Part of
(Non)referentiality in Conversation
Edited by Michael C. Ewing and Ritva Laury
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 344] 2024
► pp. 3555
Arkisyn: A Morphosyntactically Coded Database of Conversational Finnish
Database compiled at the University of Turku, with material from the Conversation Analysis Archive at the University of Helsinki and the Syntax Archives at the University of Turku. Department of Finnish and Finno-Ugric Languages, University of Turku.
Auer, Peter, and Anja Stukenbrock
2018 “When ‘You’ Means ‘I’: The German 2nd Ps.Sg. Pronoun du Between Genericity and Subjectivity.” Open Linguistics 4: 280–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biq, Yung-O.
1991 “The Multiple Uses of the Second Person Singular Pronoun in Conversational Mandarin.” Journal of Pragmatics 16: 307–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bredel, Ursula
2002 “’You Can Say You to Yourself’: Establishing Perspectives with Personal Pronouns.” In Perspectives and Perspectivation in Discourse, ed. by Carl Friedrich Graumann, and Werner Kallmeyer, 167–180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buber, Martin
1962 [1923]I and Thou. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.Google Scholar
Bühler, Karl
1965 [1934]Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. 2nd edition. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer Verlag.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
2012 “Exploring Affiliation in the Reception of Conversational Complaint Stories.” In Emotion in Interaction, ed. by Anssi Peräkylä, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen, 113–146. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabet, and Selting, Margret
2018Interactional Linguistics: Studying Language in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fremer, Maria
2000 “Va e du då. Generiskt du hos ungdomar och vuxna talare [Generic use of “du” in adolescent and adult speech].” In Ungdom, språk og identitet: Rapport fra et nettverksmøte [Youth, language, and identity: A report from a network meeting], ed. by Ulla-Britt Kotsinas, Anna-Brita Stenström, and Eli-Marie Drange, 133–147. Copenhagen: Nordisk Ministerråd.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1981Forms of Talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles, and Marjorie Harness Goodwin
1990 “Context, Activity and Participation.” In The Contextualization of Language, ed. by Peter Auer, and Aldo di Luzio, 77–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hakulinen, Auli, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen, and Irja Alho
2004Iso suomen kielioppi [Comprehensive grammar of Finnish]. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar
Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa
2008 “Minä ja muut: Puhujaviitteisyys ja konteksti [Speaker reference and contextual interpretation].” Virittäjä 112: 186–206.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman
1971 [1957] “Shifters, Verbal Categories and the Russian Verb.” In Selected Writings of Roman Jakobson 2, 130–147. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Jensen, Torben Juel, and Frans Gregersen
2016 “What Do(es) You Mean? The Pragmatics of Generic Second Person Pronouns in Modern Spoken Danish.” Pragmatics 26: 417–446.Google Scholar
Kamio, Akio
2001 “English Generic We, You, and They: An Analysis in Terms of Territory of Information. Journal of Pragmatics 33: 1111–1124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo
2008 “Conjunction and Sequenced Actions: The Estonian Complementizer and Evidential Particle Et.” In Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining: The Multifunctionality of Conjunctions, ed. by Ritva Laury, 125–152. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kitagawa, Chisato, and Adrienne Lehrer
1990 “Impersonal Uses of Personal Pronouns.” Journal of Pragmatics 14: 739–759. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kluge, Bettina
2016 “Generic Uses of the Second Person Singular – How Speakers Deal with Referential Ambiguity and Misunderstandings.” Pragmatics 26 (3): 501–522.Google 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. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laury, Ritva, and Eeva-Leena Seppänen
2008 “Clause Combining, Interaction, Evidentiality, Participation Structure, and the Conjunction-Particle Continuum: The Finnish Että.” In Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining: The Multifunctionality of Conjunctions, ed. by Ritva Laury, 153–178. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen
1988 “Putting Linguistics on a Proper Footing: Explorations in Goffman’s Concept of Participation.” In Erving Goffman: Exploring the Interaction Order, ed. by Paul Drew, and Anthony Wootton, 161–227. Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Linell, Per
