Chapter published in:
Intersubjectivity in Action: Studies in language and social interaction
Edited by Jan Lindström, Ritva Laury, Anssi Peräkylä and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 326] 2021
► pp. 61
References
Auer, Peter
2017 “Epilogue: Imperatives – The Language of Immediate Action.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 411–427. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, and Marja Etelämäki
2015”Nominated Actions and Their Targeted Agents in Finnish Conversational Directives.” Journal of Pragmatics 78: 7–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Etelämäki, Marja, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
2017”In the Face of Resistance: A Finnish Practice for Insisting on Imperatively Formatted Directives.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 215–240. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail, and J. R. E. Lee
1981 “The Rejection of Advice: Managing the Problematic Convergence of a ‘Troubles-Telling’ and a ‘Service Encounter’.” Journal of Pragmatics 5: 399–422. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Marjorie H.
2006 “Participation, Affect, and Trajectory in Family Directive/Response Sequences.” Text & Talk 26: 513–541. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hakulinen, Lauri
1961.  The Structure and Development of Finnish Language. Indiana University Publications, Uralic and Altaic Series, vol. 3.  Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
Heinemann, Trine, and Jakob Steensig
2017 “Three Imperative Action Formats in Danish Talk-in-Interaction: The Case of Imperative + Modal Particles bare and lige .” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 139–173. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo
2017 “Negotiating Deontic Rights in Second Position: Young Adult Daughters’ Imperatively Formatted Responses to Mothers’ Offers in Estonian.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 271–295. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Laitinen, Lea
2006 “Zero Person in Finnish: A Grammatical Resource for Construing Human Reference.” In Grammar from the Human Perspective: Case, Space and Person in Finnish, ed. by Marja-Liisa Helasvuo, and Lyle Campbell, 209–231. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Laury, Ritva
1996 “Pronouns and Adverbs, Figure and Ground: The Local Case Forms and the Locative Forms of the Finnish Demonstratives in Spoken Discourse.” In SKY 1996. Yearbook of the Linguistic Association of Finland, ed. by Timo Haukioja, Marja-Liisa Helasvuo, and Elise Kärkkäinen, 65–92. Helsinki: Suomen kielitieteellinen yhdistys.Google Scholar
Raevaara, Liisa
1989 “ No – vuoronalkuinen partikkeli [No – a turn-initial particle].” In Suomalaisen keskustelun keinoja I, Kieli 4, ed. by Auli Hakulinen, 147–161. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Department of Finnish Language.Google Scholar
2017 “Adjusting the Design of Directives to the Activity Environment: Imperatives in Finnish Cooking Club Interaction.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 381–410. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rossi, Giovanni
2015The Request System in Italian Interaction. Nijmegen: Ipskamp Drukkers.Google Scholar
Rossi, Giovanni, and Jörg Zinken
2016 “Grammar and Social Agency: The Pragmatics of Impersonal Deontic Statements.” Language 92 (4): e296–e325. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1992 “Repair after Next Turn: The Last Structurally Provided Defense of Intersubjectivity in Conversation.” American Journal of Sociology 97 (5): 1295–1345. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schuetz, Alfred
1953 “Common-Sense and Scientific Interpretation of Human Action.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 14 (1): 1–38. Crossref.Google Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena
2001Responding in Conversation. A Study of Response Particles in Finnish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017 “Imperatives and Responsiveness in Finnish Conversation.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 241–270. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa
2011 “Participants’ Deontic Rights and Action Formation: The Case of Declarative Requests for Action.” Interaction and Linguistic Structures (InLiSt) 52. http://​www​.inlist​.uni​-bayreuth​.de/.Google 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 (3): 297–321. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
VISK = Auli Hakulinen, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen and Irja Alho
2004Iso suomen kielioppi [Finnish Descriptive Grammar]. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. Accessed 4 June 2019. http://​scripta​.kotus​.fi​/visk. URN:ISBN:978-952-5446-35-7.Google Scholar
Zinken, Jörg, and Eva Ogiermann
2011 “How to Propose an Action as Objectively Necessary: The Case of Polish Trzeba x (‘one needs to x’).” Research on Language and Social Interaction 44 (3): 263–287. CrossrefGoogle Scholar