References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 September 2009
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Person Reference in InteractionLinguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, pp. 338 - 352Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007
References
and 2004, ‘I recognize your face but I can't remember your name: A question of expertise?’, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A: 819–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002, ‘Ethnic personal names and multiple identities in Anglophone Caribbean speech communities in Latin America’, Language in Society, 31(4): 577–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (eds.) 1984, Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1984, Referential Problems in Conversation (Occasional Paper No. 13). Department of Sociology, University of Manchester.Google Scholar
, and 2002, ‘Human temporal-lobe response to vocal sounds’, Brain Research Cognitive Brain Research, 13: 17–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bird-David, N. 1995, ‘Hunter-gatherers’ kinship organization’, in (ed.), Social Intelligence and Interaction, pp. 68–84. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (eds.) 2006, An Anthropology of Names and Naming. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
, , and 1995, ‘An interactive activation model of face naming’, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48A: 466–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 1997, ‘Dissociations between the processing of proper names and common names’, Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14: 209–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and 2005, ‘Naming very familiar people: When retrieving names is faster than retrieving semantic biographical information’, British Journal of Psychology, 96: 205–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and 1990, ‘Resolving semantically induced tip-of-the tongue states for proper nouns’, Memory and Cognition, 18: 339–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1970, ‘Relationship terms with the usative suffix in Tzotzil and Yucatec Maya’, Papers from the Sixth Regional Meeting, pp. 75–86. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
1998, ‘Conversational structure and language acquisition: The role of repetition in Tzeltal adult and child speech’, Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 8(2): 197–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1987, Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R. and Ford, M. 1964, ‘Address in American English’, in (eds.), Language in Culture and Society, pp. 234–44. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Brown, R. and Gilman, A. 1960, ‘The pronouns of power and solidarity’, in (ed.), Style in Language, pp. 253–76. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
and 1986, ‘Understanding face recognition’, British Journal of Psychology, 77: 305–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and 1991, ‘On the tip of the tongue: What causes word finding failures in young and older adults?’, Journal of Memory and Language, 30: 542–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1992, ‘I recognize your face but I can't remember your name: A simple explanation?’, British Journal of Psychology, 83: 45–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Button, G. 1987, ‘Moving out of closings’, in and (eds.), Talk and Social Organisation, pp. 101–51. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
1965, Economics and Prestige in a Maya Community: The Religious Cargo System in Zinacantan. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Capell, A. 1976, ‘General picture of Austronesian languages, New Guinea area’, in (ed.), Austronesian Languages – New Guinea Area Languages and Language Study. Vol. 2. Pacific Linguistics Series C-39, pp. 5–52. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Chafe, W. 1980, ‘The deployment of consciousness in the production of a narrative’, in (ed.), The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural, and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production, pp. 9–50. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
1994, Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chang, S.-J. 1978, ‘Anaphora in Korean’, in (ed.), Linguistic Research, pp. 223–78. Edmonton, AB: Linguistic Research Inc.Google Scholar
and 2005, ‘Working paper on non-recognitional person reference in English and Mandarin’, Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
Clancy, P. M. 1980, ‘Referential choice in English and Japanese narrative discourse’, in (ed.), The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural, and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production, pp.–127–201. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
2005, ‘Indexing stance: Reported speech as an interactional evidential’, MS, Colchester, Essex: University of Essex.Google Scholar
and 1970, ‘Nicknames and social structure in Zinacantan’, American Anthropologist, 72: 289–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B. 1996, ‘Markedness’, in , , and (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics, pp. 1–13. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1968, Pronominal Reference in Thai, Burmese, and Vietnamese. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Cumming, S. 1995, ‘Agent position in the Sejarah Melayu’, in and (eds.), Word Order in Discourse, pp. 51–83. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, J. 1984, ‘Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests, and proposals dealing with potential or actual rejection’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action, pp. 102–28. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Davidson, J.1990, ‘Modifications of invitations, offers and rejections’, in (ed.), Interaction Competence, pp. 149–80. Washington, DC: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis and University Press of America.Google Scholar
1999, Demonstratives: Form, Function, and Grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downing, P. 1996, ‘Proper names as a referential option in English conversation’, in (ed.), Studies in Anaphora, pp. 95–143. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997, “Open” class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of trouble in conversation’, Journal of Pragmatics, 28: 69–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002, ‘Out of context: An intersection between domestic life and the workplace, as contexts for (business) talk’, Language & Communication, 22: 477–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drew, P.2006, ‘Mis-alignments in “after-hours” calls to a British GP's practice: A study in telephone medicine’, in and (eds.), Communication in Medical Care: Interaction Between Primary Care Physicians and Patients. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drew, P. and Holt, E. 1995, ‘Idiomatic expressions and their role in the organization of topic transition in conversation’, in , , and (eds.), Idioms: Structural and Psychological Perspectives, pp. 117–32. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
and 1998, ‘Figures of speech: Figurative expressions and the management of topic transition in conversation’, Language in Society, 27: 495–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984, ‘The social meaning of subject pronouns in Italian conversation’, Text, 4: 277–311.Google Scholar
2000, ‘Extreme case formulations: Softeners, investment, and doing nonliteral’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33: 347–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984, Die Biologie des menschlichen Verhaltens. Grundriß der Humanethologie. Munich: Piper.Google Scholar
and 1987, Studienbrief ‘Rituelle Kommunikation’. Hagen: Fernuniversität – Gesamthochschule, Fachbereich Erziehungs- und Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
2002, Language, Cognition and the Brain: Insights from Sign Language Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
2000, ‘The theory of cultural logic: How individuals combine social intelligence with semiotics to create and maintain cultural meaning’, Cultural Dynamics, 12(1): 35–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,2002, ‘Ethnosyntax: Introduction’, in (ed.), Ethnosyntax: Explorations in Culture and Grammar, pp. 1–30. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
,2003, ‘Demonstratives in space and interaction: Data from Lao speakers and implications for semantic analysis’, Language, 79(1): 82–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,2004, ‘Nominal classification in Lao: A sketch’, Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 57(2/3): 117–43.Google Scholar
,2005, ‘The body as a cognitive artifact in kinship representations. Hand gesture diagrams by speakers of Lao’, Current Anthropology, 46(1): 51–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J.,2006a, ‘Social consequences of common ground’, in and (eds.), Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition, and Interaction, pp. 399–430. London: Berg.Google Scholar
,2006b, ‘Code, context, and cognition in the Lao pronoun system: Under the hood of social deixis’, typescript, Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
, and 2005, ‘Primary and secondary pragmatic functions of pointing gestures’, typescript, Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 2006, Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition, and Interaction. London: Berg.Google Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, S. 1986 [1972], ‘On sociolinguistic rules: Alternation and co-occurence’, in and (eds.), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, pp. 150–213. London: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Evans, N. (n.d.), ‘Naming’, MS, University of Melbourne.
