Requests in American and British English

A contrastive multi-method analysis

| University of Oldenburg
Hardbound – Available
ISBN 9789027256706 | EUR 95.00 | USD 143.00
 
e-Book –
ISBN 9789027266767 | EUR 95.00 | USD 143.00
 
This volume encompasses a thorough examination of the use of request strategies on two contrastive dimensions. On the cross-cultural dimension, it compares the use of British and American English request strategies in naturally occurring informal conversations. The conversational data are retrieved from the International Corpus of English (ICE) and the Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English. On the methodological dimension, it systematically compares request strategies and their frequency distributions in the conversational data to questionnaire-based requests. Highlighting various instrument-induced effects, the volume challenges the validity of one of the most widely used and accepted data collection tools in pragmatics research, the DCT.

The extensive data analysis contained in the volume includes a wide range of linguistic variables including mitigating and aggravating modification strategies and their interaction with head act directness levels. While it focuses on the first-pair part, the book also offers an analysis of request responses from a cross-cultural perspective.

The findings of the study contribute new insights to research on requests, politeness, variational pragmatics, and general research methodology.

[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 265]  2016.  xvi, 264 pp.
Publishing status: Available
© John Benjamins
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.265
Table of Contents
Abbreviations
ix–x
List of Tables
xi–xiv
List of Figures
xv–xvi
Chapter 1. Introduction
1–6
Chapter 2. Theoretical framework
7–82
Chapter 3. Methodology: Database, data collection, and data analysis
83–116
Chapter 4. Results I: Requests in AmE and BrE informal conversations
117–172
Chapter 5. Results II: Requests in non-elicited conversations and DCTs
173–226
Chapter 6. Conclusion
227–238
References
239–252
Appendix
253–260
Index
261–264
“For those who are interested in language function this is a very compact, direct and well-reasoned monograph that provides extremely useful insights into the variation that exists in the realisation of requests across British and American English. Though the differences revealed are small, the endeavour itself is very useful and to be commended.”
“ Requests in American and British English is a fascinating study on requests from cross-cultural and methodological perspectives. It gives a wider, more general perspective on requests, and it is a model of advocating naturally occurring data in pragmatic studies. Considering its far-reaching implications for different research studies, the volume is highly recommended to scholars of pragmatics and those interested in language politeness, variational pragmatics and research methodologies.”
“Flöck’s book is a thought-provoking, well-structured and systematic work, highly recommendable to all researchers interested in requests, cross-cultural pragmatics and data gathering instruments. Her study will surely contribute to a deeper understanding of these three aspects by offering new insights to all of them.”
References

References

Achiba, Machiko
2003 Learning to Request in a Second Language. A Study of Child Interlanguage Pragmatics. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Adolphs, Svenja
2008 Corpus and Context: Investigating Pragmatic Functions in Spoken Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aijmer, Karin
1996 Conversational Routines in English: Convention and Creativity. London: Longman.Google Scholar
2002 English Discourse Particles: Evidence from a Corpus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Alcón Soler, Eva, Alicia Martínez Flor, and María Pilar Safont Jordà
2005 “Towards a Typology of Modifiers for the Speech Act of Requesting: A Socio-Pragmatic Approach.” RAEL: Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada 4: 1–35.Google Scholar
Apte, Mahadev L.
2001 “Taboo Words.” In Concise Encyclopedia of Sociolinguistics, edited by Rajend Methrie, 508–21. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Austin, John L.
1975 How to Do Things with Words. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bach, Kent, and Robert M. Harnish
1979 Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts. Cambridge, MA etc.: MIT Pres.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen
1999 “Exploring the Interlanguage of Interlanguage Pragmatics: A Research Agenda for Acquisitional Pragmatics.” Language Learning 49 (4): 677–713. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen, and Beverly Hartford
1993 “Learning the Rules of Academic Talk: A Longitudinal Study of Pragmatic Development.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13 (3): 279–304. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barron, Anne
2003 Acquisition in Interlanguage Pragmatics: Learning How to Do Things with Words in a Study Abroad Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 “The Structure of Requests in Irish English and English English.” In Variational Pragmatics: A Focus on Regional Varieties of Pluricentric Languages, edited by Klaus P. Schneider and Anne Barron, 35–67. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barron, Anne, and Emily Black
2015 “Constructing Small Talk in Learner-Native Speaker Voice-Based Telecollaboration: A Focus on Topic Management and Backchanneling.” System , Special Issue on Pragmatics, 48: 112–28.Google Scholar
Barron, Anne, and Klaus P. Schneider
2014 “Discourse Pragmatics: Signposting a Vast Field.” In Pragmatics of Discourse, edited by Klaus P. Schneider and Anne Barron, 1–33. Handbook of Pragmatics 3. Berlin/ Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beebe, Leslie M., and Martha Clark Cummings
1996 “Natural Speech Act Data versus Written Questionnaire Data: How Data Collection Method Affects Speech Act Performance.” In Speech Acts Across Cultures: Challenges to Communication in a Second Language, edited by Susan M. Gass and Joyce Neu, 65–86. Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Belz, Julie A.
