Part of
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 (22)
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, and Marja Etelämäki. 2015. ”Nominated Actions and Their Targeted Agents in Finnish Conversational Directives.” Journal of Pragmatics 78: 7–24. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Marjorie H. 2006. “Participation, Affect, and Trajectory in Family Directive/Response Sequences.” Text & Talk 26: 513–541. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rossi, Giovanni. 2015. The 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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schuetz, Alfred. 1953. “Common-Sense and Scientific Interpretation of Human Action.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 14 (1): 1–38. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena. 2001. Responding in Conversation. A Study of Response Particles in Finnish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa. 2011. “Participants’ Deontic Rights and Action Formation: The Case of Declarative Requests for Action.” Interaction and Linguistic Structures (InLiSt) 52. [URL].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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
VISK = Auli Hakulinen, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen and Irja Alho. 2004. Iso suomen kielioppi [Finnish Descriptive Grammar]. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. Accessed 4 June 2019. [URL]. 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar