Article published in:
Scientific Approaches to Literature in Learning Environments
Edited by Michael Burke, Olivia Fialho and Sonia Zyngier
[Linguistic Approaches to Literature 24] 2016
► pp. 5780
References

References

Bell, A.
(2011) Re-constructing Babel: Discourse analysis, hermeneutics and the interpretive arc. Discourse Studies, 13(5), 519-568. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coates, J.
(1989) Gossip revisited: An analysis of all female discourse. In J. Coates & D. Cameron (Eds.), Women in their speech communities (pp. 94-122). London: Longman.Google Scholar
(1996) Women talk: Conversation between women friends. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
(2006) Talk in a play frame: More on laughter and intimacy. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(1), pp. 28-49.Google Scholar
Eckert, P.
(1989) Jocks and burnouts: Social categories and identity in the High School. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
(2000) Linguistic variation as social practice. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Edelsky, C.
(1981) Who’s got the floor? Language in Society, 10(3), 383-421. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. & Goodwin, M.H.
(1992) Assessments and the construction of context. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 146-189). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hazen, K.
(2002) The family. In J.K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, & N. Schilling-Estes (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (pp. 500-525). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Heritage, J.
(2002) Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: a method of modifying agreement/disagreement. In C.A. Ford, B.A. Fox, & S.A. Thompson (Eds.), The language of turn and sequence (pp. 196-224). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heritage, J. & Greatbatch, D.
(1991) On the institutional character of institutional talk: The case of news interviews. In D. Boden & D.H. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis (pp. 93-137). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, J. & Meyerhoff, M.
(1999) The community of practice: Theories and methodologies in language and gender research. Language in Society 28: 173-83. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, J., & Stubbe, M.
(2003) Power and politeness in the workplace. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R.
(2008) Conversation analysis (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G.
(1986) Notes on ‘latency’ in overlap onset. Human Studies, 9, 153-183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kingsolver, B.
(2012) Flight behavior. London: Faber.Google Scholar
Lave, J., & Wenger, E.
(1991) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, G.H.
(1993) Collectivities in action: Establishing the relevance of conjoined participation in conversation. Text, 13(2), 213-245.Google Scholar
Lerner, G.
(2002) Turn-sharing: The choral co-production of talk-in-interaction. In C.A. Ford, B.A. Fox, & S.A. Thompson (Eds.), The language of turn and sequence (pp. 225-256). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Long, E.
(2003) Book clubs. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Moore, E.
(2006) “You tell all the stories”: Using narrative to explore hierarchy within a community of practice. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10(5), 611-640. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mullany, L.
(2007) Gendered discourse in the professional workplace. Houndmills: Palgrave. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peace, D.
(2013) Red or dead. London: Faber.Google Scholar
Peplow, D.
(2011) “Oh, I’ve know a lot of Irish people”: Reading groups and the negotiation of literary interpretation. Language and Literature, 20(4), 295-315. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014) “I've never enjoyed hating a book so much in all my life”: The co-construction of identity in the reading group. In S. Chapman & B. Clark (Eds.), Pragmatics and literary stylistics (pp. 152-171). Houndmills: Palgrave. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016) Talk about books: A study of reading groups. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Peplow, D., & Carter, R.
(2014) Stylistics and real readers. In M. Burke (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of stylistics (pp. 440-454). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Peplow, D., Swann, J, Trimarco, P. & Whiteley, S.
(2016) Reading group discourse: Cognitive stylistics and sociocultural approaches. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, A.
(1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57-101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pratt, N. & Back, J.
(2009) Spaces to discuss mathematics: Communities of practice on an online discussion board. Research in Mathematics Education, 11(2), 115-130. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Psathas, G.
(1995) Conversation analysis: The study of talk-in-interaction. London: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ricoeur, P.
(1974) The conflict of interpretations: Essays in hermeneutics, D. Ihde (Ed.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
(1981) Paul Ricoeur: Hermeneutics and the human sciences – Essays on language, action and interpretation, J.B. Thompson (Ed. and Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, H.
(1984) Notes on methodology. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 21-27). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1992) Lectures on conversation. 2 Vols. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A., & Jefferson, G.
(1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Linguistics Society of America, 50(4), 696-735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Swann, J., & Allington, D.
(2009) Reading groups and the language of literary texts: A case study in social reading. Language and Literature, 18(3), 247-264. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
ten Have, P.
(1999) Doing conversation analysis: A practical guide. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Wenger, E.
(1998) Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Whiteley, S.
(2011) Text world theory, real readers and emotional responses to “The Remains of the Day”. Language and Literature, 20(1), 23-42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Peplow, David & Sara Whiteley
2021.  In Style and Reader Response [Linguistic Approaches to Literature, 36],  pp. 23 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 september 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.