2003 “Linguistic Perspectives on the Development of Intercultural Competence in Telecollaboration.” Language Learning & Technology 7 (2): 68–117.Google Scholar
Biesenbach-Lucas, Sigrun
2007 “Students Writing Emails to Faculty: An Examination of E-Politeness among Native and Non-Native Speakers of English.” Language Learning and Technology 11: 59–81.Google Scholar
Billmyer, Kristine, and Manka Varghese
2000 “Investigating Instrument-Based Pragmatic Variability. Effects of Enhancing Discourse Completion Tests.” Applied Linguistics 21 (4): 517–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blitvic, Pilar, and Maria Sifianou
2013 Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict. Benjamins.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
1982 “Learning to Say What You Mean in a Second Language.” Applied Linguistics 3 (1): 29–59. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1987 “Indirectness and Politeness in Requests: Same or Different?” Journal of Pragmatics 11 (2): 131–46. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1989 “Playing It Safe: The Role of Conventionality in Indirectness.” In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, edited by Shoshana Blum-Kulka, Juliane House, and Gabriele Kasper, 37–70. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, and Juliane House
1989 “Cross-Cultural and Situational Variation in Requesting Behaviour.” In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, edited by Shoshana Blum-Kulka, Juliane House, and Gabriele Kasper, 123–54. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, Juliane House, and Gabriele Kasper
1989a Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
1989b “Investigating Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: An Introductory Overview.” In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, edited by Shoshana Blum-Kulka, Juliane House, and Gabriele Kasper, 1–34. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
1989c “The CCSARP Coding Manual.” In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, edited by Shoshana Blum-Kulka, Juliane House, and Gabriele Kasper, 273–94. Norwood, NJ, USA: Ablex.Google Scholar
Bodman, Jean, and Miriam Eisenstein
1988 “‘May God Increase Your Bounty’. The Expression of Gratitude in English by Native and Non-Native Speakers.” Cross Currents 15: 1–21.Google Scholar
Bousfield, Derek
2008 Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bousfield, Derek, and Miriam A. Locher
2008 Impoliteness in Language : Studies on Its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Boxer, Diana
1996 “Ethnographic Interviewing as a Research Tool in Speech Act Analysis. The Case of Complaints.” In Speech Acts across Cultures: Challenges to Communication in a Second Language, edited by Susan M. Gass and Joyce Neu, 217–39. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Breuer, Anja, and Ronald Geluykens
2007 “Variation in British and American English Requests. A Contrastive Analysis.” In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics and Interlanguage Pragmatics, edited by Bettina Kraft and Ronald Geluykens, 107–26. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
1978 “Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena.” In Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, edited by E.N. Goody, 56–324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1987 Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bruzzi, Stella
2001 “Observational (’Fly-on-the-Wall’) Documentary.” In The Television Genre Book, edited by Glen Creeber, Toby Miller, and John Tulloch, 129–31. London: British Film Institute.Google Scholar
Carter, Ronald, and Michael McCarthy
2006 Cambridge Grammar of English: A Comprehensive Guide; Spoken and Written English Grammar and Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace, John W. Du Bois, and Sandra A. Thompson
1991 “Towards a New Corpus of Spoken American English.” In English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik, edited by Karin Aijmer, Jan Svartvik, and Bengt Altenberg, 64–82. London/ New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Chen, Rong
1993 “Responding to Compliments: A Contrastive Study of Politeness Strategies between American English and Chinese Speakers.” Journal of Pragmatics 20 (1): 49–75. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H.
