Meaning construction in interactive academic talk
A conversation-analytic approach to mental spaces
Mental spaces are conceptual structures for meaning representation and interpretation in discourse. They are pervasive in
everyday language as an important aspect of ongoing language processing and meaning construction (
Hamawand 2016). The application of
Mental Space Theory (MST) to the analysis of real, attested examples of
discourse (e.g. Conversation Analysis) has been undertaken through productive exchanges (see
Hougaard
2004,
2005,
Oakley & Hougaard 2008,
Oakley 2009). The integration links external, observable language behaviors to internal, conceptual
mental operations (
Williams 2008), revealing that the cognitive dimensions of discursive
approaches are essential to the analysis of talk-in-interaction. This study focuses on the technical aspects of Conversation Analysis in
interactive academic talk and shows how MST can provide a subsequent framework for making plausible accounts of the meaning construction
process underlying typical conversational moves in this unique talk setting. The data analyses show that the accessibility and selectivity
of cognitive mappings contribute to shaping the structurality of meaning representation, transmission, and interpretation. The findings have
implications for understanding and characterizing how co-constructed meaning enters into individual and collective conceptualization in
higher education communication.
Article outline
-
1.Introduction
- 2.A discursive view of mental spaces
- 3.The cognitive dimension of Conversation Analysis
- 4.The study: Data and methods
- 5.Findings and discussion
- 5.1Prosodic triggers and presupposition mappings
- 5.2Conditional relevance and space building movement
- 5.3Overlapping talk and the order of space building
- 5.4Alternate framings and space connection strategies
- 6.Concluding remarks
- Notes
-
References
-
Key publications of author
References (110)
References
Ackermann, Edith. 1995. Construction and transfer of meaning through form. In Leslie P. Steffe & Jerry Gale (eds.), Constructivism in education, 341–354. NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Allen, Graham. 2011. Intertextuality. London: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Allwood, Jens. 2003. Meaning potentials and context: Some consequences for the analysis of variation in meaning. In Hubert Cuyckens, René Dirven & John Taylor (eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics, 29–66. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Atkinson, J. Maxwell & John Heritage (eds.). 1984. Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Barsalou, Lawrence W. 1987. The instability of graded structure: Implications for the nature of concepts. In Ulrich Neisser (ed.), Concepts and conceptual development, 101–140. New York: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Basturkman, Helen. 2002. Negotiating meaning in seminar-type discussion and EAP. English for Specific Purposes 21(3). 233–242. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Benwell, Bethan & Elizabeth Stokoe. 2002. Constructing discussion tasks in university tutorials: Shifting dynamics and identities. Discourse Studies 4(4). 429–453. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brandt, Per Aage. 2005. Mental space and cognitive semantics: A critical comment. Journal of Pragmatics 37(10). 1578–1594. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cazden, Courtney. 1986. Classroom discourse. In Merldin C. Wittrock (ed.), Handbook of research on teaching, 432–463. New York: MacMillan.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cienki, Alan. 2007. Frames, Idealized Cognitive Modes and Domains. In Dirk Geeraerts & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, 170–187. Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cobb, Paul & Erna Yackel. 1996. Constructivist, emergent, and sociocultural perspectives in the context of developmental research. Educational Psychologist 3(4). 175–190. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Coulson, Seana. 2000. Semantic leaps: Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Coulson, Seana. 2006. Constructing meaning. Metaphor and Symbol 21(4). 245–266. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Coulson, Seana & Todd Oakley. 2001. Blending basics. Cognitive Linguistics 11(3–4). 175–196.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, William. 2000. Explaining language change: An evolutionary approach. London: Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Deppermann, Arnulf. 2012. How does ‘cognition’ matter to the analysis of talk-in-interaction?. Language Sciences 34(6). 746–767. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dinsmore, John. 1991. Partitioned representations: A study in mental representation, language understanding and linguistic structure. Dordrecht: Kluwer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Drew, Paul & John Heritage. 1992. Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Evans, Vyvyan. 2006. Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning-construction. Cognitive Linguistics 17(4). 491–534. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fauconnier, Gilles. 1994. Mental spaces: aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fauconnier, Gilles. 1997. Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fauconnier, Gilles. 2007. Mental Spaces. In Dirk Geeraerts & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, 351–376. Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner. 2002. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner. 2006. Mental Spaces. In Dirk Geeraerts (ed.), Cognitive linguistics: Basic readings, 303–371. Berlin: Monton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fillmore, Charles J. 1982. Frame Semantics. In Dirk Geeraerts (ed.), Cognitive linguistics: Basic readings, 373–400. Berlin; New York: Monton de Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fuller, Janet M. 2003. The influence of speaker roles on discourse marker use. Journal of Pragmatics 35(1). 23–45. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gardner, Rod. 2007. The Right connections: Acknowledging epistemic progression in talk. Language in Society 361. 319–341.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gärdenfors, Peter. 2014. The geometry of meaning: Semantics based on conceptual spaces. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in ethnomethodology. New York: Prentice-Hall.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Garfinkel, Harold. 2002. Ethnomethodology’s program. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gash, Hugh. 2015. Knowledge construction: A paradigm shift. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 2015(143). 5–23. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gass, Susan. 1997. Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gergen, Kenneth J. 1985. The social constructionist movement in modern psychology. American Psychologist 40(3). 266–275. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goodwin, Charles. 2000. Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32(10). 1489–1522. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Graesser, Arthur C. 2006. Views from a cognitive scientist: Cognitive representations underlying discourse are sometimes social. Discourse Studies 8(1). 59–66. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gumperz, John J. 1992a. Contextualization and understanding. In Alessandro Duranti & Charles Goodwin (eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon, 229–252. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gumperz, John J. 1992b. Contextualization revisited. In Peter Auer & Aldo Di Luzio (eds.), The contextualization of language, 39–53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hamawand, Zeki. 2016. Semantics: A cognitive account of linguistic meaning. Sheffield, UK: Equinox Publishing.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hardin, Curtis D. & E. Tory Higgins. 1996. Shared reality: How social verification makes the subjective objective. In Richard M. Sorrentino & E. Tory Higgins (eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition, vol. 31, 28–84. New York, NY: Guilford Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hayano, Kaoru. 2011. Claiming epistemic primacy: yo-marked assessments in Japanese. In Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, & Jakob Steensig (eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, 58–81. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hata, Kazuki. 2016. Contrast-terminal: The sequential placement of trail-off but in extensive courses of action. Journal of Pragmatics 1011. 138–154. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heller, Vivien. 2015. Academic discourse practices in action: Invoking discursive norms in mathematics and language lessons. Linguistics and Education 311. 187–206. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heritage, John. 1984. Garfinkle and ethomothodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heritage, John. 2011. Territories of knowledge, territories of experience: Empathic moments in interaction. In Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, & Jakob Steensig (eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, 159–183. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heritage, John. 2012. Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(1). 1–29. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heritage, John. 2013. Action formation and its epistemic (and other) backgrounds. Discourse Studies 15(5). 551–578. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heritage, John. 2006. Cognition in discourse. In Hedwig te Molder & Jonathan Potter (eds.), Conversation and cognition, 184–202. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heritage, John & Geoffrey Raymond. 2012. Navigating epistemic landscapes: Acquiescence, agency and resistance in response to polar questions. In de Ruiter Jan P. (ed.). Questions: formal, functional and interactional perspectives, 179–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hopper, Robert. 2005. A cognitive agnostic in conversation analysis: When do strategies affect spoken interaction? In Hedwig te Molder & Jonathan Potter (eds.), Conversation and cognition, 134–158. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hougaard, Anders. 2004. ‘How’re we doing’: An interactional approach to cognitive processes of online meaning construction. Unpublished PhD dissertation.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hougaard, Anders. 2005. Conceptual disintegration and blending in interactional sequences: A discussion of new phenomena, processes vs. products, and methodology. Journal of Pragmatics 37(10). 1653–1685. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hougaard, Anders. 2008. Compression in interaction. In Todd Oakley & Anders Hougaard (eds.), Mental spaces in discourse and interaction, 179–208. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hougaard, Anders & Todd Oakley. 2008. Mental spaces and discourse analysis. In Todd Oakley, & Anders Hougaard (eds.), Mental spaces in discourse and interaction, 1–26. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hougaard, G. Rasmus. 2008. ‘Mental spaces’ and ‘blending’ in discourse and interaction: A response. In Todd Oakley & Anders Hougaard (eds.), Mental spaces in discourse and interaction, 247–250. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jakobson, Roman. 1990. The speech event and the functions of language. In Roman Jakobson, Linda R. Waugh and Monique Monville-Burston (eds.), On Language, 69–79. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jefferson, Gail. 1986. Notes on ‘latency’ in overlap onset. Human Studies 9(2). 153–183. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kaufer, David S. & Kathleen Carley. 1993. Communication at a distance: The influence of print on sociocultural organization and change. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kern, Friederike & Margret Selting. 2012. Conversation Analysis and Interactional Linguistics. In Carol A. Chapelle (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Last retrived from [URL].
