We propose a model of reference that contrasts with standard linguistic approaches in that it focuses on the role of interaction in reference, arguing that referring expressions in conversations are not designed for interchangeable audiences but rather exploit the common ground between partners. Our model also differs from psycholinguistic approaches in that it uses conversational data, since critical aspects of natural conversations are absent from laboratory tasks used so far and thus are not captured by current models. Examples from conversations are presented to demonstrate that speakers often try to manage the accessibility of a problematic referent to an addressee by presenting a context for it as well as a referring expression, even at the cost of syntactic orthodoxy. We also present examples demonstrating that partners negotiate as to what representation is good enough for present purposes and whether that has been achieved. While strategies may vary as to explicitness, we believe these negotiations underlie all formulations of referring expressions.
2024. Action and understanding in the semi-structured research interview: Using CA to analyse European research scientists’ attitudes to linguistic (dis)advantage. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 68 ► pp. 101355 ff.
Bootsma, Jael N., Lyn S. Turkstra & Jan Willem Gorter
2021. Expression of propositional attitudes in conversation by adults with traumatic brain injury: A relevance theoretic approach. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 56:2 ► pp. 346 ff.
2012. A bit ofthisand a bit ofthat: on social identification in Early and Late Modern English letters. English Language and Linguistics 16:2 ► pp. 261 ff.
Anderson, Anne H.
2006. Achieving Understanding in Face-to-Face and Video-Mediated Multiparty Interactions. Discourse Processes 41:3 ► pp. 251 ff.
Horton, William S.
2005. Conversational Common Ground and Memory Processes in Language Production. Discourse Processes 40:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Smith, Sara W., Hiromi Pat Noda, Steven Andrews & Andreas H. Jucker
2005. Setting the stage: How speakers prepare listeners for the introduction of referents in dialogues and monologues. Journal of Pragmatics 37:11 ► pp. 1865 ff.
Jucker, Andreas H., Sara W. Smith & Tanja Lüdge
2003. Interactive aspects of vagueness in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 35:12 ► pp. 1737 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 october 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.