Part of
Responding to Polar Questions across Languages and Contexts
Edited by Galina B. Bolden, John Heritage and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
[Studies in Language and Social Interaction 35] 2023
► pp. 210238
References
Asu, Eva Liina
2006 “Rising Intonation in Estonian: An Analysis of Map Task Dialogues and Spontaneous Conversations.” In Fonetiikan Päivät 2006. The Phonetics Symposium 2006, ed. by Reijo Aulanko, Leena Wahlberg, and Martti Vainio, 1–8. Helsinki: Helsinki University.Google Scholar
Bolden, Galina
2016 “A Simple da?: Affirming Responses to Polar Questions in Russian Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 100: 40–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight L.
1946 “Thoughts on ‘Yep’ and ‘Nope’.” American Speech 21 (2): 90–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul
1997 “ ‘Open’ Class Repair Initiators in Response to Sequential Sources of Trouble in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 28: 69–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J., Mark Dingemanse, Julija Baranova, Joe Blythe, Penelope Brown, Tyko Dirksmeyer, Paul Drew, Simeon Floyd, Sonja Gipper, Rósa S. Gísladóttir, Gertie Hoymann, Kobin H. Kendrick, Stephen C. Levinson, Lilla Magyari, Elizabeth Manrique, Giovanni Rossi, Lila San Roque, and Francisco Torreira
2013 “Huh? What? – A First Survey in Twenty-One Languages.” In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding, ed. by Makoto Hayashi, Geoffrey Raymond, and Jack Sidnell, 343–380. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J., Tanya Stivers, Penelope Brown, Christina Englert, Katariina Harjunpää, Makoto Hayashi, Trine Heinemann, Gertie Hoymann, Tiina Keisanen, Mirka Rauniomaa, Chase Wesley Raymond, Federico Rossano, Kyung-Eun Yoon, Inge Zwitserlood, and Stephen C. Levinson
2019 “Polar Answers.” Journal of Linguistics 55 (2): 277–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erelt, Mati, and Helle Metslang
(eds) 2017Eesti keele süntaks. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.Google Scholar
Hakulinen, Auli, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja-Riitta Heinonen, and Irja Alho
2004Iso suomen kielioppi. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Google Scholar
Hennoste, Tiit
2000a “Sissejuhatus suulisesse eesti keelde IV. Suulise kõne erisõnavara 3. Partiklid.” Akadeemia 8: 1773–1806.Google Scholar
2000b “Sissejuhatus suulisesse eesti keelde V. Mõned mitteverbaalsed nähtused suulises kõnes.” Akadeemia 9: 2011–2038.Google Scholar
2012 “Küsimuse vorm, episteemiline staatus ja episteemiline hoiak.” Keel ja Kirjandus 8/9: 674–695. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
in press). “Suuline keel.” In Eesti grammatika ed. by Helle Metslang Tartu Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus
Hennoste, Tiit, Olga Gerassimenko, Riina Kasterpalu, Mare Koit, Andriela Rääbis, and Krista Strandson
2008 “From Human Communication to Intelligent User Interfaces: Corpora of Spoken Estonian.” In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’08). Marrakech, Morocco. European Language Resources Association (ELRA). [URL]
2009 “Towards an Intelligent User Interface: Strategies of Giving and Receiving Phone Numbers.” In Text, Speech and Dialogue. TSD 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5729, ed. by Václav Matoušek, and Pavel Mautner, 347–354. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hennoste, Tiit, Andriela Rääbis, and Kirsi Laanesoo
2017 “Polar Questions, Social Actions and Epistemic Stance.” STUF – Language Typology and Universals 70 (3): 523–544. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hennoste, Tiit, Andriela Rääbis, and Andra Rumm
2019 “Estonian Declarative Questions: Their Usage and Comparison with - and jah-questions.” Journal of Pragmatics 153: 46–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
1984 “A Change-of-State Token and Aspects of Its Sequential Placement.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond
2012 “Navigating Epistemic Landscapes: Acquiescence, Agency and Resistance in Responses to Polar Questions.” In Questions: Formal, Functional and Interactional Perspectives, ed. by Jan P. de Ruiter, 179–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle 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): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kasterpalu, Riina
2005 “Partiklid jah, jaa ning jajaa naaberpaari järelliikmena eestikeelsetes müügiläbirääkimistes.” Keel ja Kirjandus 11: 873–890, 12: 996–1000.Google Scholar
Kasterpalu, Riina, and Tiit Hennoste
2016 “Estonian aa: A Multifunctional Change-of-State Token.” Journal of Pragmatics 104: 148–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo
2003aFrom Interaction to Grammar. Estonian Finite Verb Forms in Conversation. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Uralica Upsaliensia 34. Uppsala.Google Scholar
2003b “Terminally Rising Pitch Contours of Response Tokens in Estonian.” Crossroads of Language, Interaction and Culture, vol. 5: 49–65.Google Scholar
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
2009 “Üldküsimuse lihtvastuse funktsioonid.” Keel ja Kirjandus 1: 33–53.Google Scholar
2010 “Minimal Answers to Yes/No Questions in the Service of Sequence Organization.” Discourse Studies 12 (3): 283–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “The Terms of Not Knowing.” In The Morality of Knowledge, ed. by Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig, 184–206. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 “Estonian no(o)(h) in Turns and Sequences: Families of Function.” In NU and NÅ: A Family of Discourse Markers Across the Languages of Europe and Beyond, ed. by Peter Auer, and Yael Maschler, 213–242. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin H.
2015 “Other-Initiated Repair in English.” Open Linguistics 1 (1): 164–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin H., and Francisco Torreira
2014 “The Timing and Construction of Preference: A Quantitative Study.” Discourse processes 52 (4): 255–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koivisto, Aino
2014 “Displaying Now-Understanding: The Finnish Change-of-State Token aa.” Discourse Processes 52 (2): 111–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kurhila, Salla, and Niina Lilja
2017 “Toisto ja korjauksen rajat.” Virittäjä 121 (2): 213–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, Seung-Hee
2015 “Two Forms of Affirmative Responses to Polar Questions.” Discourse Processes 52 (1): 21–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rääbis, Andriela
2009Eesti telefonivestluste sissejuhatus: struktuur ja suhtlusfunktsioonid. Dissertationes linguisticae Universitatis Tartuensis 13. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Raymond, Geoffrey
2000The Structure of Responding. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, CA.
2010 “Prosodic Variation in Responses: The Case of Type-Conforming Responses to Yes/No Interrogatives.” In Prosody in Interaction, ed. by Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, Elisabeth Reber, and Margret Selting, 109–130. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 “At the Intersection of Turn and Sequence Organization: On the Relevance of “Slots” in Type-Conforming Responses to Polar Interrogatives.” In Units of Talk – Units of Action, ed. by Beatrice Szczepek Reed, and Geoffrey Raymond, 169–206. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robinson, Jeffrey D., and Heidi Kevoe-Feldman
2010 “Using Full Repeats to Initiate Repair on Others’ Questions.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 43 (3): 232–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rossi, Giovanni
2020 “Other-Repetition in Conversation across Languages: Bringing Prosody into Pragmatic Typology.” Language in Society 49: 495–520. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rumm, Andra
2019Avatud küsimused ja nende vastused eesti suulises argivestluses. Dissertationes linguisticae Universitatis Tartuensis 36. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
2007Sequence Organization in Interaction. A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Volume 1. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., Gail Jefferson, and Harvey Sacks
1977 “The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation.” Language 53: 361–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selting, Margret
1996 “Prosody as an Activity-Type Distinctive Cue in Conversation: The Case of So-Called ‘Astonished’ Questions in Repair Initiation.” In Prosody in Conversation: Interactional Studies (Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics 12), ed. by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, and Margret Selting, 231–270. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena
1996 “On Repeats and Responses in Finnish Conversations.” In Interaction and Grammar (Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics 13), ed. by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson, 277–327. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001b “Simple Answers to Polar Questions: The Case of Finnish.” In Studies in Interactional Linguistics, ed. by Margret Selting, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 405–431. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya
2018 “How We Manage Social Relationships through Answers to Questions: The Case of Interjections.” Discourse Processes 56 (3): 191–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strandson, Krista
2001 “Kuidas vestluskaaslane parandusprotsessi algatab?Keel ja Kirjandus 6: 394–409.Google Scholar
Svennevig, Jan
2004 “Other-Repetition as Display of Hearing, Understanding and Emotional Stance.” Discourse Studies 6 (4): 489–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A., Barbara A. Fox, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
2015Grammar in Everyday Talk: Building Responsive Actions (Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics 31). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, Sue, and Celia Kitzinger
2006 “Surprise as an Interactional Achievement: Reaction Tokens in Conversation.” Social Psychology Quarterly 69 (2): 150–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar