Article published in:
Language and Dialogue
Vol. 7:3 (2017) ► pp. 301–335

Dialogue, dialogicality and interactivity

A conceptually bewildering field?

| University of Gothenburg (Sweden)
This paper discusses about twenty approaches to the study of dialogue or interaction. The literature shows different foci in and understandings of these phenomena. There is a basic distinction between dialogue – in the sense of overt exchanges of sequentialised utterances or contributions by two or more participants who are co-present in particular situated encounters – and dialogicality, which is taken to be a more general capacity that enables individuals or constellations of individuals to make sense in and through interactions with others, artefacts and environments. There are also “interactivity” approaches that appear to broaden the scope to encompass more of non-linguistic and often material aspects of human sense-making.
Keywords: dialogue, dialogicality, interactivity, sense-making, semiotic resource
Published online: 27 November 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.7.3.01lin
References

References

Anward, Jan
2015 Doing Language. Linköping: Department of Culture and Communication.Google Scholar
Arendt, Hannah
1971 [1978] The Life of the Mind. Book One: Thinking. San Diego: Harcourt, Inc.Google Scholar
Auer, Peter
2005 “Projection in interaction and projection in grammar.” Text 25: 7–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 “On-line syntax: Thoughts on the temporality of spoken language.” Language Sciences 31: 1–13. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bakhtin, Michail M.
1968 Rabelais and His World. Translated by H. Iswolsky. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
1981 The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Transl. by Carol Emerson and Michael Holquist, edited by Michael Holquist. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail M.
1986 Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. A selection of essays from the Russian original “Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva” [1979] Translated by V. McGee, edited by Carol Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Barad, Karen
2007 Meeting the Universe Halfway – Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham: Duke University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 329 ]
Barwise, John and Jon Perry
1983 Situations and Attitudes. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bertau, Marie-Cécile, Gonçalves Miguel, and Peter Raggatt
(Eds.) 2012 Dialogic Formations: Investigations into the Origins and Development of the Dialogical Self. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
Billig, Michael
1987 Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brandist, Craig and Galin Tihanov
(eds.) 2000 Materializing Bakhtin: The Bakhtin Circle and Social Theory. Basingstoke: Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brannigan, Holly, Martin Pickering, Janet McLean, and Alexandra Cleland
2007 “Syntactic alignment and participant role in dialogue.” Cognition 104: 163–197. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Broth, Mathias, Jakob Cromdal, and Lena Levin
2017 “Starting out as a driver: Progression in instructed pedal work.” In Memory Practices and Learning: Interactional, Institutional and Sociocultural Perspectives, ed. by Mäkitalo, Åsa, Linell, Per and Säljö, Roger, 113–143. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
Buber, Martin
1954 Die Schriften über das Dialogische Prinzip: Ich und Du [1923], Zwiesprache [1932], Die Frage an den Einzelnen, Elemente des Zwischenmenschlichen [1954] Heidelberg: Schneider.Google Scholar
Carbaugh, Donal
2013 “On Dialogue Studies.” Journal of Dialogue Studies 1: 9–28.Google Scholar
Cicourel, Aaron
1968 The Social Organization of Juvenile Evidence. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
1981 “Notes on the integration of micro- and macro-levels of analysis.” In Advances in Social Theory and Methodology: Towards an Integration of Micro- and Macro-sociologies, ed. by Knorr-Cetina, Karin and Cicourel, Aaron, 51–80. London: Routledge and Kegan.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert
1996 Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Robin
2005 Type Theory with Records. University of Gothenburg. Ms.Google Scholar
Cowley, Stephen
(ed.) 2011 Distributed Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cowley, Stephen, João Major, Sune V. Steffensen, and Alfredo Dinis
(Eds.) 2010 Signifying Bodies: Biosemiosis, Interaction and Health. Braga: The Faculty of Philosophy of Braga.Google Scholar
De Boer, Bart
2011 “Self-organization and language evolution.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language Evolution (e-book), ed. by Talleman, Maggie and Gibson, Kathleen. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dewey, John and Arthur Bentley
1949 Knowing and the Known. Boston.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul and John Heritage
(Eds.) 1992 Talk at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Du Bois, Jack
2014 “Towards a Dialogic Syntax.” Cognitive Linguistics 25: 359–410. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Emerson, Carol
1997 The First Hundred Years of Mikhail Bakhtin. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Engeström, Yrjö
2008 From Teams to Knots: Activity-theoretical Studies of Collaboration and Learning at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 330 ]
Foolen, Ad, Ulrike Lüdtke, Timothy Racine, and Jordan Zlatev
(eds.) 2012 Moving Ourselves, Moving Others: Motion and Emotion in Intersubjectivity, Consciousness and Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