1979 “Responding to Indirect Speech Acts.” Cognitive Psychology 11: 430–77. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996 Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., and Dale H. Schunk
1980 “Polite Responses to Polite Requests.” Cognition 8: 11–143. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., and Adrian Bangerter
2004 “Changing Ideas about Reference.” In Experimental Pragmatics, edited by Ira A. Noveck and Dan Sperber, 25–49. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Andrew D., and Elite Olshtain
1993 “The Production of Speech Acts by EFL Learners.” TESOL Quarterly 27 (1): pp. 33–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Craig, Robert T., Karen Tracy, and Frances Spisak
1986 “The Discourse of Requests: Assessment of a Politeness Approach.” Human Communication Research 12 (4): 437–78. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Craven, Alexandra, and Jonathan Potter
2010 “Directives: Entitlement and Contingency in Action.” Discourse Studies 12 (4): 419–42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Croft, William
1994 “Speech Act Classification, Language Typology and Cognition.” In Foundations of Speech Act Theory: Philosophical and Linguistic Perspectives, edited by Savas Tsohatzidis, 460–77. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Crowdy, Steve
1993 “Spoken Corpus Design.” Literary & Linguistic Computing 8 (4): 259–65. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan
1996 “Towards an Anatomy of Impoliteness.” Journal of Pragmatics 25 (3): 349–67. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, Derek Bousfield, and A. Wichmann
2003 “Impoliteness Revisited: With Special Reference to Dynamic and Prosodic Aspects.” Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1545–79. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Curl, Traci S., and Paul Drew
2008 “Contingency and Action: A Comparison of Two Forms of Requesting.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 41 (2): 129–53. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul
2005 “Conversation Analysis.” In Handbook of Language and Social Interaction, edited by Kristine L. Fitch and Robert E. Sanders, 71–102. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, and Traci S. Curl
2008 “Conversation Analysis: Overview and New Directions.” In Advances in Discourse Studies, edited by Vijay Bhatia, John Flowerdew, and Rodney H. Jones, 22–35. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Duranti, Alessandro
1997 Linguistic Anthropology. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Duthler, Kirk W.
2006 “The Politeness of Requests Made via Email and Voicemail: Support for the Hyperpersonal Model.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11: 500–521. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, Penelope, and Sally McConnell-Ginet
1992 “Think Practically and Look Locally: Language and Gender as Community-Based Practice.” Annual Review of Anthropology 21: 461–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1998 “Communities of Practice: Where Language, Gender and Power All Live.” In Language and Gender: A Reader, edited by Jennifer Coates, 484–94. Malden, MA/ Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Economidou-Kogetsidis, Maria
2010 “Cross-Cultural and Situational Variation in Requesting Behaviour: Perceptions of Social Situations and Strategic Usage of Request Patterns.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (8): 2262–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 “ ‘Please Answer Me as Soon as Possible’: Pragmatic Failure in Non-Native Speakers’ E-Mail Requests to Faculty.” Journal of Pragmatics 43: 3193–3215. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 “Strategies, Modification and Perspective in Native Speakers’ Requests: A Comparison of WDCT and Naturally Occurring Requests.” Journal of Pragmatics 53: 21–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Edmondson, Willis, and Juliane House
1981 Let’s Talk and Talk about It: A Pedagogic International Grammar of English. München: Urban & Schwarzenberg.Google Scholar
Eelen, Gino
2001 A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester/Northampton: St. Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, Miriam, and Jean Bodman
1993 “Expressing Gratitude in American English.” In Interlanguage Pragmatics, edited by Gabriele Kasper and Shoshana Blum-Kulka, 64–81. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, Rod
2003 Task-Based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. Anders, and Herbert A. Simon
1984 Protocol Analysis. Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge, Mass. etc.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1987 “Verbal Reports on Thinking.” In Introspection in Second Language Research, edited by Claus Faerch and Gasper Kasper, 24–53. Clevedon/Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, Susan
1976 “Is Sybil There? The Structure of Some American English Directives.” Language in Society 5 (1): 25–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Faerch, Claus, and Gabriele Kasper
1989 “Internal and External Modification in Interlanguage Request Realization.” In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, edited by Shoshana Blum-Kulka, Juliane House, and Gabriele Kasper, 221–47. New Jersey: Ablex.Google Scholar
Farr, Fiona, and Anne O’Keeffe
2002 “ ‘Would’ as a Hedging Device in an Irish Context: An Intra-Varietal Comparison of Institutionalised Spoken Interaction.” In Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation, edited by Randy Reppen, Susan Fitzmaurice, and Douglas Biber, 25–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Félix-Brasdefer, J. César
2003 “Validity in Data Collection Methods in Pragmatics Research.” In Theory, Practice, and Acquisition. Papers from the 6th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium and the 5th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese, edited by Paula Kempchinsky and Carlos E. Pineros, 239–57. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
2007 “Natural Speech vs. Elicited Data: A Comparison of Natural and Role Play Requests in Mexican Spanish.” Spanish in Context 4 (2): 15–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Field, Andy
2009 Discovering Statistics Using SPSS (and Sex and Drugs and Rock “N” Roll). 3rd ed. Los Angeles etc.: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Fisher, R.A.
1925 Statistical Methods, Experimental Design, and Scientific Inference. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
1956 Statistical Methods and Scientific Inference. New York: Hafner.Google Scholar
Fox, Barbara
2015 “On the Notion of Pre-Request.” Discourse Studies 17 (1): 41–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Francik, Ellen P., and Herbert H. Clark
1985 “How to Make Requests That Overcome Obstacles to Compliance.” Journal of Memory and Language 24: 560–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Bruce
1974 An Analysis of Vernacular Performative Verbs. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
1990 “Perspectives on Politeness.” Journal of Pragmatics 14 (2): 219–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fukushima, Saeko
2000 Requests and Culture. Politeness in British English and Japanese. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Geis, Michael L.
1995 Speech Acts and Conversational Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Geluykens, Ronald
2007 “On Methodology in Cross-Cultural Pragmatics.” In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics and Interlanguage Pragmatics, edited by Bettina Kraft and Ronald Geluykens, 21–72. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
2008 “Requesting in Native and Non-Native Business Letters.” In Institutional Discourse in Cross-Cultural Contexts, edited by Ronald Geluykens and Bettina Kraft, 169–92. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
2011 Politeness in Institutional Discourse: Face-Threatening Acts in Native and Nonnative English Business Letters. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1967 Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
1983 “The Interaction Order.” American Sociological Review 48: 1–17. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Golato, Andrea
2003 “Studying Compliment Responses: A Comparison of DCTs and Recordings of Naturally Occurring Talk.” Applied Linguistics 24 (1): 90–121. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldschmidt, Myra M.
1998 “Do Me a Favor: A Descriptive Analysis of Favor Asking Sequences in American English.” Journal of Pragmatics 29 (2): 129–53. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, David, and George Lakoff
1971 “Conversational Postulates.” In Papers from the Seventh Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, edited by D. Adams, M.A. Campbell, V. Cohen, J. Lovins, E. Maxwell, C. Nygren, and J. Reighard, 63–84. University of Chicago: Chicago.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney
1991 “The Development of the International Corpus of English.” In English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik, edited by Karin Aijmer, Jan Svartvik, and Bengt Altenberg 1991:83–91. London/ New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Grice, Herbert Paul
1975 “Logic and Conversation.” In Speech Acts, edited by Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, 41–58. Vol. 3 Syntax and Semantics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gu, Yueguo
1990 “Politeness in Modern Chinese.” Journal of Pragmatics 14: 237–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, Heidi E.
1994 Conversations with an Alzheimer’s Patient: An Interactional Sociolinguistic Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hancher, Michael
1979 “The Classification of Cooperative Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society 8 (1): 1–14. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hartford, Beverly S., and Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig
1992 “Experimental and Observational Data in the Study of Interlanguage Pragmatics.” In Pragmatics and Language Learning, edited by Lawrence F. Bouton and Yamuna Kachru, 3: 33–52. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Division of English as an International Language.Google Scholar
Heil, John
1999 “Ordinary Language Philosophy.” In The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, edited by Robert Audi, 2nd ed., 635. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heinemann, Trine
2006 “‘Will You or Can’t You?’: Displaying Entitlement in Interrogative Requests.” Journal of Pragmatics, Special Issue: Processes and Products of Negation, 38 (7): 1081–1104. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
2008 “Conversation Analysis as Social Theory.” In The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory, edited by Bryan S. Turner, 300–320. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Herring, Susan C.
2001 “Computer-Mediated Discourse.” In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, edited by Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen, and Heidi Hamilton, 612–24. Malden, M.A.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hindelang, Götz
1978 Auffordern: Die Untertypen Des Aufforderns Und Ihre Sprachlichen Realisierungsformen. Göppingen: Kümmerle.Google Scholar
Hinkel, Eli
1997 “Appropriateness of Advice: DCT and Multiple Choice Data.” Applied Linguistics 18 (1): 1–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Holtgraves, Thomas
1986 “Language Structure in Social Interaction: Perceptions of Direct and Indirect Speech Acts and Interactants Who Use Them.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (2): 305–14. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 “Automatic Intention Recognition in Conversation Processing.” Journal of Memory and Language 58 (3): 627–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Holtgraves, Thomas, and Yang
1990 “Politeness as Universals: Cross-Cultural Perceptions of Request Strategies and Inferences Based on Their Use.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59 (4): 719–29. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
House, Juliane
1989 “Politeness in English and German: The Functions of ‘Please’ and ‘Bitte.’” In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, edited by Shoshana Blum-Kulka, Juliane House, and Gabriele Kasper, 96–119. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
House, Juliane, and Gabriele Kasper
1981 “Politeness Markers in English and German.” In Conversational Routine: Explorations in Standardized Communication Situations and Prepatterned Speech, edited by Florian Coulmas, 157–85. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Ho, Victor
2010 “Constructing Identities through Request E-Mail Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 42: 2253–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 “What Functions Do Intertextuality and Interdiscursivity Serve in Request E-Mail Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 43: 2534–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hutchby, Ian, and Robin Wooffitt
2006 Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Ide, Sachiko, Beverly Hill, Yukiko Carnes, Tsunoa Ogino, and Akiko Kawasaki
1992 “The Concept of Politeness: An Empirical Study of American English and Japanese.” In Politeness in Language: Studies in Its History, Theory and Practice, edited by Richard J. Watts, Sachiko Ide, and Konrad Ehlich, 281–97. Berlin, etc.: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Jääskeläinen, Riitta
2000 “Focus on Methodology in Think-Aloud Studies on Translating.” In Tapping and Mapping the Process of Translation and Interpreting. Outlooks on Empirical Research, edited by Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit and Riitta Jääskeläinen, 71–82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jautz, Sabine
2008 “Gratitude in British and New Zealand Radio Programmes. Nothing but Gushing?” In Variational Pragmatics: A Focus on Regional Varieties of Pluricentric Languages, edited by Klaus P. Schneider and Anne Barron, 141–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
1984 “Transcription Notation.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, edited by John Atkinson and John Heritage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, Bill, Gabriele Kasper, and Steven Ross
1998 “Effect of Rejoinders in Production Questionnaires.” Applied Linguistics 19 (2): 157–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Kimberly
1992 “A Question of Context: Directive Use at a Morris Team Meeting.” Language in Society 21 (03): 427. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H.
2009 “Speech Act Research between Armchair, Field and Laboratory: The Case of Compliments.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (8): 1611–35. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H., Gerold Schneider, Irma Taavitsainen, and Barb Breustedt
2008 “Fishing for Compliments: Precision and Recall in Corpus-Linguistic Compliment Research.” In Speech Acts in the History of English, edited by Andreas H. Jucker and Irma Taavitsainen, 273–94. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H., and Irma Taavitsainen
2000 “Diachronic Speech Act Analysis: Insults from Flyting to Flaming.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1 (1): 67–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 Historical Pragmatics. Vol. 8. Handbooks of Pragmatics. Berlin etc.: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kallen, Jeffrey L., and John M. Kirk
2012 SPICE-Ireland: A User’s Guide. Clo Ollscoil na Banriona.Google Scholar
Kasper, Gabriele
2000 “Data Collection in Pragmatics Research.” In Culturally Speaking: Managing Rapport Through Talk Across Cultures, edited by Helen Spencer-Oatey, 316–41. London/ New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Kasper, Gabriele, and Merete Dahl
1991 “Research Methods in Interlanguage Pragmatics.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13: 215–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kaufmann, Anita
2002 “The Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English Part 1.” Journal of Pragmatics 34 (9): 1309–16. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Graeme
1998 An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. London/ New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Kienpointner, Manfred
1997 “Varieties of Rudeness: Types and Functions of Impolite Utterances.” Functions of Language 4 (2): 251–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kohnen, Thomas
2008 “Tracing Directives through Text and Time: Towards a Methodology of a Corpus-Based Diachronic Speech-Act Analysis.” In Speech Acts in the History of English, edited by Andreas Jucker and Irma Taavitsainen, 295–310. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koike, Dale A.
1994 “Negation in Spanish and English Suggestions and Requests: Mitigating Effects?” Journal of Pragmatics 21 (5): 513–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krings, Hans Peter
1987 “The Use of Introspective Data in Translation.” In Introspection in Second Language Research, edited by Claus Faerch and Gabriele Kasper, 159–526. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Kuroshima, Satomi
2010 “Another Look at the Service Encounter: Progressivity, Intersubjectivity, and Trust in a Japanese Sushi Restaurant.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (3): 856–69. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William
1972 Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania University Press.Google Scholar
1984 “Field Notes of the Project on Linguistic Change and Variation.” In Language in Use. Readings in Sociolinguistics, edited by John Baugh and Joel Sherzer, 28–53. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Labov, William, and David Fanshel
1977 Therapeutic Discourse. New York, etc.: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Labov, William, Sharon Ash, and Charles Boberg
2006 The Atlas of North American English. Phonetics, Phonology and Sound Change - A Multimedia Reference Tool. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lachenicht, L.G.
1980 “Aggravating Language: A Study of Abusive and Insulting Language.” Papers in Linguistics 13 (3-4): 607–88. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, Robin
1973 “The Logic of Politeness: Or Minding Your P’s and Q’s.” In Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, edited by Claudia Corum, T. Cedric Smith-Stark, and Ann Weiser, 292–305. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1975 “Linguistic Theory and the Real World.” Language Learning 25 (2): 309–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Laurier, Eric, Hayden Lorimer, and Barry Brown
2007 “Habitable Cars: The Organisation of Collective Private Transport: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-000-23-0758. Swindon: ESRC.” http://​www​.esrc​.ac​.uk​/my​-esrc​/grants​/RES​-000​-23​-0758​/outputs​/Read​/bc4ceb3c​-cdf1​-4f1b​-82e2​-0598dc76f7d7.
Leech, Geoffrey N.
1983 Principles of Pragmatics. London ; New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Lehrer, Adrienne
1989 “Remembering and Representing Prose. Quoted Speech as Data Source.” Discourse Processes 12: 105–25 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lesser, Ruth, and Lesley Milroy
1993 Linguistics and Aphasia: Psycholinguistic and Pragmatic Aspects of Intervention. London/ New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C.
