Article published In:
Functions of Language
Vol. 27:2 (2020) ► pp.113142
References (72)
References
Aijmer, Karin. 1997. I think: An English modal particle. In Toril Swan & Olaf Jansen Westvik (eds.), Modality in Germanic languages, 1–47. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berend, Nina. 2005. Regionale Gebrauchsstandards – Gibt es sie und wie kann man sie beschreiben? In Ludwig M. Eichinger & Werner Kallmeyer (eds.), Standardvariation. Wie viel Variation verträgt die deutsche Sprache?, 143–170. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Betz, Emma & Andrea Golato. 2008. Remembering relevant information and withholding relevant next actions: The German token ‘ach ja’. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41(1). 55–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan. 1989. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 91. 93–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bogaert, Julie van. 2010. A constructional taxonomy of “I think” and related expressions: Accounting for the variability of complement-taking mental predicates. English Language and Linguistics 14(3). 399–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. I think and other complement-taking mental predicates: A case of and for constructional grammaticalization. Linguistics 491. 295–332.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2008. The comment clause in English: Syntactic origins and pragmatic developments. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clift, Rebecca. 2016. Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 2007. Assessing and accounting. In Elizabeth Holt & Rebecca Clift (eds.), Reporting talk: Reported speech in interaction, 81–119. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Dagmar Barth-Weingarten. 2011. A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT2. Translated and adapted for English by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Dagmar Barth-Weingarten. Gesprächsforschung 121. 1–51. [URL]. (21 Dec., 2016.)
Declerck, Renaat & Susan Reed. 2005. What is modal about I thought that…? English Language and Linguistics 9(2). 311–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf, Nadine Proske & Arne Zeschel (eds.). 2017. Verben im interaktiven Kontext. Bewegungsverben und mentale Verben im gesprochenen Deutsch. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf & Silke Reineke. 2017. Epistemische Praktiken und ihre feinen Unterschiede: Verwendungen von ich dachte in gesprochener Sprache. In Arnulf Deppermann, Nadine Proske & Arne Zeschel (eds.), 337–375.Google Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf, Feilke Helmuth & Angelika Linke. 2016. Sprachliche und kommunikative Praktiken: Eine Annäherung aus linguistischer Sicht. In Arnulf Deppermann, Helmuth Feilke & Angelika Linke (eds.), Sprachliche und kommunikative Praktiken, 1–23. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf & Thomas Schmidt. 2014. Gesprächsdatenbanken als methodisches Instrument der Interaktionalen Linguistik – Eine exemplarische Untersuchung auf Basis des Korpus FOLK in der Datenbank für Gesprochenes Deutsch (DGD2). In Mitteilungen des Deutschen Germanistenverbandes 1/2014. 4–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1987. Po-faced receipts of teases. Linguistics 251. 219–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 2007. The stance triangle. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse, 139–182. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, Nicholas J. 2006. Social consequences of common ground. In Nicholas Enfield & Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction, 399–430. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
2008. Common ground as a resource for social affiliation. In István Kecskés & Jacob Mey (eds.), Intention, common ground and the egocentric speaker-hearer, 223–254. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Englebretson, Robert (ed.). 2007. Stancetaking in discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erman, Britt. 1987. Pragmatic expressions in English: A study of you know, you see and I mean in face-to-face conversation. Stockholm: Almquist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
. 2001. Pragmatic markers revisited with a focus on you know in adult and adolescent talk. Journal of Pragmatics 33(10). 1337–1359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, Anita. 2008. ‘And I think that is a very straight forward way of dealing with it’: The communicative function of cognitive verbs in political discourse. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 27(4). 384–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, Anita & Marjut Johansson. 2010. Cognitive verbs in context: A contrastive analysis of English and French argumentative discourse. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15(2). 240–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fox Tree, Jean E. & Josef C. Schrock. 2002. Basic meanings of you know and I mean . Journal of Pragmatics 34(6). 727–747. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1974. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Golato, Andrea. 2010. Marking understanding versus receipting information in talk: Achso. and ach in German interaction. Discourse Studies 12(2). 147–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Golato, Andrea & Emma Betz. 2008. German ach and achso in repair uptake: Resources to sustain or remove epistemic asymmetry. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 271. 7–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles. 1981. Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Günthner, Susanne. 1996. The prosodic contextualization of moral work: An analysis of reproaches in ‘why’-formats. In Margret Selting & Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies, 271–302. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Günthner, Susanne & Paul Hopper. 2010. Zeitlichkeit & sprachliche Strukturen: Pseudoclefts im Englischen und Deutschen. Gesprächsforschung 111. 1–28.Google Scholar
Helmer, Henrike, Silke Reineke & Arnulf Deppermann. 2016. A range of uses of negative epistemic constructions in German: ich weiß nicht as a resource for dispreferred actions. Journal of Pragmatics 1061. 97–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In John Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action, 299–345. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
. 2006. Cognition in Discourse. In Hedwig te Molder & Jonathan Potter (eds.), Conversation and cognition, 184–202. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
. 2010. Conversation Analysis: Practices and methods. In David Silverman (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice, 3rd edn., 208–230. London: Sage.Google Scholar
. 2012a. Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(1). 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(1). 30–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013a. Epistemics in conversation. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis, 370–394. Malden, MA: Wiley.Google Scholar
. 2013b. Action formation and its epistemic (and other) backgrounds. Discourse Studies 15(5). 551–578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John & Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 68(1). 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Imo, Wolfgang. 2005. A Construction Grammar approach to the phrase “I mean” in spoken English. InLiSt (Interaction and Linguistic Structure) 421. 1–37.Google Scholar
. 2007. Construction Grammar und Gesprochene-Sprache-Forschung. Konstruktionen mit zehn matrixsatzfähigen Verben im Gesprochenen Deutsch. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Konstruktion oder Funktion? Erkenntnisprozessmarker (change-of-state-token) im Deutschen. In Susanne Günthner & Jörg Bücker (eds.), Grammatik im Gespräch, 57–86. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Das Adverb jetzt zwischen Zeit- und Gesprächsdeixis. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 38(1). 25–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 2004. ‘At first I thought’: A normalizing device for extraordinary events. In Gene H. Lerner (ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation, 131–167. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity. Text & Talk 26(6). 699–731. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. I thought it was pretty neat: Social action formats for taking a stance. In Stef Slembrouck, Miriam Taverniers & Mieke Van Herreweghe (eds.), From ‘Will’ to ‘Well’: Studies in Linguistics, 293–304. Gent: Academia.Google Scholar
. 2012. I thought it was very interesting: Conversational formats for taking a stance. Journal of Pragmatics 44(15). 2194–2210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo. 2011. The terms of not knowing. In Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig (eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, 184–206. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William & Joshua Waletzky. 1967. Narrative analysis. In June Helm (ed.), Essays on the verbal and visual Arts, 12–44. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Laury, Ritva & Marja-Liisa Helasvuo. 2016. Disclaiming epistemic access with ‘know’ and ‘remember’ in Finnish. Journal of Pragmatics 1061. 80–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindström, Jan & Susanna Karlsson. 2016. Tensions in the epistemic domain and claims of no-knowledge: A study of Swedish medical interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 1061. 129–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Östman, Jan-Ola. 1981. You know: A discourse functional approach. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, Simona. 2011. Clause-combining and the sequencing of actions: Projector constructions in French talk-in-interaction. In Ritva Laury & Ryoko Suzuki (eds.), Subordination in conversation, 103–148. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. More than an epistemic hedge: French je sais pas ‘I don’t know’ as a resource for the sequential organization of turns and actions. Journal of Pragmatics 1061. 148–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1980. Telling my side: “Limited access” as a “fishing” device. Sociological Inquiry 501. 186–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1986. Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies 9(2–3). 219–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Potter, Jonathan. 1997. Discourse analysis as a way of analysing naturally occurring talk. In David Silverman (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice, 144–160. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Quasthoff, Uta. 1980. Erzählen in Gesprächen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on conversation. 21 Vols. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1996a. Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In Elinor Ochs, Emmanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar, 52–133. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheibmann, Joanne. 2000. I dunno: A usage-based account of the phonological reduction of don’t in American English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 32(1). 105–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selting, Margret, Peter Auer, Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, Jörg Bergmann, et al. 2009. Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT2). Gesprächsforschung 101. 353–402. [URL]. (21 Dec., 2016.)
Smith, Michael Sean. 2013. “I thought” initiated turns: Addressing discrepancies in first-hand and second-hand knowledge. Journal of Pragmatics 571. 318–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. 2002. “Object complements” and conversation: Towards a realistic account. Studies in Language 26(1). 125–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & Anthony Mulac. 1991. The discourse conditions for the use of the complementizer that in conversational English. Journal of Pragmatics 15(3). 237–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weatherall, Ann. 2011. I don’t know as a prepositioned epistemic hedge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 44(4). 317–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weinrich, Harald. 1993. Textgrammatik der deutschen Sprache. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Wooffitt, Robin. 1991. ‘I was just doing X ... when Y’: Some inferential properties of a device in accounts for paranormal experiences. Text 11(2). 267–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zeschel, Arne. 2017. Denken und wissen im gesprochenen Deutsch. In Arnulf Deppermann, Nadine Proske & Arne Zeschel (eds.), 249–335.Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Mondada, Lorenza & Fernanda Miranda da Cruz
2024. Requesting a Colleague’s Independent Opinion at Work. Research on Language and Social Interaction 57:4  pp. 372 ff. DOI logo
Pino, Marco & Laura Jenkins
2024. Inviting the Patient to Talk About a Conversation They Had with Another Healthcare Practitioner: A Way of Promoting Discussion About Disease Progression and End of Life in Palliative Care Interactions. Health Communication 39:4  pp. 778 ff. DOI logo
Schirm, Sam
2024. From doing work on your own talk to doing work on others’ talk. Interactional Linguistics 4:1  pp. 68 ff. DOI logo
Smith, Michael Sean & Lucas M. Seuren
2022. Re-apprehending misapprehensions: A practice for disclosing troubles in understanding in talk-in-interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 193  pp. 43 ff. DOI logo
Laury, Ritva, Marja-Liisa Helasvuo & Janica Rauma
2020. Chapter 6. When an expression becomes fixed. In Fixed Expressions [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 315],  pp. 133 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 november 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.