Chapter published in:
Cross-theoretical Explorations of Interlocutors and their Individual Differences
Edited by Laura Gurzynski-Weiss
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 53] 2020
► pp. 8097
References

References

Agar, M.
(1994) Language shock. Understanding the culture of conversation. New York, NY: Quill.Google Scholar
Arievitch, I. M.
(2017) Beyond the brain. An agentive activity perspective on mind, development, and learning. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
Back, M.
this volume). Interlocutor differences and the role of social others in a Spanish peer tutoring context. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss Ed. Cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual differences pp. 99 123 Amsterdam, Netherlands John Benjamins
Bakhurst, D.
(1991) Consciousness and revolution in Soviet philosophy. From the Bolsheviks to Evald Ilyenkov. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Choi, S., & Lantolf, J. P.
(2008) Representation and embodiment of meaning in L2 communication: Motion events in the speech and gesture of advanced L2 Korean and L2 English speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 191–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(1966) Cartesian linguistics. A chapter in the history of rationalist thought. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Courtin, C.
(2000) The impact of sign language on the cognitive development of Deaf children. The case of theories of mind. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5, 266–276. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Danziger, K.
(1997) Naming the mind. How psychology found its language. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
Feuerbach, L.
(1854/1957) The Essence of Christianity / Translated from the German by George Eliot (Marian Evans). New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
(1966) Principles of the philosophy of the future. Translated, with an introduction, by Manfred H. Vogel. Indianapolis IN: The Bobbs-Merrill Company.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K.
this volume). Variationist perspective(s) on interlocutor individual differences. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss Ed. Cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual differences pp. 127 157 Amsterdam, Netherlands John Benjamins
Gibson, J. J.
(1979) The ecological approach to visual perception (revised ed.). New York, NY: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
Harris, R.
(2003) Critique of orthodox linguistics. In H. G. Davis & T. J. Taylor (Eds.), Rethinking linguistics (pp. 16–26). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Harvey, D.
(2010) A companion to Marx’s Capital. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Hoffman, E.
(1989) Lost in translation. A life in a new language. New York, NY, Dutton.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E.
(2014) Sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperative in L2 education: Vygotskian praxis and the research/practice divide. New York, NY: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D.
this volume). Complexity Theory: Relational systems in interaction and in interlocutor differences in second language development. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss Ed. Cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual differences pp. 189 208 Amsterdam John Benjamins
Mayer, M.
(1969) Frog, where are you? New York, NY: Dial Books.Google Scholar
McNeill, D.
(1992) Hand and mind. What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2005) Gesture and thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016) Why we gesture. The surprising role of hand movements in communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meristo, M., Falkman, K. W., Hjelmquiest, E., Tedoldi, M., Surian, L., & Siegal, M.
(2007) Language access and theory of mind reason: Evidence from deaf children in bilingual and oralist environments. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1156–1169. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pawlak, M.
this volume). In L. Gurzynski-Weiss Ed. Cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual differences pp. 51 75 Amsterdam, Netherlands John Benjamins
Peter, K.
(2017) “What is absolutely impossible for one person, is possible for two” – A historical-methodological study concerning Feuerbachian elements in the later works of L. S. Vygotsky. История российской психологии в лицах: Дайджест [The History of Russian Psychology in Individuals: Digest], 3, 179–211.Google Scholar
Philp, J., & Gurzynski-Weiss, L.
this volume). On the role of the interlocutor in second language development: A cognitive-interactionist approach. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss Ed. Cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual differences pp. 19 50 Amsterdam, Netherlands John Benjamins
Serafini, E. J.
this volume). The impact of learner perceptions of interlocutor individual differences on learner possible selves during a short-term experience abroad. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss Ed. Cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual differences pp. 209 243 Amsterdam, Netherlands John Benjamins
Slobin, D. I.
(1996) From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking.” In J. Gumperz & S. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70–96). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2006) What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition. In M. Hickmann & S. Robert (Eds.), Space in language: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories (pp. 59–81). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stam, G.
(2015) Changes in thinking for speaking: A longitudinal case study. Modern Language Journal, 99, 83–99. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stam, G., Lantolf, J. P., Smotrova, T., & Buescher, K.
(2017) Thinking for speaking CAN be explicitly taught in a second language. Presentation at the Annual Conference of the American Association for Applied Linguistics. Portland, OR. March 19.
Talmy, L.
(2000) Towards a cognitive semantics. Volume II: Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tomasuolo, E., Valeri, G., Di Renzo, A., Pasqualetti, P., & Volterra, V.
(2013) Deaf children attending different school environments: Sign language abilities and theory of mind. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 18, 12–29. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vocate, D.
(1994) Self-talk and inner speech: Understanding the uniquely human aspects of intrapersonal communication. In D. Vocate (Ed.), Intrapersonal communication. Different voices, different minds (pp. 3–32). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Voloshinov, V. N.
(1973) Marxism and the philosophy of language. New York, NY: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S.
(1978) Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
(1987) The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Volume 1: Problems of general psychology, including the volume Thinking and speech. New York, NY: Plenum.Google Scholar
(1990) The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Volume 2: The fundamentals of defectology. New York, NY: Plenum.Google Scholar
(1994) The problem of the environment. In R. van der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 338–354). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
(1997) The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Volume 4: The history of the development of higher mental function. New York, NY: Plenum.Google Scholar
Wertsch, J. M.
(1991) Voices of the mind. A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Zavershneva, E.
(2016) Vygtosky the unpublished: An overview of the personal archive (1912–1934). In A. Yasnitsky & R. van der Veer (Eds.), Revisionist revolution in Vygotsky studies (pp. 94–126). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar