Chapter published in:
Between Turn and Sequence: Turn-initial particles across languages
Edited by John Heritage and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
[Studies in Language and Social Interaction 31] 2018
► pp. 1–22

Introduction

Analyzing turn-initial particles

| UCLA
| University of Helsinki
Published online: 19 July 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.31.01her
References

References

Ameka, Felix K.
1992 “Interjections: The Universal yet Neglected Part of Speech.” Journal of Pragmatics 18: 101–118. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter
1996 “The Pre-Front Field in Spoken German and Its Relevance as a Grammaticalization Position.” Pragmatics 6 (3): 295–322. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter, and Yael Maschler
2016 NU/NÅ: A Family of Discourse Markers across the Languages of Europe and Beyond. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blakemore, Diane
2003 Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bolden, Galina
2006 “Little Words that Matter: Discourse Markers “So” and “Oh” and the Doing of Other-Attentiveness in Social Interaction.” Journal of Communication 56: 661–688. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016 “The Discourse Marker Nu in Russian Conversation.” In NU/NÅ: A Family of Discourse Markers across the Languages of Europe and Beyond, ed. by Peter Auer and Yael Maschler, 48–80. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan
2002 “Sequentiality as the Basis of Constituent Structure.” In The Evolution of Language from Pre-Language, ed. by Talmy Givon, and Bertram Malle, 109–132. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven E.
2012 “Address Terms in the Organization of Turns at Talk: The Case of Pivotal Turn Extensions.” Journal of Pragmatics 44: 1853–1867. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013a “Agency in Response: The Role of Prefatory Address Terms.” Journal of Pragmatics 57: 290–302. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013b “Turn-Constructional Units and the Transition Relevance Place.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 150–166. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven E., and Chase W. Raymond
2015 “Modular Pivots: A Resource for Extending Turns at Talk.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 48 (4): 388–405. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth, Bert Cornillie, and Paola Pietrandrea
2013 Discourse Markers and Modal Particles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf
2013 “Turn-Design at Turn-Beginnings: Multimodal Resources to Deal with Tasks of Turn-Construction in German.” Journal of Pragmatics 46: 91–121. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul
1997 “Open’ Class Repair Initiators in Response to Sequential Sources of Trouble in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 28: 69–101. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, Penelope
2008 “Variation and the Indexical Field.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 12: 453–476. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin
2006 “Towards an Understanding of the Spectrum of Approaches to Discourse Particles.” In Approaches to Discourse Particles, ed. by Kerstin Fischer, 1–20. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
2015 “Conversation, Construction Grammar, and Cognition.” Language and Cognition 7 (4): 563–588. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin, and Maria Alm
2013 “A Radical Construction Grammar Perspective on the Modal Particle-Discourse Particle Distinction.” In Discourse Markers and Modal Particles: Categorization and Description, ed. by Liesbeth Degand, Bert Cornillie, and Paola Pietrandrea, 47–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., and Sandra A. Thompson
1996 “Interactional Units in Conversation: Syntactic, Intonational and Pragmatic Resources for the Management of Turns.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson, 134–184. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold
1967 Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Golato, Andrea
2012 “German Oh: Marking an Emotional Change of State.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45: 245–268. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
1986 “Between and Within: Alternative Treatments of Continuers and Assessments.” Human Studies 9: 205–217. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 “Participation, Stance and Affect in the Organization of Activities.” Discourse and Society 18: 53–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard
1998 The Function of Discourse Particles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hakulinen, Auli, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja-Riitta Heinonen, and Irja Alho
2004 Iso suomen kielioppi [Comprehensive grammar of Finnish]. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar
Hakulinen, Auli, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
2012 “Being Equivocal: Affective Responses Left Unspecified.” In Emotion and Affect in Interaction, ed. by Anssi Peräkylä, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen, 147–173. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hayashi, Makoto
2005 “Joint Turn Construction through Language and the Body: Notes on Embodiment in Coordinated Participation in Situated Activities.” Semiotica 156(1–4): 21–53.Google Scholar
Heinemann, Trine, and Aino Koivisto
2016 “Indicating a Change-of-State in Interaction: Cross-Linguistic Perspectives.” Journal of Pragmatics 104: 83–88.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
1984a “A Change-of-State Token and Aspects of Its Sequential Placement.” In Structures of Social Action, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1984b Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
1998 “ Oh-Prefaced Responses to Inquiry.” Language in Society 27 (3): 291–334. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 “Turn-initial Position and some of Its Occupants.” Journal of Pragmatics 57: 331–337. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015 “ Well-Prefaced Turns in English Conversation: A Conversation Analytic Perspective.” Journal of Pragmatics 88: 88–104. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
1994 “Constituting and Maintaining Activities across Sequences: And-prefacing as a Feature of Question Design. Language in Society 23: 1–29. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Houtkoop, Hanneke, and Harrie Mazeland
1985 “Turns and Discourse Units in Everyday Conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 9: 595–619. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
1987 “On Exposed and Embedded Correction in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button, and John R. E. Lee, 86–100. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters Ltd.Google Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo
2013 “Accomplishing Continuity across Sequences and Encounters: No(h)-prefaced Initiations in Estonian. Journal of Pragmatics 57: 274–289. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016 “Estonian No(O)(H) in Turns and Sequences: Families of Function.” In NU/NÅ: A Family of Discourse Markers across the Languages of Europe and Beyond, ed. by Peter Auer, and Yael Maschler, 213–242. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, John, and John Local
1989 Doing Phonology: Observing, Recording, Interpreting. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin, and Francisco Torreira
2015 “The Timing and Construction of Preference: A Quantitative Study.” Discourse Processes 52:255–289. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Hye Ri Stephanie
2013 “Retroactive Indexing of Relevance: The Use of Well in Third Position.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 46 (2):125–143. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Hye Ri Stephanie, and Satomi Kuroshima
2013 “Turn Beginnings in Interaction: An Introduction.” Journal of Pragmatics 57: 267–273. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, Gene H.
2003 “Selecting Next Speaker: The Context Sensitive Operation of a Context-Free Organization.” Language in Society 32: 177–201. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004 “On the Place of Linguistic Resources in the Organization of Talk-in-Interaction: Grammar as Action in Prompting a Speaker to Elaborate.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 37: 151–184. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, Jan
2006 “Grammar in the Service of Interaction: Exploring Turn Organization in Swedish.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 39: 81–117. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Local, John
1992 “Continuing and Restarting.” In The Contextualization of Language, ed. by Peter Auer, and Aldo Di Luzio, 273–296. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996 “Conversational Phonetics: Some Aspects of News Receipts in Everyday Talk.” In Prosody in Conversation, ed. by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, and Margret Selting, 177–230. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Local, John, and Gareth Walker
2004 “Abrupt-joins as a Resource for the Production of Multi-unit, Multi-action Turns.” Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1375–1403. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012 “How Phonetic Features Project More Talk.” Journal of the International Phonetic Association 42 (3):255–280. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mazeland, Harrie, and Mike Huiskes
2001 “Dutch ‘But’ as a Sequential Conjunction.” In Studies in Interactional Linguistics, ed. by Margret Selting, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 141–169. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza
2006 “Participants’ Online Analysis and Multimodal Practices: Projecting the End of the Turn and the Closing of the Sequence.” Discourse Studies 8: 117–129. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 “Multimodal Resources for Turn-Taking: Pointing and the Emergence of Possible Next Speakers.” Discourse Studies 9: 195–226. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Norrick, Neal R.
2009 “Interjections as Pragmatic Markers.” Journal of Pragmatics 41: 866–891. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey
2003 “Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding.” American Sociological Review 68: 939–967. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reber, Elizabeth
2012 Affectivity in Talk-in-Interaction: Sound Objects in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Redeker, Gisela
1991 “Linguistics Marker of Discourse Structure.” Linguistics 29: 1139–1172.Google Scholar
Robinson, Jeffrey D.
2001 “Closing Medical Encounters: Two Physician Practices and Their Implications for the Expression of Patients’ Unstated Concerns.” Social Science and Medicine 53 (5): 639–656. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1987 “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button, and John R. E. Lee, 54–69. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
1992 [1964–72] Lectures on Conversation (2 Vols.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 50:696–735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1987 “Recycled Turn Beginnings: A Precise Repair Mechanism in Conversationʹs Turn-Taking Organisation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button, and John R. E. Lee, 70–85. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
1996 “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Sandra Thompson, and Emanuel Schegloff, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004 “On Dispensability.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 37:95–149. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis Volume 1. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., and Harvey Sacks
1973 “Opening up Closings.” Semiotica 8:289–327. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1987 Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schourup, Lawrence
1999 “Discourse Markers.” Lingua 107:227–265. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selting, Margret
1996 “On the Interplay of Syntax and Prosody in the Constitution of Turn Constructional Units and Turns in Conversation.” Pragmatics 6: 371–388. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000 “The Construction of Units in Conversational Talk.” Language in Society 29: 477–517. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack, and Tanya Stivers
2013 Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Boston MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, N. J. Enfield, and Stephen C., Levinson
2010 Question-response Sequences in Conversation across Ten Languages. Special Issue. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(10). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, and Makoto Hayashi
2010 “Transformative Answers: One Way to Resist a Question’s Constraints.” Turn-taking in Japanese Conversation: A Study of Grammar and Interaction, Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tanaka, Hiroko
1999 “Grammar and Social Interaction in Japanese and Anglo-American English: The Display of Context, Social Identity and Social Relation.” Human Studies 22:363–395. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A., Barbara A. Fox, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
2015 Grammar in Everyday Talk: Building Responsive Actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walker, Gareth
2010 “The Phonetic Constitution of a Turn-Holding Practice.” In Prosody in Interaction, ed. by Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, Elizabeth Reber, and Margret Selting, 51–72. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weidner, Matylda
2016 “The Particle No in Polish Talk-in-Interaction.” In NU/NÅ: A Family of Discourse Markers across the Languages of Europe and Beyond, ed. by Peter Auer, and Yael Maschler, 104–131. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
West, Candace
2006 “Coordinating Closings in Primary Care Visits: Producing Continuity of Care.” In Communication in Medical Care: Interaction between Primary Care Physicians and Patients, ed. by John Heritage, and Douglas Maynard, 379–415. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Rühlemann, Christoph
2020.  In Visual Linguistics with R, Crossref logo
Rühlemann, Christoph
2020. Turn structure and inserts. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 25:2 ► pp. 185 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 05 april 2021. 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.