Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics
Vol. 7:3 (1997) ► pp.325–366

Four-party conversation and gender

Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 1 September 1997
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.7.3.03ber
References
André-Larochebouvy, Danielle
(1984) La conversation quotidienne. Paris: Didier.Google Scholar
Bange, Pierre
(1992) Analyse conversationnelle et théorie de l’action. Paris: Hatier, LAL.Google Scholar
Bernage, Berthe
(1953) Convenances et bonnes manières. Paris: Gauthier Languereau.Google Scholar
Berrier, Astrid
(1990) Tours de parole: Théorie conversationnelle et pratique en français langue seconde au niveau universitaire. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Toronto: University of Toronto.
(1993) Pratiques interactives: évaluation possible? Le Français dans le monde. Recherches et applications, août-sept.: 92-109.Google Scholar
(1994a) Se sécuriser en conversation: esquisse de stratégies. Enjeux 331: 129-136.Google Scholar
(1994b) Politesse et conversation: les femmes dans l’Entre-deux. Actes du Colloque sur l’Entre-deux. Rabat. To be published.Google Scholar
(1995) Au-delà de l’approche com m unicative: La prise de parole en français langue seconde. Saint-Laurent: Tré-Carré.Google Scholar
B errier, Astrid
(1997) “S’opposer dans une conversation à quatre: de quelques moyens.” La Revue québécoise de linguistique. To be published.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
, and al. (1989) Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex Pub.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Bouchard, Robert
(1984) De l’analyse conversationnelle à l’évaluation de l’oral en classe. Le Français dans le monde 186, juillet: 33-41.Google Scholar
(1987) Structuration et conflits de structuration. In J. Cosnier & C. Kerbrat-Orecchioni (eds.), Décrire la conversation. Presses Universitaires de Lyon: pp. 73-104.Google Scholar
Coulmas, Florian
(1981) Poison to our soul: thanks and apologies contrastively viewed. In F. Coulmas (ed.), Conversational Routines. The Hague: Mouton Pub: pp. 69-91.Google Scholar
Coulon, Alain
(1987) L’Ethnométhodologie. Paris: Puf. Que Sais-je.Google Scholar
Edelsky, Carole
(1981) Who’s got the floor? Language in society 101: 383-421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fishman, Pamela
(1983) Interaction: the work women do. In Barry Thorne, C. Kramarae and N. Henley (eds.), Language, gender and society. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House Pub.: pp. 89-101.Google Scholar
Folcalvez, Françoise Le
(1967) A.B.C. du savoir-vivre. Paris: Nathan.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving
(1974) Les Rites d’interaction. Paris: Editions de Minuit.Google Scholar
(1987) Répliques et réponses. Façons de parler. Paris: Editions de Minuit.Google Scholar
Kasper, Gabriele, and M. Dahl
(1991) Research methods in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in second language acquisition, 131: 215-247. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine
(1994) “Notes sur le fonctionnement du trilogue”. Littérature 93, février. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
et al. (1995) Le Trilogue. Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon.Google Scholar
Léard, Jean-Marcel
(1989) Les mots du discours: variété et enchaînement au niveau sémantique, Revue québécoise de linguistique 18.1: 85-108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mchoul, Alexander
(1978) The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom Language in Society 71: 183-213. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Mehan, Hugh
(1982) The structure of classroom events and their consequences for student performance. In P. Gilmore and A. Glatthorn (eds.), Children in and out of School; Ethnography and Education. W ashington D.C.: CAL: 59-87.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, E. Schegloff, and G. Jefferson
(1974) A simplest systematics for the organisation of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50.4: 696-735. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emmanuel and H. Sacks
(1974) Opening up closings. In R. Turner (ed.), Ethnomethodology. Harmondsworth, Penguin: 233-263.Google Scholar
Shultz, J., S. Florio, and F. Erickson
(1982) Where’s the floor? aspects of the cultural organization of social relationships in comm unication at hom e and at schoo l. In P. Gilmore and A. Glatthorn (eds.), Children in and out of School; Ethnography and Education. Washington D.C.: CAL: 88-123.Google Scholar
Traverso, Véronique
(1995) Gestion des échanges dans les conversations à trois participants. Le trilogue. Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon: pp. 29-53.Google Scholar
Whalen, Marilyn, and D. Zimmerman
(1987) Sequential and institutional contexts in calls for help. The Social psychology quarterly 50.2: 172-185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
W ierzbicka, Anna
(1985) Different cultures, different languages, different speech acts. Journal of Pragmatics 91: 145-178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna
(1991) Cross Cultural Pragmatics The Semantics of Human Interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfson, Nessa
(1983) Rules of speaking. Language and communication. Richards, J. and R. Schmidt. London: Longman: pp. 60-87.Google Scholar
Zamouri, Salwa
(1995) La formation de coalitions dans les conversations triadiques. Le trilogue. Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon: pp. 54-79.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Bruxelles, Sylvie & Catherine Kerbrat-Orecchioni
2004. Coalitions in polylogues. Journal of Pragmatics 36:1 ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine
2004. Introducing polylogue. Journal of Pragmatics 36:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Kryk-Kastovsky, Barbara
2021. Impoliteness as a result of power asymmetry in selected social contexts. In Angewandte Linguistik – Neue Herausforderungen und Konzepte, ► pp. 41 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 april 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.