François, Frédéric
1994 Morale et mise en mots. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Gallagher, Shaun
2011 “Interpretations of embodied cognition.” In The Implications of Embodiment: Cognition and Communication, ed. by Tschacher, T. and Bergomi, C., 59–71. Exeter: Imprint Academic.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold
1967 Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
2002 Ethnomethodology’s Program: Working out Durkheim’s Aphorism. Edited and introduced by A. W. Rawls. Lanham, MA: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Gibson, James
1979 The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
Gillespie, Alex and Flora Cornish
2009 “Intersubjectivity: Towards a Dialogical Analysis.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 40: 19–46. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan
2009 The Interactive Stance: Meaning for Conversation. London: King’s College.Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan and Massimo Poesio
2016 “Grammar is a system that characterizes talk in interaction.” Frontiers in Psychology 7: 1–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
2011 “Contextures of Action.” In Embodied Interaction: Language and Body in the Material World, ed. by Streeck, Jürgen, Goodwin, Charles and LeBaron, Curtis, 182–193. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2017 Co-Operative Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Grice 1975. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grossen, Michèle
2010 “Interaction analysis and psychology. A dialogical perspective!” Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science 44: 1–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grice, Paul
1975 “Logic and conversation.” In Syntax and Semantics, 3: Speech Acts, ed. by Cole, Peter and Morgan, Jerry, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Günthner, Susanne, Wolfgang Imo, and Jörg Bücker
(Eds.) 2014 Grammar and Dialogism: Sequential, Syntactic and Prosodic Patterns between Emergence and Sedimentation. Berlin: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen
1981 Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Hakulinen, Auli and Margret Selting
(eds.) 2005 Syntax and Lexis in Conversation: Studies on the Use of Linguistic Resources in Talk-in-interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Roy
1997 “From an integrationist point of view.” In Linguistics Inside Out: Roy Harris and His Critics, ed. by Wolf, George and Nigel Love, 229–310. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heath, Christian
2013 The Dynamics of Auction: Social Interaction and the Sale of Fine Art and Antiques. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heritage, John
1984 Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Heritage, John and Steven Clayman
2010 Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities and Institutions. New York: Wiley Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John and Douglas Maynard
(eds.) 2006 Communication in Medical Care: Interaction between Primare Care Physicians and Patients. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hermans, Hubert and Harry Kempen
1993 The Dialogical Self. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
[ p. 331 ]
Hermans, Hubert and Agnieszka Hermans-Konopka
2010 Dialogical Self Theory: Positioning and Counter-positioning in a Globalizing Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hintikka, Jaakko and Jack Kalus
1985 Anaphora and Definite Descriptions: Two Applications of Game-Theoretical Semantics. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hodges, Bert, Sune V. Steffensen, and Jim Martin
2012 “Caring, conversing, and realizing values: new directions in language studies.” Language Sciences 34: 499–506. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hoffmeyer, Jesper
2010 “A biosemiotic approach to health.” In Signifying Bodies: Biosemiosis, Interaction and Health, ed. by Cowley, Stephen, Major, João, Steffensen, Sune V. and Dinis, Alfredo, 21–41. Braga: The Faculty of Philosophy of Braga.Google Scholar
Holquist, Michael
1986 “Introduction.” In Bakhtin, Mikhail M. (1986) Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. A selection of essays from the Russian original “Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva” [1979] Translated by V. McGee, edited by C. Emerson and M. Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
1990 Dialogism: Bakhtin and His World. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hundsnurscher, Franz
1980 “Konversationsanalyse versus Dialoggrammatik.” In Akten des VI. Internationalen Germanisten-Kongress Basel 1980, ed. by Rupp, Heinz and Roloff, Hans-Gert, 89–95. Bern: Lang.Google Scholar
Hutchins, Edwin
2013 “The cultural ecosystem of human cognition.” Philosophical Psychology, 1–16.Google Scholar
Jovchelovitch, Sandra
2007 Knowledge in Context: Representations, Community and Culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo
2010 “Bodily quoting in dance correction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43: 1–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kempson, Ruth, Wilfried Meyer-Viol, and Dov Gabbay
2001 Dynamic Syntax: The Flow of Language Understanding. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin
2017 “Using Conversation Analysis in the Lab.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 50: 1–11. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lave, Jean and Etienne Wenger
1991 Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leontiev, Aleksei N.