. (9 April, 2019)
Lantolf, James P. (ed.). 2000. Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levinson, Stephen C. 2003. Contextualizing ‘contextualization cues’. In Susan L. Eerdmans, Carlo L. Prevignano & Paul J. Thibault (eds.), Language and interaction: Discussions with John J. Gumperz, 31–39. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Liddicoat, Anthony J. 2007. An introduction to Conversation Analysis. London: Continuum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Maynard, Douglas W. 2003. Bad news, good news: Conversational order in everyday talk and clinical settings. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McCarthy, Michael. 2003. Talking back: ‘Small’ interactional response tokens in everyday conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction 36(1). 33–63. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Minsky, Marvin. 1975. A framework for representing knowledge. In Patrick Henry Winston (ed.), The Psychology of Computer Vision, 211–277. New York: McGraw-Hill.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Miranda, Shaila M. & Carol Saunders. 2003. The social construction of meaning: An alternative perspective on information sharing. Information System Research 14(1). 87–106. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Oakley, Todd. 2009. From attention to meaning: Explorations in semiotics, linguistics, and rhetoric. Berlin: Peter Lang. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ogden, Charles Kay & Ivor Armstrong Richards. 1989. The meaning of meaning. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Orr, Mary. 2003. Intertextuality: Debates and contexts. Malden, USA: Polity Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pan, Yuling. 2012. Interactional Linguistics as a research perspective. In Carol A. Chapelle (ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Last retrieved from [URL].
. (9 April, 2019.)
Pena-Shaff, Judith B. & Craig Nicholls. 2004. Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions. Computer and Education 42(3). 243–265. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pica, Teresa. 1994. Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second language learning conditions, processes and outcomes? Language Learning 44(3). 493–527. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Potter, Jonathan & Hedwig te Molder. 2005. Conversation and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Raymond, Geoffrey & John Heritage. 2006. The epistemics of social relations: Owning grandchildren. Language in Society 35(5). 677–705. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rommetveit, Ragnar. 1992. Outlines of a dialogically based social-cognitive approach to human cognition and communication. In Astri Heen Wold (ed.), The dialogical alternative: Towards a theory of language and mind, 19–44. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sacks, Harvey. 1984. On doing ‘being ordinary’. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social interaction, 413–429. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Gail Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50(4). 696–735. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1972. Notes on a conversational practice: Formulating place. In David Sudnow (ed.), Studies in social interaction, 75–119. New York: The Free Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1992. In another context. In Alessandro Duranti & Charles Goodwin (eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon, 191–227. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1996. Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schegloff, Emanuel A. & Harvey Sacks. 1973. Opening up closings. Semiotica 8(4). 289–327. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schiffrin, Deborah. 1987. Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schourup, Lawrence. 1999. Discourse markers: Tutorial overview. Lingua 107(3–4). 227–265. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Scott, Mike. 1999. WordSmith tools help manual, version 3.0. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stahl, Gerry. 2006. Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stivers, Tanya, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig. 2011. Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig (eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, 3–26. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stubbs, Michael. 2010. Three concepts of keywords. In Marina Bondi & Mike Scott (eds.), Keyness in texts, 21–42. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sweetser, Eve & Gilles Fauconnier. 1996. Cognitive links and domains: Basic aspects of Mental Space Theory. In Gilles Fauconnier & Eve Sweetser (eds.), Spaces, worlds and grammars, 1–28. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Turner, Mark. 2001. Cognitive dimensions of social science: The way we think about politics, economics, law, and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tyler, Andrea & Vyvyan Evans. 2001. Reconsidering prepositional polysemy networks: The case of ‘over’. Language 77(4). 724–765. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Boxtel, Carla, Jos van der Linden & Gellof Kanselaar. 2000. Collaborative learning tasks and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and Instruction 10(4). 311–330. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Walsh, Steve. 2014. Newcastle University Corpus of Academic Spoken English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yin, Robert K. 2014. Case study research: Design and methods. London: Sage.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yin, Robert K. & Darnella Davis. 2007. Adding new dimensions to case study evaluations: The case of evaluating comprehensive reforms. In George Julnes & Debra J. Rog (eds.), Informing federal policies for evaluation methodology, 75–93. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Key publications of author
Pan, Yun. 2017. Raising trainee translators’ critical language awareness in news translation. Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies 21. 160–190. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pan, Yun. 2020. Corpus linguistics approaches to trainee translators’ framing practice in news translation. The International Journal for Translation and Interpreting Research 12(1). 90–114. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Bredikhin, Sergey, Vladislav Babayants, Iuliia Pelevina, D. Rudoy, A. Olshevskaya & N. Ugrekhelidze
2021.
A comprehensive cognitive-perceptual model of analysis for contextually determined components of a conceptualized term.
E3S Web of Conferences 273
► pp. 11038 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. 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.