Cover not available
Part of
The Construction of Discourse as Verbal Interaction
Edited by María de los Ángeles Gómez González and J. Lachlan Mackenzie
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 296] 2018
► pp. 1–10

Introduction

How is discourse constructed and evaluation achieved in verbal interaction?

| University of Santiago de Compostela
| VU Amsterdam
Article outline
  • References
Published online: 20 September 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.296.01gom
References (46)
References
Andersen, Gisle. 2001. Pragmatic Markers and Sociolinguistic Variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asher, Nicholas, and Alex Lascarides. 2003. Logics of Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Beavers, John, Beth Levin, and Shiao Wei Tham. 2010. “The Typology of Motion Expressions Revisited.” Journal of Linguistics 46: 331–377.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bednarek, Monika. 2008. Emotion Talk across Corpora. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, and Edward Finegan. 1989. “Styles of Stance in English: Lexical and Grammatical Marking of Evidentiality and Affect.” Text & Talk 9(1): 93–124.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Boucher, Jerry, and Charles E. Osgood. 1969. “The Pollyanna Hypothesis.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour 8: 1–8.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brunner, Marie-Louise. 2015. Negotiating Conversation Starts in the Corpus of Academic Spoken English. Unpublished MA thesis. Universität des Saarlandes.Google Scholar
CASE. 2018. The CASE Project. Birkenfeld: Trier University of Applied Sciences. [[URL]] (14 March 2018).Google Scholar
Cheng, Winnie, and Martin Warren. 2001. “The Use of Vague Language in Intercultural Conversations in Hong Kong.” English World-Wide 22(1): 81–104.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Columbus, Georgie. 2009. “A Corpus-Based Analysis of Invariant Tags in Five Varieties of English.” In Corpus Linguistics: Refinements and Reassessments, ed. by Antoinette Renouf, and Andrew Kehoe, 401–414. Amsterdam & New York NY: Rodopi.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 2001. “Constructing Reason-for-the-Call Turns in Everyday Telephone Conversation.” InLiSt: Interaction and Linguistic Structures 25.Google Scholar
Cuenca, Maria Josep. 2013. “The Fuzzy Boundaries between Discourse Marking and Modal Marking.” In Discourse Markers and Modal Markers: Categorization and Description, ed. by Liesbeth Degand, Bert Cornillie, and Paola Pietrandrea, 191–216. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Cunningham, Hamish, Diana Maynard, and Kalina Bontcheva. 2002. “GATE: A Framework and Graphical Development Environment for Robust NLP Tools and Applications.” Proceedings of the 40th Anniversary Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL’02). Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 1989. Language and Power. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner. 2002. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 1996. “Pragmatic Markers.” Pragmatics 6 (2): 167–190.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geluykens, Ronald. 1993. “Topic Introduction in English Conversation.” Transactions of the Philological Society 91 (2): 181–214.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1993. English Grammar: A Function-Based Introduction. 2 vols. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Gómez González, María de los Ángeles. 2012. “The Question of Tag Questions in English and Spanish.” In Encoding the Past, Decoding the Future: Corpora in the 21st Century, ed. by Isabel Moskowich, and Begoña Crespo, 59–97. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
. 2014. “Canonical Tag Questions in English, Spanish and Portuguese: A Discourse-Functional Study.” Languages in Contrast 14 (1): 93–126.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “Canonical Tag Questions in English, Spanish and Portuguese: A Discourse-Functional Study.” In Genre- and Register-Related Discourse Features in Contrast, ed. by Marie-Aude Lefer, and Svetlana Vogeleer, 93–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
González, Montserrat. 2004. Pragmatic Markers in Oral Narratives: The Case of English and Catalan. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gray, Bethany, and Douglas Biber. 2014. “Stance Markers.” In Corpus Pragmatics: A Handbook, ed. by Karin Aijmer, and Christoph Rühlemann, 219–248. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd ed. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan, and Geoff Thompson. 2000. Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2005. “Stance and Engagement: A Model of Interaction in Academic Discourse. Discourse Studies 7(2): 173–192.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jing-Schmidt, Zhuo. 2007. “Negativity Bias in Language: A Cognitive-Affective Model of Emotive Intensifiers.” Cognitive Linguistics 18(3): 417–443.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lavid, Julia, and Lara Moratón. 2015. “Intersubjective Positioning and Thematisation in English and Spanish: A Contrastive Analysis of Letters to the Editor.” Nordic Journal of English Studies 14 (1): 289–319.Google Scholar
Lavid, Julia, Jorge Arús, Bernard DeClerck, and Veronique Hoste. 2015. “Creation of a High-Quality, Register-Diversified Parallel Corpus for Linguistic and Computational Investigations.” In Current Work in Corpus Linguistics: Working with Traditionally Conceived Corpora and Beyond: Selected Papers from the 7th International Conference on Corpus Linguistics (CILC2015). Procedia –Social and Behavioral Sciences 198 (24): 249–256.Google Scholar
Maier, Robert M., Carolin Hofmockel, and Anita Fetzer. 2016. “The Negotiation of Discourse Relations in Context: Co-Constructing Degrees of Overtness.” Intercultural Pragmatics 13 (1): 71–105.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R., and Peter R. R. White. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Hampshire/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Martínez, María Ángeles. 2014. “Storyworld Possible Selves and the Phenomenon of Narrative Immersion: Testing a New Theoretical Construct.” Narrative 22 (1): 110–131.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “Staging the Ghost Blend in Two Versions of the Ballad ‘Big Joe and Phantom 309’.” In Audionarratology: Interfaces of Sound and Narrative, ed. by Jarmila Mildorf, and Till Kinzel, 47–63. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ortony, Andrew, and Terence J. Turner. 1990. “What’s Basic about Emotions?” Psychological Review 97 (3): 315–331.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pichler, Heike. 2013. The Structure of Discourse-Pragmatic Variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pratto, Felicia, and Oliver P. John. 1991. “Automatic Vigilance: The Attention-Grabbing Power of Negative Social Information.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61(3): 380–391.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramírez-Verdugo, Dolores, and Jesús Romero-Trillo. 2005. “The Pragmatic Function of Intonation in L2 Discourse: English Tag Questions Used by Spanish Speakers.” Intercultural Pragmatics 2: 151–168.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1968. “Sequencing in Conversational Openings.” American Anthropologist 70: 1075–1095.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schourup, Lawrence. 1999. “Discourse Markers.” Lingua 107: 227–265.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stenström, Anna-Brita. 1994. An Introduction to Spoken Interaction. London & New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Takahashi, Mariko. 2014. “A Comparative Study of Tag Questions in Four Asian Englishes from a Corpus-Based Approach.” Asian Englishes 16 (2): 101–124.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Towards a Cognitive Semantics II: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoff. 2015. “Emotional Talk, Emotion Talk, and Evaluation.” Presentation given at the Jornada de Investigación Emo-Fundett. Madrid, 4 February 2015, later revised in July 2015. Madrid: UNED.Google Scholar
Wong, Jock. 2004. “The Particles of Singapore English: A Semantic and Cultural Interpretation.” Journal of Pragmatics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language Studies 36 (4): 739–793.DOI logoGoogle Scholar