Part of
Enabling Human Conduct: Studies of talk-in-interaction in honor of Emanuel A. Schegloff
Edited by Geoffrey Raymond, Gene H. Lerner and John Heritage
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 273] 2017
► pp. 125143
Bergmann, Jörg
1993 “Alarmiertes Verstehen. Kommunikation in Feuerwehrnotrufen [Alarming understandings. Communication in calls to the fire department].” In Wirklichkeit im Deutungsprozeß. Verstehen und Methoden in den Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften [Reality in Interpretive Processes. Understanding and Methods in the Cultural and Social Sciences], ed. by Thomas Jung and Stefan Müller-Doohm, 283–328. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven E., and John Heritage
2014 “Benefactors and Beneficiaries: Benefactive Status and Stance in the Management of Offers and Requests.” In Requesting in Social Interaction, ed. by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen and Paul Drew, 55–86. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold
1967Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice–Hall.Google Scholar
Heritage, John
1984Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
1988 “Explanations as Accounts: A Conversation Analytic Perspective.” In Understanding Everyday Explanation: A Casebook of Methods, ed. by Charles Antaki, 127–144. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond
2005"The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Assessment Sequences." Social Psychology Quarterly 68 (1): 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 “Navigating Epistemic Landscapes: Acquiescence, Agency and Resistance in Responses to Polar Questions.” In Questions. Formal, Functional, and Interactional Perspectives, ed. by Jan P. De Ruiter, 179–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Houtkoop Steenstra, Hanneke
1987Establishing Agreement: An Analysis of Proposal-Acceptance Sequences. Doctoral dissertation. Universiteit van Amsterdam. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
1983 “Notes on Some Orderlinesses of Overlap Onset.” In Discourse Analysis and Natural Rhetoric, ed. by Valentina D'Urso and Paola Leonardi, 11–38. Padua: Cleup Editore.Google Scholar
Labov, William, and David Fanshel
1977Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lindström, Anna
1994 “Identification and Recognition in Swedish Telephone Conversation Openings.” Language in Society 23: 231–252. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997Designing Social Actions: Grammar, Prosody, and Interaction in Swedish Conversation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, California.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita M.
1975Second Assessments: A Study of Some Features of Agreements/Disagreements. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California at Irvine, California.Google Scholar
1984 “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey
2000The Structure of Responding. Type-Conforming and Noncomforming Responses to YNIs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, California.Google Scholar
2003 “Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No Type Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding.” American Sociological Review 68: 939–967. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1987 [1973] “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organization, ed. by Graham Button and John Lee, 54–69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1972Sequencing in conversational openings. In Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication, ed. by J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes, 346–380. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
2007Sequence Organization in Interaction. A Primer in Conversation Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., and Harvey Sacks
1973 “Opening up Closings.” Semiotica 8: 289–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä
2012 “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose, and Decide.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45: 297–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa
2013 “Deontic Rights in Interaction: A Conversation Analytic Study on Authority and Cooperation.” Publications of the Department of Social Research 2013:10. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Social Research, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, Don H.
2004 “Closing Matters.” Paper presented at the 10th Annual CLIC-LISO Conference , May 13–15.
Cited by

Cited by 22 other publications

Arano, Yusuke
2020. Doing reflecting: Embodied solitary confirmation of instructed enactment. Discourse Studies 22:3  pp. 261 ff. DOI logo
Bolden, Galina B., John Heritage & Marja-Leena Sorjonen
2023. Chapter 1. Introduction. In Responding to Polar Questions across Languages and Contexts [Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 35],  pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Clayman, Steven E & Heidi Kevoe-Feldman
2023. Dispatching First Responders: Language Practices and the Dispatcher’s Operational Role in Radio Encounters With Police Officers. Discourse & Society 34:5  pp. 547 ff. DOI logo
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
2015. What does grammar tell us about action?. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA)  pp. 623 ff. DOI logo
Diepeveen, Aafke, Jan Svennevig & Paweł Urbanik
2022. Suspects’ opportunities to claim their legal rights in police investigative interviews. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 28:2 DOI logo
Harjunpää, Katariina & Ana Cristina Ostermann
2023. Chapter 3. Responding to polar questions in Brazilian Portuguese. In Responding to Polar Questions across Languages and Contexts [Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 35],  pp. 76 ff. DOI logo
Haugh, Michael
2017. Prompting offers of assistance in interaction. Pragmatics and Society 8:2  pp. 183 ff. DOI logo
Heinemann, Trine & Jakob Steensig
Humă, Bogdana & Elizabeth Stokoe
2020. The Anatomy of First-Time and Subsequent Business-to-Business “Cold” Calls. Research on Language and Social Interaction 53:2  pp. 271 ff. DOI logo
Humă, Bogdana, Elizabeth Stokoe & Rein Ove Sikveland
2020. Putting persuasion (back) in its interactional context. Qualitative Research in Psychology 17:3  pp. 357 ff. DOI logo
Keevallik, Leelo
2018. Chapter 11. Making up one’s mind in second position. In Between Turn and Sequence [Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 31],  pp. 315 ff. DOI logo
Löfgren, Agnes & Emily Hofstetter
2023. Introversive semiosis in action: depictions in opera rehearsals. Social Semiotics 33:3  pp. 601 ff. DOI logo
Pavlidou, Theodossia-Soula & Angeliki Alvanoudi
2023. Polar answers. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) DOI logo
Rauniomaa, Mirka & Trine Heinemann
2014. Organising the soundscape. In Interacting with Objects,  pp. 145 ff. DOI logo
Rauniomaa, Mirka, Esko Lehtonen & Heikki Summala
2018. Noticings with instructional implications in post‐licence driver training. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 28:2  pp. 326 ff. DOI logo
Rautiainen, Iira, Pentti Haddington & Antti Kamunen
2023. Nudging Questions as Devices for Prompting Courses of Action and Negotiating Deontic (A)symmetry in UN Military Observer Training. In Complexity of Interaction,  pp. 217 ff. DOI logo
Raymond, Geoffrey, Jie Chen & Kevin A. Whitehead
2023. Sequential Standoffs in Police Encounters With the Public. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 42:5-6  pp. 653 ff. DOI logo
Seuren, Lucas M.
2018. Assessing Answers: Action Ascription in Third Position. Research on Language and Social Interaction 51:1  pp. 33 ff. DOI logo
Seuren, Lucas M. & Mike Huiskes
2017. Confirmation or Elaboration: What Do Yes/No Declaratives Want?. Research on Language and Social Interaction 50:2  pp. 188 ff. DOI logo
Thompson, Sandra A., Barbara A. Fox & Chase Wesley Raymond
2021. The grammar of proposals for joint activities. Interactional Linguistics 1:1  pp. 123 ff. DOI logo
Vatanen, Anna & Pentti Haddington
2023. Multiactivity in adult-child interaction: accounts resolving conflicting courses of action in request sequences. Text & Talk 43:2  pp. 263 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 november 2023. 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.