2009Rethinking Language, Mind and World Dialogically: Interactional and Contextual Theories of Human Sense-Making. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
Mikesell, Lisa, Galina Bolden, Jenny Mandelbaum, Jeffrey Robinson, Tanya Romaniuk, Alexa Bolaños-Carpio, Darcey Searles, Wan Wei, Stephen M. DiDomenico, and Beth Angell
2017 “At the Intersection of Epistemics and Action: Responding with I Know.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 50 (3): 268–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, Søren Beck, Christina Fogtmann Fosgerau, and Torben Juel Jensen
2009 “From Community to Conversation – and Back: Exploring the Interpersonal Potentials of Two Generic Pronouns in Danish.” Acta Linguistica Hafniensia: International Journal of Linguistics 41: 116–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ochs, Elinor, Patrick Gonzales, and Sally Jacoby
1996 “ ‘When I Come Down I’m in the Domain State’: Grammar and Graphic Representation in the Interpretive Activity of Physicists.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by. Elinor Ochs, Emanuel Schegloff, and Sandra Thompson, 328–369. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1992Lectures on Conversation. Vol. 1 & 2. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Selting, Margret, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
(eds) 2001Studies in Interactional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seppänen, Eeva-Leena
1996 “Ways of Referring to a Knowing Co-Participant in Finnish Conversation.” SKY Yearbook of the Linguistic Association of Finland: 135–176.Google Scholar
1998Läsnäolon pronominit [Pronouns of participation]. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar
Sidnell, Jack, and Tanya Stivers
(eds) 2012The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, Anna
2004Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael
1976 “Shifters, Linguistic Categories, and Cultural Description.” In Meaning in Anthropology, ed. by Keith H. Basso, and Henry A. Selby, 11–55. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena, and Minna Laakso
2005 “Katko vai eiku? Itsekorjauksen aloitustavat ja vuorovaikutustehtävät [Cut-off, the particle eiku and other practices for initiating self-repair, and the interactional functions of self-repair].” Virittäjä 109: 244–271.Google Scholar
Stirling, Lesley, and Lenore Manderson
2011 “About You: Empathy, Objectivity and Authority.” Journal of Pragmatics 43: 1581–1602. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stukenbrock, Anja
2014 “Pointing to an ‘Empty’ Space: Deixis am Phantasma in Face-to-Face Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 74: 70–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suomalainen, Karita
2018Sinä, konteksti ja monitulkintaisuus: Yksikön 2. persoonan viittaukset arkikeskustelussa [Sinä ‘you’, context, and ambiguity: Second-person singular reference in everyday Finnish conversation].” Virittäjä 122 (3): 320–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2020Kuka sinä on? Tutkimus yksikön 2. persoonan käytöstä ja käytön variaatiosta suomenkielisissä arkikeskusteluissa [Who is ‘you’? On the use of second person singular in Finnish everyday conversations]. Annales Universitatis Turkuensis C 499. Turku: University of Turku.Google Scholar
Suomalainen, Karita, and Mikael Varjo
2020 “When Personal is Interpersonal: Organizing Interaction with Deictically Open Personal Constructions in Finnish Everyday Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 168: 98–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uusitupa, Milla
2017Rajakarjalaismurteiden avoimet persoonaviittaukset [Open person constructions in Border Karelian dialects]. Dissertations in Education, Humanities, and Theology 117. Joensuu: University of Eastern Finland.
Varjo, Mikael
2019 “It Takes All Kinds to Make a Zero: Employing Multiple Correspondence Analysis to Categorize an Open Personal Construction in Conversational Finnish.” Corpus Linguistics Research 5, 55–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Varjo, Mikael, and Karita Suomalainen
2018 “From Zero to ‘You’ and Back: A Mixed Methods Study Comparing the Use of Two Open Personal Constructions in Finnish.” Nordic Journal of Linguistics 41 (3): 333–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vatanen, Anna
2018 “Resisting an Action in Conversation by Pointing out Epistemic Incongruence: Mä tiedän ‘I know’ Responses in Finnish.” Journal of Pragmatics 123: 192–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, Lawrence, and Rémi van Compernolle
2009 “On Versus Tu And Vous: Pronouns with Indefinite Reference in Synchronous Electronic French Discourse.” Language Sciences 31: 409–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zobel, Sarah
2016 “A Pragmatic Analysis of German Impersonally Used First Person Singular ‘Ich’.” Pragmatics 26 (3): 379–416.Google Scholar