1981 “The problem of activity in psychology.” In The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology ed. by Wertsch, James, 37–71. Armonk, NY: Sharpe.Google Scholar
Levinas, Emmanuel
1969 Totality and Infinity. Translated by A. Lingis. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.Google Scholar
Ligorio, Beatrice and Margarida César
(Eds.) 2013 Interplays between Dialogical Learning and Dialogical Self. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Björn, Peter MacNeilage, and Michael Studdert-Kennedy
1984 “Self-organizing processes and the explanation of phonological universals.” In Explanation for Language Universals, ed. by Butterworth, Brian, Comrie, Bernard and Dahl, Östen, 181–203. Berlin: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lindwall, Oskar and Anna Ekström
2011 “Instruction‐in‐Interaction: The Teaching and Learning of a Manual Skill.” Human Studies 35: 27–49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Linell, Per
1998 Approaching Dialogue: Talk, Interaction and Contexts in Dialogical Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 332 ]
2009 Rethinking Language, Mind and World Dialogically: Interactional and Contextual Theories of Human Sense-making. Charlotte NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
2013 “The dynamics of incrementation in utterance-building: processes and resources.” In Units of Talk – Units of Actions, ed. by Szczepek Reed, Beatrice and Raymond, Geoffrey, 57–89. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015 “Dialogism and the Distributed Language Approach: A rejoinder to Steffensen.” Language Sciences 50: 120–126. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017 “Self-other interdependences in dialogue.” In Self and Other in Dialogue, ed. by Gille, Johan and Norén, Coco, 7–29. Pieterlen, Switzerland: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Linell, Per, Lennart Gustavsson, and Päivi Juvonen
1988 “Interactional dominance in dyadic communication: A presentation of initiative-response analysis.” Linguistics, 26: 415–442. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Linell, Per and Ivana Marková
2014 Dialogical Approaches to Trust in Communication. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
Luckmann, Thomas
2012 “Alles Soziale besteht aus verschiedenen Niveaus der Objektivierung.” Ein Gespräch mit Thomas Luckmann. In Sozialität in Slow Mootion: Theoretische und empirische Perspektiven, ed. by Ayass, Ruth and Meyer, Christian, 21–39. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
Luff, Paul, Jon Hindmarsh, and Christian Heath
(eds.) 2000 Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing System Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mäkitalo, Åsa and Roger Säljö
2002 Talk in institutional context and institutional context in talk: Categories as situated practices. Text 22: 57–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Marková, Ivana
2003 Dialogicality and Social Representations: The Dynamics of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2006 “On «the inner alter» in dialogue.” International Journal for Dialogical Science, 1: 125–147.Google Scholar
2014 “Complementarity as epistemology of life.” In Culture Psychology and Its Future: Complementarity in a New Key, ed. by Wagoner, Brady, Chaudhary, Nandita and Hviid, Pernille, 33–50. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
2016 The Dialogical Mind: Common Sense and Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Marková, Ivana and Klaus Foppa
(eds.) 1990 The Dynamics of Dialogue. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
(eds.) 1991 Asymmetries of Dialogue. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Marková, Ivana and Alex Gillespie
(eds.) 2008 Trust and Distrust: Sociocultural perspectives. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
(eds.) 2012 Trust and Conflict: Representation, culture and dialogue. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Marková, Ivana, Carl F. Graumann, and Klaus Foppa
(eds.) 1995 Mutualities in Dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marková, Ivana, Per Linell, Michèle Grossen, and Anne Salazar Orvig
2007 Dialogue in Focus Groups: Exploring socially shared knowledge. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Martin, Cathrin
2004  From other to self. Learning as Interactional Change. Uppsala University.Google Scholar
[ p. 333 ]
Märtsin, Mariann, Brady Wagoner, Emma-Louise Aveling, Irini Kadianaki, and Lisa Whittaker
(eds.) 2012 Dialogicality in Focus: Challenges to Theory, Method and Application. New York: Nova Science.Google Scholar
Maturana, Humberto and Francisco Varela
1980 Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Matusov, Eugene
2001 Journey into Dialogic Pedagogy. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Publishers.Google Scholar
Mercer, Neil
1995 The Guided Construction of Knowledge: Talk amongst Teachers and Learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice
1964 “The philosopher and his shadow.” In Signs, ed. by Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, 159–81. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, Christian, Jürgen Streeck, and Scott Jordan
(eds.) 2017 Intercorporeality: Emerging Socialities in Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza
2013 “Interactional space and the study of embodied talk-in-interaction.” In Space in Language and Linguistics: Geographical, Interactional, and Cognitive Perspectives. (linguae and litterae, 24), ed. by Auer, Peter, Hilpert, Martin, Stukenbrock, Anja and Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, 247–275. Berlin: de Gruyter. Crossref Rommetveit 1974Google Scholar
Morson, Gary and Carol Emerson
1990 Mikhail Bakhtin. Creation of a Prosaics. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Moscovici, Serge
2000 Social Representations: Explorations in Social Psychology, ed. by Gerald Duveen. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
2008 Psychoanalysis: Its Image and its Public. Translated by David Macey. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Noë, Alva
2004 Action in Perception. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ochs, Elinor, Emanuel Schegloff, and Sandra Thompson
1996 Interaction and Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, Sarah Bro
2015 The Cognitive Ecology of Human Errors in Emergency Medicine: An Interactivity-Based Approach. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of Southern Denmark.Google Scholar
Pickering, Martin and Simon Garrod
2004 “Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27: 169–226. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 “How tightly are production and comprehension interwoven?” Frontiers in Psychology 4: Article 238 (April 2013). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Poesio, Massimo and Hannes Rieser
2010 “Competions, coordination, and alignment in dialogue.” Dialogue and Discourse 1: 1–89. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Potter, Jonathan
1996 Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. London: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Prior, Paul
1998 Writing/disciplinarity: A Sociohistoric Account of Literate Activity in the Academy. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Prior, Paul and Jody Shipka
2003 “Chronotopic lamination: Tracing the contours of literateactivity.” In Writing Selves/ Writing Societies: Research from Activity Perspectives, ed. by Bazerman, Charles and Russell, David, 180–238. Fort Collins, CO: The WAC Clearinghouse.Google Scholar
Rommetveit, Ragnar
1974 On Message Structure. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Roth, Wolff-Michael and Alfredo Jornet
2014 “Toward a Theory of Experience.” Science Education 98: 106–126. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 334 ]
Roulet, Eddy, Antoine Auchlin, Jacques Moeschler, M. Schelling, and Christian Rubattel
1985 L’articulation du discours en français contemporain. Berne: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1992 Lectures on Conversation. Vols. I-II. Edited by Gail Jefferson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation.” Language 50: 696–735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salazar Orvig, Anne
1999 Les mouvements du discourse. Paris: l’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Sarangi, Srikant and Celia Roberts
(Eds.) 1999 Talk, Work and Institutional Order: Discourse in Medical, Mediation and Management Settings. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1992 “Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided for place for the defence of intersubjectivity in conversation.” American Journal of Sociology 95: 1295–1345. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996 “Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by Ochs, Elinor, Schegloff, Emanuel A. and Thompson, Sandra, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 Sequence Organization in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Searle, John
1969 Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Steffensen, Sune Vork
2013 “Human interactivity: Problem-solving, solution-probing and verbal patterns in the wild.” In Cognition Beyond the Brain: Computation, Interactivity and Human Artifice, ed. by Cowley, Stephen and Vallée-Tourangeau, Frédéric, 195–221. Dordrect: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen, Charles Goodwin, and Curtis LeBaron
(Eds.) 2011 Embodied Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Szczepek Reed, Beatrice and Raymond Geoffrey
(eds.) 2013 Units of Talk – Units of Actions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tallis, Raymond
2011 Aping Mankind: Neuromania, Darwinitis and the Misrepresentation of Humanity. (Acumen) New printing (2014): London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Theunissen, Michael
1964 Der Andere: Studien zur Sozialontologie der Gegenwart. (New edition, Berlin: de Gruyter 1965).Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A., Barbara Fox, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
2015 Grammar in Everyday Talk: Building Responsive Actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trevarthen, Colwyn
1979 “Communication and cooperation in early infancy: a description of primary intersubjectivity.” In Before Speech: The Beginning of Interpersonal Communication, ed. by Bullowa, Margaret, 321–347. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Valsiner, Jaan
2014 An Invitation to Cultural Psychology. Los Angeles, etc: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vice, Susan
1997 Introducing Bakhtin. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, Lev
1987 Thinking and Speech. Edited and translated by N. Minick. Russian original [1934] New York and London: Plenum.Google Scholar
[ p. 335 ]
Wegerif, Rupert
2007 Dialogic, Education and Technology: Expanding the Space of Learning. New York and Berlin: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weigand, Edda
2009 Language as Dialogue: From Rules to Principles of Probability. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 Dialogue: The Mixed Game. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016 “How to verify a theory of dialogue.” Language and Dialogue 6: 349–369. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017 “IADA history: The unity of dialogue and its multiple faces.” Language and Dialogue 7: 63–79. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018 “Ethics in Dialogue: Ideals and reality.” In Dialogic Ethics, ed. by Arnett, Ronald and Cooren, François. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Wertsch, James
1985 Culture, Communication, and Cognition: Vygotskian perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1998 Mind as Action. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wieder, Lawrence
1974 Language and Social Reality: The Case of Telling the Convict Code. The Hague: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zlatev, Jordan
2013 “The mimesis hierarchy of semiotic development: Five stages of intersubjectivity in children.” Public Journal of Semiotices 4: 47–70.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Cowley, Stephen J. & Anneliese Kuhle
2020. The rise of languaging. Biosystems 198 ► pp. 104264 ff. Crossref logo
Foolen, Ad
2019. Quo vadis pragmatics? From adaptation to participatory sense-making. Journal of Pragmatics 145 ► pp. 39 ff. Crossref logo
Linell, Per
2018. Dialogism is an integrationism. Language and Dialogue 8:2 ► pp. 306 ff. Crossref logo
Mustajoki, Arto, Tatiana Sherstinova & Ulla Tuomarla
2018.  In From Pragmatics to Dialogue [Dialogue Studies, 31], ► pp. 189 ff. Crossref logo
Soukup, Barbara
2020. Survey area selection in Variationist Linguistic Landscape Study (VaLLS). Linguistic Landscape. An international journal 6:1 ► pp. 52 ff. Crossref logo
Trasmundi, Sarah Bro & Per Linell
2017. Insights and their emergence in everyday practices. Pragmatics & Cognition 24:1 ► pp. 62 ff. Crossref logo
Weigand, Edda
2018. The theory myth. Language and Dialogue 8:2 ► pp. 289 ff. Crossref logo

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