1983 Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lindström, Anna
2005 “Language as Social Action: A Study of How Senior Citizens Request Assistance with Practical Tasks in the Swedish Home Help Service.” In Syntax and Lexis in Conversation Analysis, edited by Auli Hakulinen and Margret Selting, 209–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lin, Yuh-Huey
2009 “Query Preparatory Modals: Cross-Linguistic and Cross-Situational Variations in Request Modification.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (8): 1636–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam A.
2013 “Politeness.” In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, edited by Carol A. Chapelle, 4457–63. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam A., and Richard J. Watts
2005 “Politeness Theory and Relational Work.” Journal of Politeness Research 1: 9–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 “Relational Work and Impoliteness: Negotiating Norms of Linguistic Behaviour.” In Impoliteness in Language. Studies on Its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, edited by Derek Bousfield and Miriam Locher, 77–99. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lyons, J.
1977 Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Manes, Joan, and Nessa Wolfson
1981 “The Compliment Formula.” In Conversational Routine, edited by Florian Coulmas, 115–32. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Mao, LuMing Robert
1994 “Beyond Politeness Theory: ‘Face’ Revisited and Renewed.” Journal of Pragmatics 6: 70–73.Google Scholar
Márquez Reiter, Rosina
2000 Linguistic Politeness in Britain and Uruguay: A Contrastive Study of Requests and Apologies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, Yoshiko
1988 “Reexamination of the Universality of Face: Politeness Phenomena in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 12: 403–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, Michael
2003 “Talking Back: ‘Small’ Interactional Response Tokens in Everyday Conversation.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 36 (1): 33–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Merrison, Andrew J., Jack J. Wilson, Bethan L. Davies, and Michael Haugh
2012 “Getting Stuff Done: Comparing E-Mail Requests Form Students in Higher Education in Britain and Australia.” Journal of Pragmatics 44: 1077–98. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Gerald, Sean Wallis, and Bas Aarts
2002 Exploring Natural Language: Working with the British Component of the International Corpus of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Noveck, Ira A., and Dan Sperber
2004 Experimental Pragmatics. San Diego: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ogiermann, Eva
2009 “Politeness and in-Directness across Cultures: A Comparison of English, German, Polish and Russian Requests.” Journal of Politeness Research 5: 189–216. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
O’Keeffe, Anne, and Svenja Adolphs
2008 “Response Tokens in British and Irish Discourse: Corpus, Context and Variational Pragmatics.” In Variational Pragmatics: A Focus on Regional Varieties of Pluricentric Languages, edited by Klaus P. Schneider and Anne Barron, 69–98. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pfingsthorn, Joanna, and Ilka Flöck
2014 “Investigating and Teaching Pragmatics : A Corpus-Based Approach.” In Englisch Lehren, Lernen, Erforschen, edited by Wolfgang Gehring and Matthias Merkl, 155–73. Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita
1978 “Compliment Responses: Notes on the Co-Operation of Multiple Constraints.” In Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction, edited by Jim Schenkein, 79–112. New York: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1984 “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In Structures of Social Interaction. Studies in Conversation Analysis, edited by John Atkinson and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pufahl Bax, Ingrid
1986 “How to Assign Work in an Office: A Comparison of Spoken and Written Directives in American English.” Journal of Pragmatics 10 (6): 673–92. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rauniomaa, Mirka, and Tiina Keisanen
2012 “Two Multimodal Formats for Responding to Requests.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (6–7): 829–42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rintell, Ellen M., and Candace J. Mitchell
1989 “Studying Requests and Apologies. An Inquiry into Method.” In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, edited by Shoshana Blum-Kulka, Juliane House, and Gabriele Kasper, 248–72. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor
1975 “Cognitive Representations of Semantic Categories.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 104 (3): 192–233. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Kenneth R.
1992 “Speech Acts and Questionnaires. The Effect of Hearer Response.” Journal of Pragmatics 17 (1): 49–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1994 “On the Validity of DCTs in Non-Western Contexts.” Applied Linguistics 15: 1–14. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996 “Film in Interlanguage Pragmatics Research.” Paper Presented at the Approaches to Interlanguage Pragmatics Research Colloquium: Second Language Research Forum. Tucson; Arizona.
2000 “An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study of Interlanguage Pragmatic Development.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22 (1): 27–67. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Kenneth R., and Reiko Ono
1995 “Eliciting Speech Act Data in Japanese: The Effect of Questionnaire Type.” Language Learning 45 (2): 191–223. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emmanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 50: 696–735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sadock, Jerrold
2004 “Speech Acts.” In The Handbook of Pragmatics, edited by Lawrence Horn and Gregory Ward, 53–73. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sadock, Jerrold M.
1974 Toward a Linguistic Theory of Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1994 “Toward a Grammatically Realistic Typology of Speech Acts.” In Foundations of Speech Act Theory, edited by Tsohatzidis, Savas L. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Safont, Maria P.
2003 “Instructional Effects on the Reques Acts Modification Devices by EFL Learners.” In Pragmatic Competence and Foreign Language Teaching, edited by Alicia Martinez-Flor, Ana Fernandez Guerra, and Esther Uso Juan, 211–32. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I.Google Scholar
Salazar Campillo, Patricia
2003 “Pragmatic Instruction in the EFL Context.” In Pragmatic Competence and Foreign Language Teaching, edited by Alicia Martinez-Flor, Ana Fernandez Guerra, and Esther Uso Juan, 233–46. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I.Google Scholar
Sasaki, Miyuki
1998 “Investigating EFL Students’ Production of Speech Acts: A Comparison of Production Questionnaires and Role Plays.” Journal of Pragmatics 30 (4): 457–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sbisà, Marina
2002 “Cognition and Narrativity in Speech Act Sequences.” In Rethinking Sequentiality, edited by Meierkord, Christine and Fetzer, Anita. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 “Speech Act Theory.” In Handbook of Pragmatics: 2006 Installment, edited by Östmann, Jan-Ola and Jef Verschueren, 1–19. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 “Locution, Illocution, Perlocution.” In Pragmatics of Speech Actions, edited by Marina Sbisà and Ken Turner, 25–75. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scharf, Fred, and Seamus Mac Mathúna
1998 ‘Cultural Values and Irish Economic Performance’. In The Cultural Context in Business Communication, edited by Susanne Niemeier, Charles P. Campbell, and René Dirven, 145–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schauer, Gila A.
2007 “Finding the Right Words in the Study Abroad Context: The Development of German Learners’ Use of External Modifiers in English.” Intercultural Pragmatics 4 (2): 193–220. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schauer, Gila A., and Svenja Adolphs
2006 “Expressions of Gratitude in Corpus and DCT Data: Vocabulary, Formulaic Sequences, and Pedagogy.” System 34: 119–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1972 “Sequencing in Conversational Openings.” In Directions in Sociolinguistics. The Ethnography of Communication, edited by John Gumperz and Dell Hymes, 346–80. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
1979 “The Relevance of Repair for Syntax-for-Conversation.” In Discourse and Syntax, edited by Talmy Givón, 261–88. Vol. 12 Syntax and Semantics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1988 “Presequences and Indirection: Applying Speech Act Theory to Ordinary Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 12: 55–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1992 “On Talk and Its Institutional Occasions.” In On Talk and Its Institutional Occasions, edited by Paul Drew and John Heritage, 101–34. Talk at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1996 “Issues of Relevance for Discourse Analysis: Contingency in Action, Interaction and Co-Participant Context.” In Issues of Relevance for Discourse Analysis: Contingency in Action, Interaction and Co-Participant Context, edited by Eduard H. Hovy and Donia R. Scott, 3–35. Computational and Conversational Discourse. Burning Issues - An Interdisciplinary Account. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
1998 “Reflections on Studying Prosody in Talk-in-Interaction.” Language and Speech 41: 235–63.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., and Harvey Sacks
1973 “Opening up Closings.” Semiotica 8 (4): 289–327. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schlieben-Lange, Brigitte, and Harald Weydt
1978 “Für Eine Pragmatisierung Der Dialektologie.” Zeitschrift Für Germanistische Linguistik 6 (3): 257–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Klaus P., and Anne Barron
2008 “Where Pragmatics and Dialectology Meet: Introducing Variational Pragmatics.” In Variational Pragmatics: A Focus on Regional Varieties of Pluricentric Languages, edited by Klaus P. Schneider and Anne Barron, 1–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014 The Pragmatics of Discourse. Handbooks of Pragmatics 3. Berlin/ Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R.
1969 Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1975 “Indirect Speech Acts.” In Speech Acts, edited by Peter Cole and Jerry J. Morgan, 59–82. Vol. 3 Syntax and Semantics. New York: Academic Press Inc.Google Scholar
1976 “A Classification of Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society 5 (1): 1–23. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1979 Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sifianou
1992 Politeness Phenomena in England and Greece: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, John McHardy, and Malcolm Coulthard
1975 Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Philip M.
