacker
2021. Video remote interpreting in clinical communication: A multimodal analysis. Patient Education and Counseling Crossref logo
Pöchhacker, Franz
2021.  In Handbook of Translation Studies [Handbook of Translation Studies, 5],  pp. 152 ff. Crossref logo
Salus, Sanae, Tomoya Kita, Yuki Aoyama & Eriko Sugimori
2021. Evaluating the Effect of Listeners' Response on Speakers' Later Recollection and Impression of the Story. Japanese Psychological Research 63:4  pp. 239 ff. Crossref logo
Vranjes, Jelena & Geert Brône
2020.  In Linking up with Video [Benjamins Translation Library, 149],  pp. 203 ff. Crossref logo
Vranjes, Jelena & Geert Brône
2021. Interpreters as laminated speakers: Gaze and gesture as interpersonal deixis in consecutive dialogue interpreting. Journal of Pragmatics 181  pp. 83 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 october 2021. 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.