1985 Language, the Sexes and Society. New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, and Federico Rossano
2010 “Mobilizing Response.” Language and Social Interaction 43 (1): 3–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Takahashi, Satomi
2001 “The Role of Input Enhancement in Developing Pragmatic Competence.” In Pragmatics in Language Teaching, edited by Kenneth R. Rose and Gabriele Kasper, 171–99. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trosborg, Anna
1994 Interlanguage Pragmatics: Requests, Complaints, and Apologies. Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter
2000 Sociolinguistics. An Introduction to Language and Society. 4th ed. London etc.: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Turnbull, William
2001 “An Appraisal of Pragmatics Elicitation Techniques for the Social Psychological Study of Talk: The Case of Request Refusals.” Pragmatics 11 (1): 31–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Turnbull, William, and Karen L. Saxton
1997 “Modal Expressions as Facework in Refusals to Comply with Requests: I Think I Should Say ‘no’ Right Now.” Journal of Pragmatics 27 (2): 145–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Turner, Ken
1996 “The Principal Principles of Pragmatic Inference: Politeness.” Language Teaching 29 (1): 1. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ungerer, Friedrich, and Hans-Jörg Schmid
1996 An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Upadhyay, Shiv R.
2003 “Nepali Request Acts: Linguistic Indirectness and Politeness Reconsidered.” Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1651–77. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vendler, Zeno
1972 Res Cogitans. Ithaca/ London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Verschueren, Jef
1987 “Metapragmatics and Universals of Linguistic Action.” In Linguistic Action. Some Empirical-Conceptual Studies, edited by Jef Verschueren, 125–47. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Vine, Bernadette
2009 “Directives at Work: Exploring the Contextual Complexity of Workplace Requests.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (7): 1395–1405. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walker, Traci
2013 “Requests.” In Pragmatics of Speech Actions, edited by Marina Sbisà and Ken Turner, 445–66. Handbooks of Pragmatics, Vol. 2. Berlin/ Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Watts, Richard J.
2003 Politeness. Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Watts, Richard J., Sachiko Ide, and Konrad Ehlich
1992 Politeness in Language: Studies in Its History, Theory and Practice. Berlin, etc.: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
West, Candace
1990 “Not Just `Doctors’ Orders’: Directive-Response Sequences in Patients’ Visits to Women and Men Physicians.” Discourse & Society 1 (1): 85–112. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna
1985 “Different Cultures, Different Languages, Different Speech Acts: Polish vs. English.” Journal of Pragmatics 9: 145–78. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wolfram, Walt
2004 “Social Varieties of American English.” In Language in the USA: Themes for the Twenty-First Century, edited by Edward Finegan and John R. Rickford, 58–75. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wolfram, Walt, and Natalie Schilling-Estes
2006 American English: Dialects and Variation. 2nd ed. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Woodfield, Helen, and Maria Economidou-Kogetsidis
2010 “ ‘I Just Need More Time’: A Study of Native and Non-Native Students’ Requests to Faculty for an Extension.” Multilingua 29: 77–118. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wootton, Anthony J.
1981 “The Management of Grantings and Rejections by Parents in Request Sequences.” Semiotica 37 (1-2). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997 Interaction and the Development of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wray, Alison, and Aileen Bloomer
2006 Projects in Linguistics. A Practical Guide to Researching Language. London: Hodder.Google Scholar
Wunderlich, Dieter
1976 Studien Zur Sprechakttheorie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Yuan, Yi
2001 “An Inquiry into Empirical Pragmatics Data-Gathering Methods: Written DCTs, Oral DCTs, Field Notes, and Natural Conversations.” Journal of Pragmatics 33 (2): 271–92. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zaefferer, Dietmar
2001 “Deconstructing a Classical Classification: A Typological Look at Searle’s Concept of Illocution Type.” Revue Internationale de Philosophie 55: 209–25.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 8 other publications

No author info given
2017. Publications Received. Language in Society 46:1 ► pp. 123 ff. Crossref logo
No author info given
2018.  In Compliments and Positive Assessments [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 289], Crossref logo
Baker, Olja
2021. Parliamentary directives in New Zealand and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Languages in Contrast 21:1 ► pp. 28 ff. Crossref logo
Berry, Sam
2019. Non-institutional learning technologies, risks and responsibilities: a critical discourse analysis of university artefacts. Research in Learning Technology 27:0 Crossref logo
Flöck, Ilka & Ronald Geluykens
2018. Preference Organization and Cross-Cultural Variation in Request Responses: A Corpus-Based Comparison of British and American English. Corpus Pragmatics 2:1 ► pp. 57 ff. Crossref logo
Freytag, Vera
2020.  In Politeness in Professional Contexts [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 311], ► pp. 199 ff. Crossref logo
Norrby, Catrin, Jan Lindström, Jenny Nilsson & Camilla Wide
2020.  In Handbook of Pragmatics [Handbook of Pragmatics, ], ► pp. 201 ff. Crossref logo
ÇETİNAVCI, Uğur Recep
2020. Naturally occurring requests in Turkish: A case from an academic context. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics ► pp. 285 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 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.

Subjects

Linguistics

Discourse studies
Germanic linguistics
English linguistics
Sociolinguistics and Dialectology
Pragmatics
BIC Subject: CFG – Semantics, Pragmatics, Discourse Analysis
BISAC Subject: LAN009030 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / Pragmatics
U.S. Library of Congress Control Number:  2016021085 | Marc record