2003, ‘Context, culture, and structuration in the languages of Australia’, Annual Review of Anthropology, 32: 13–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984, Maya Society Under Colonial Rule, The Collective Enterprise of Survival. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
1992, ‘The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations’, Psychological Review, 99(4): 689–723.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ford, C. A., Fox, B. A. and Thompson, S. A. 2002, ‘Constituency and the grammar of turn increments’, in , and (eds.), The Language of Turn and Sequence, pp. 14–38. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1987, Discourse Structure and Anaphora: Written and Conversational English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1967, Kinship and Marriage: An Anthropological Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gair, J. W. 1988, ‘Kinds of markedness’, in and (eds.), Linguistic Theory in Second Language Acquisition, pp. 225–50. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003, ‘Social deixis in Bininj Kun-wok conversation’, D.Phil., diss., University of Queensland.Google Scholar
Gergely, G. and Gergely C. 2006, ‘Sylvia's recipe: The role of imitation and pedagogy in the transmission of cultural knowledge’, in and (eds.), Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition, and Interaction. London: Berg.Google Scholar
, and The ABC Research Group 1999, Simple Heuristics that Make Us Smart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1990, Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction. Vol. II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1993, English Grammar: A Function-Based Introduction. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1977, ‘Same setting, different norms: Phone call beginnings in France and the United States’, Language in Society, 6: 209–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goethe, J. W. 1795, ‘Das Mädchen von Oberkirch’, in (ed.), 1949, Johann Wolfgang Goethe. Sämtliche Werke. Artemis-Gedenkausgabe zu Goethes 200. Geburtstag. Band 6. Die Weimarer Dramen, pp. 759–68. Zürich: Artemis-Verlag.Google Scholar
1974, Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Goodenough, W. H. 1965, ‘Personal names and modes of address in two Oceanic societies’, in (ed.), Context and Meaning in Cultural Anthropology, pp. 265–76. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
1986, ‘Audience diversity, participation and interpretation’, Text, 6: 283–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1987, ‘Forgetfulness as an interactive resource’, Social Psychology Quarterly, 50(2): 115–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. 1975, ‘Logic and conversation’, in and (eds.), Speech Acts, pp. 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
, and 1989, ‘Givenness, implicature, and demonstrative expressions in English discourse’, Chicago Linguistic Society, 25(2): 89–103.Google Scholar
, and 1993, ‘Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse’. Language, 69(2): 274–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2006, ‘On the preference for minimization in referring to persons: Evidence from Hebrew conversation’, Journal of Pragmatics, 38: 1305–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996, ‘Korean caki as a reflexive and a bound pronoun’, Master's thesis, University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
1990, Referential Practice: Language and Lived Space Among the Maya. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2005, ‘Explorations in the deictic field’, Current Anthropology, 46(2): 191–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1988, ‘The effects of different types of retrieval cues on the recall of names of famous faces’, Memory and Cognition, 16: 545–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2006, ‘Against markedness (and what to replace it with)’, Journal of Linguistics, 42(1): 25–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993, ‘Anchoring, iconicity, and orientation in Guugu Yimithirr pointing gestures’, Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 3: 3–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005, ‘“Whorish Old Man” and “One (Animal) Gentleman”: The intertextual construction of enemies and selves’, Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 15(1): 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haviland, J.2006, ‘Documenting lexical knowledge’, in and (eds.), Language Documentation, pp. 129–62. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Havránek, B. 1964 (1932), ‘The functional differentiation of the standard language’, in (eds.), A Prague School Reader on Esthetics, Literary Structure, and Style, pp. 3–16. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
, and 1991, ‘Routes through the face recognition system’, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43A: 761–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005, ‘Referential problems and turn construction: An exploration of an intersection between grammar and interaction’, Text, 25(4): 437–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinemann, T. 2005, ‘Where grammar and interaction meet: The preference for matched polarity in responsive turns in Danish’, in and (eds.), Syntax and Lexis in Conversation: Studies on the Use of Linguistic Resources in Talk-in-Interaction, pp. 375–402. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J.1984b, ‘A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action, pp. 299–345. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2002a, ‘The limits of questioning: Negative interrogatives and hostile question content’, Journal of Pragmatics, 34: 1427–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J.2002b, ’Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement’, in , , and (eds.), The Language of Turn and Sequence, pp. 196–224. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heritage, J. and Atkinson, J. M. 1984, ‘Introduction’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 1–15. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
and 2005, ‘The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in assessment sequences’, Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(1): 15–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, N. 1996, ‘Demonstratives in narrative discourse: A taxonomy of universal uses’, in (ed.), Studies in Anaphora, pp. 205–54. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2005, ‘Figurative pivots: The use of figurative expressions in pivotal topic transitions’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38: 35–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1987, ‘Discourse binding of the Korean reflexive caki’, Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics, 2: 196–208.Google Scholar
and 1996, ‘Languages, cultures, relationships: Telephone openings in Taiwan’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 29: 291–313.Google Scholar
, , and 1991, ‘Universals and particulars in telephone openings’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 24: 369–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, R. and Koleilat-Doany, N. 1989, ‘Telephone openings and conversational universals: A study in three languages’, in and (eds.), Language, Communication and Culture, pp. 157–79. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. 1991, ‘Opening sequences in Dutch telephone conversations’, in and (eds.), Talk and Social Structure: Studies in Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis, pp. 232–50. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
1989, ‘Formal forms and discernment: Two neglected aspects of linguistic politeness’, Multilingua, 8(2/3): 223–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ide, S.2005, ‘How and why honorifics can signify dignity and elegance: The indexicality and reflexivity of linguistic rituals’, in and (eds.), Broadening the Horizon of Linguistic Politeness, pp. 45–64 Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G. 1983, ‘Notes on some orderlinesses of overlap onset’, in and (eds.), Discourse Analysis and Natural Rhetoric, pp. 11–38. Padua: Cleup Editore.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G.1984, ‘On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately next-positioned matters’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action, pp. 191–221. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G.1987, ‘On embedded and exposed correction in conversation’, in and (eds.), Talk and Social Organization, pp. 86–100. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
1988, ‘On the sequential organization of troubles-talk in ordinary conversation’, Social Problems, 35(4): 418–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1990, ‘Lost properties? Retrieval differences between name codes and semantic codes for familiar people’, Psychological Research, 52: 62–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1988, ‘Functional inheritance, anaphora, and semantic interpretation in a generalized categorial grammar’, D.Phil., diss., Providence, RI: Brown University.Google Scholar
1988, Sign Languages of Aboriginal Australia: Cultural, Semiotic and Communicative Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1989, ‘Nominal reference in discourse: Introducing and tracking referents in Korean spoken narratives’, Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics, 3: 431–44.Google Scholar
1992, ‘Korean pronouns caki and ku: The grammatical distinction between selective and unselective binding’, Master's thesis, University of Maryland at College Park.Google Scholar
1994, ‘Grammatical relations and anaphora in Korean’, D.Phil., diss., University of Colorado. Boulder: Colorado.Google Scholar
Kirsner, R. S. 1979, ‘Deixis in discourse: An exploratory quantitative study of the modern Dutch demonstrative adjectives’, in (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 12: Discourse and Syntax, pp. 355–75. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
2005, ‘Speaking as a heterosexual: (How) does sexuality matter for talk-in-interaction’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38(3): 221–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2005, ‘Speaking as a lesbian: Correcting the heterosexist presumption’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38(4): 371–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Volume I, Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1983, The Kula – New Perspectives on Massim Exchange. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1973, ‘Abstract syntax of Korean with reference to English’, D.Phil., diss., Indiana University. Bloomington.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. 1987, ‘Minimization and conversational inference’, in and (eds.), The Pragmatic Perspective, pp. 61–129. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
2000, Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, MA and London: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
2006a, ‘Matrilineal clans and kin terms on Rossel island’, Anthropological Linguistics 48(1): 1–43.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C.2006b, ‘On the human “interactional engine”’, in and (eds.), Roots of Human Sociality: Cognition, Culture, and Interaction, pp. 39–69. London: Berg.Google Scholar
2006c, Parts of the body in Yélî Dnye, the Pauan language of Rossel Island. Language Science, 28: 221–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. C.in press, ‘Landscape, seascape and the ontology of places on Rossel Island, Papua New Guinea’, Language Sciences.
and 2004, ‘Comparative feedback: Cultural shaping of response systems in interaction’, paper presented at the Workshop on Feedback in Interaction, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
1969, The Elementary Structures of Kinship (2nd edition). London: Eyre and Spottiswoode.Google Scholar
2003, Grammar, Gesture, and Meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linde, C. 1979, ‘Focus of attention and the choice of pronouns in discourse’, in (ed.), Syntax and Semantics (12): Discourse and Syntax, pp. 337–54. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1994). Identification and Recogition in Swedish Telephone conversation openings. Language in Society, 23(2), 231–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lounsbury, F. G. 1965, ‘Another view of the Trobriand kinship categories’, in (ed.), Formal Semantic Analysis. American Anthropologist Special Publication 4 (67), part 2, pp. 142–85. Menasha, WI: American Anthropological Association.Google Scholar
Lounsbury, F. G.1969, ‘A formal account of the Crow- and Omaha-type kinship terminologies’, in (ed.), Cognitive Anthropology, pp. 212–55. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
1992, Language Diversity and Thought: A Reformulation of the Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 1997, Readings in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 2002, Telephone Calls: Unity and Diversity in Conversational Structure Across Languages and Cultures. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984, ‘“Brother” and “Uncle”: An analyis of rules, structural contradictions, and meaning in Vietnamese kinship’, American Anthropologist, 86: 290–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1995, Linguistic Semantics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 2004, ‘Semantics, cross cultural style’, Cognition, 92 64: B1–B12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1929. The Sexual Life of Savages in North-Western Melanesia. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Maybury-Lewis, D. 1984, ‘Name, person and ideology in central Brazil’, in and (eds.), Naming Systems: The 1980 Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society, pp. 1–10. Washington, DC: American Ethnological Society.Google Scholar
and 1992, ‘Linear and non-linear effects of aging on categorizing and naming faces’, Psychology and Aging, 7: 217–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1980, ‘It's not who you are but how you give that counts: The role of exchange in a Melanesian society’, American Ethnologist, 7: 58–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 1987, ‘Putting names to faces’, British Journal of Psychology, 78: 143–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (eds.) 2002. Modality and Structure in Signed and Spoken Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff, M., Walker, J. A., Sidnell, J. ‘Varieties of English on Bequia (St Vincent & Grenadines): A social and linguistic overview’, University of Edinburgh Unpublished manuscript, MS, 46 pages.
, and 1999, ‘Retrieving familiar people's names in patients with severe closed-head injuries’, Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 21: 171–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mithun, M. 1984, ‘Principles of naming in Mohawk’, in and (eds.), The 1980 Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society: Naming Systems, pp. 40–54. Washington, DC: American Ethnological Society.Google Scholar
and 1997, ‘Social markers and the evolution of reciprocal exchange’, Current Anthropology, 38: 93–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1994, ‘English and Japanese demonstratives: A contrastive analysis of second language acquisition’, Issues in Applied Linguistics, 5(2): 329–51.Google Scholar
and 1996, ‘Contrastive analysis of English and Japanese demonstratives from the perspective of L1 and L2 acquisition’, Language Sciences, 18: 811–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996, ‘Demonstratives in academic written English discourse’, Master's thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Ochs, E. 1984, ‘Clarification and culture’, in (eds.), Georgetown University Round Table in Languages and Linguistics, pp. 325–41. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
2001, ‘A focus-based study of English demonstrative reference’, Journal of English Linguistics, 29: 124–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002, ‘Referring to people in Korean and English’, D.Phil., diss., University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Oh, S.-Y.Forthcoming, ‘Overt reference to speaker and recipitent in Korean,’ Discourse Studies.
1964, ‘Principles governing the usage of in-law terminology on Andros Island, Bahamas’, Man Ser. 1, 64: pp. 54–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997, ‘A cross-linguistic study of the use of contrastive connectives in English, Korean, and Japanese conversation’, D.Phil., diss., University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
and (eds.). 2004, Kinship and Family: An Anthropological Reader. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1965/1932, Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Volume II, Elements of Logic). Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
1999, Sagali and the Kula. A Regional Systems Analysis of the Massim. Lund Monographs in Social Anthropology. Lund: Department of Sociology, Lund University.Google Scholar
1980, ‘Telling my side: “Limited Access” as a “Fishing’ Device”, Sociological Inquiry, 50: 186–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, A. M.1984, ‘Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1986, ‘Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims’, Human Studies, 9: 219–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1972, ‘Saramaka onomastics: An Afro-American naming system’, Ethnology, 4: 341–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1975, Philosophical Papers, Vol. 2, Mind, Language, and Reality, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ree, J. J. 1975, Demonstratives and number in Korean. In (ed.), The Korean Language: Its structure and social projection, pp. 33–46. Hawaii: Center for Korean Studies.Google Scholar
and 2005, Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2006, ‘Managing trouble responsibility and relationships during conversational Repair’, Communication Monographs, 73: 137–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1982, ‘The things we do with words: Ilongot speech acts and speech act theory in philosophy’, Language in Society, 11: 203–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1988, Proto Oceanic and the Austronesian Languages of Western Melanesia. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Sacks H. 1995, Lectures on Conversation, ed. . Voulmes 1 and 2. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, H.1970, ‘Doing “being ordinary”. Lecture 1, Spring 1970’, in Sacks (1992), pp. 215–21.
Sacks, H.1972, Unpublished class lectures.
Sacks, H.1972a, ‘An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for doing sociology’, in (ed.), Studies in Social Interaction, pp. 31–74. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, H.1972b, ‘On the analyzability of stories by children’, in and (eds.), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, pp. 325–45. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Sacks, H.([1973]1987). ‘On the perferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation’, in and . (eds.), Talk and Social Organisation, pp. 54–69. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
1992, ‘Doing “being ordinary” ’ Lectures on Conversation Vol.2 (Fall 1968–Spring 1972). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. and Schegloff, E. A. 1979, ‘Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction’, in (eds.), Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, pp. 15–21. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
, and 1974, ‘A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation’, Language, 50: 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1968, ‘Sequencing in conversational openings’, American Anthropologist, 70(6): 1075–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.1972, ‘Notes on a conversational practice: Formulating place’, in (ed.), Studies in Social Interaction, pp. 75–119. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.1979a, ‘Identification and recognition in telephone openings’, in (eds.), Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, pp. 23–78. New York: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.1979b, ‘The relevance of repair for syntax-for-conversation’, in (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 12: Discourse and Syntax, pp. 261–88. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1980, ‘Preliminaries to preliminaries: “Can I ask you a question”’, Sociological Inquiry, 50: 104–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.1984, ‘On some gestures’ relation to talk’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action, pp. 266–96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1988, Presequences and indirection: Applying speech act theory to ordinary conversation’, Journal of Pragmatics, 12(1): 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1992, ‘Repair after next turn: the last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation’, American Journal of Sociology, 95(5): 1295–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.1996a, ‘Some practices for referring to persons in talk-in-interaction: A partial sketch of a systematics’, in (eds.), Studies in Anaphora, pp. 437–85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996b. ‘Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action’, American Journal of Sociology, 102: 161–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997, ‘Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair’, Discourse Processes, 23: 499–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2000b, ‘Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation’, Language in Society, 29(1): 1–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2001, ‘Increments’. Forum Lecture, LSA Linguistic Institute, Santa Barbara, July 2001.
Schegloff, E. A.2002 [1970], ‘Opening sequencing’, in and (eds.), Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance, pp. 321–85. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2002a, ‘On ‘opening sequencing’: An introductory note’, in and (eds.), Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance, pp. 321–25. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2002b, ‘Beginnings in the telephone’, in and (eds), Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance, pp. 284–300. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2002c, ‘Reflections on research on telephone conversation: Issues of cross-cultural scope and scholarly exchange, interactional import and consequences’, in and (eds.), Telephone Calls: Unity and Diversity in Conversational Structure Across Languages and Cultures, pp. 249–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2004 [1970], ‘Answering the phone’, in (ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies From the First Generation, pp. 63–107. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2006a, ‘Interaction: The infrastructure for social institutions, the natural ecological niche for language, and the arena in which culture is enacted’, in and (eds.), Roots of Human Sociality: Cognition, Culture, and Interaction, pp 70–96, Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2006b, A Primer for Conversation Analysis: Sequence Organization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
, , 1977, ‘The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation’, Language 53: 361–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 2001, ‘Priming the access to names of famous faces’, British Journal of Psychology, 92: 303–07.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Searle, J. R. 1997 [1958], ‘Proper names’, in (ed.), Readings in the Philosophy of Language, pp. 585–92. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Selting, M. 1996, ‘Prosody as an activity-type distinctive cue in conversation: The case of so-called ‘astonished’ questions in repair initiation’, in and (eds.), Prosody in Conversation, pp. 231–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1985, ‘Trauer auf Trobriand-eine ethnologisch/linguistische Fallstudie’, Anthropos, 80: 471–92.Google Scholar
1986, Kilivila – The Language of the Trobriand Islanders. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Senft, G.1999, ‘Bronislaw Kasper Malinowski’, in , , and (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Supplement 1998. 20 pp. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Senft, G.2004, ‘Aspects of spatial deixis in Kilivila’, in (ed.), Deixis and Demonstratives in Oceanic languages, pp. 59–80. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Senft, G.in press, ‘Ich Weiβ nicht, was soll es bedeuten…’. Ethndinguistische Winke Zur Rolle von umfasseden Metadaten beider Arbeit mit Corpora. ‘In Sprachcorpona – Datenmengen und Exkennthisfortschritt. Jauhrbuch des Instituts für deutscne Sprache 2006. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
, and 1992, ‘Functional neuroanatomy of face and object processing. A positron emission tomography study’, Brain Research Cognitive Brain Research, 115: 15–36.Google ScholarPubMed
2001, ‘What children know when they know what a name is: The Non-Cartesian view of language acquisition’, Current Anthropology, 42(4): 481–514.Google Scholar
1983, Kuna Ways of Speaking. An Ethnographic Perspective. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
2004, ‘There's risks in everything: Extreme-case formulations and accountability in inquiry’, Discourse and Society, 15: 745–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005, ‘Gesture in the pursuit and display of recognition: A Caribbean case study’, Semiotica, 156(1/4): 55–87.Google Scholar
Sidnell, J.2001, ‘Rules and situated conduct: Wittgenstein's late writings and the problem of ethnographic description’, MS, 16 pages. Department of Anthropology, Northwestern University.
Sidner, C. L. 1983, ‘Focusing in the comprehension of definite anaphora’, in and (eds.), Computational Models of Discourse, pp. 267–330. Cambridge: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. 1976, ‘Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description’, in and (eds.), Meaning in Anthropology, pp. 11–55. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
2004, ‘“Cultural” concepts and the language-culture nexus’, Current Anthropology, 45(5): 621–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, M.2005, ‘The ethics of the archive in the politics of “cultural heritage”’, MS, 30 pages.
1990, ‘A mechanism for social selection and successful altruism’, Science, 250: 1665–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2005a, ‘Modified repeats: One method for asserting primary rights from second position’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38(2): 131–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T.2005b, ‘Stance, alignment and affiliation during story telling: Nodding as a token of preliminary affiliation’, unpublished paper, Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.
Strauss, S. 1993, ‘Why “this” and “that” are not complete without “it’”, in , , , , and (eds.), CLS 29: Papers From the 29th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 403–17. Chicago: The Society.Google Scholar
2002, ‘A conversation analytical study of telephone conversation openings between native and non-native speakers’, Journal of Pragmatics, 34: 1807–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2001, Language in the Body: Iconicity and Metaphor in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terasaki, A. K. 2004 (1976), ‘Pre-announcement sequences in conversation’, in (ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, pp. 171–223. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Toennies, F. 1961, ‘Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft’, in , , and (eds.), Theories of Society: Foundations of Modern Sociological Theory, pp. 191–201. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1984, Naming Systems: 1980 Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society. Washington, DC: American Ethnological Society.Google Scholar
, , and (eds.) 1998, Pheromone Communication in Social Insects. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
1978, ‘Los Elegidos de Dios: Etnografía de los Mayas de Quintana Roo’, Séria de Antropología Social, 56. Mexico: Instituto Nacional Indigenista.Google Scholar
, , and 2003, ‘Modulation of neural responses to speech by directing attention to voices or verbal content’, Brain Research Cognitive Brain Research, 17: 48–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 2005, ‘Interaction of face and voice areas during speaker recognition’, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17: 367–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1976, Women of Value, Men of Renown: New Perspectives in Trobriand Exchange. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
1956, Language, Thought, and Reality. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
1973, Crab Antics: The Social Anthropology of English-speaking Negro Societies of the Caribbean. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
2000, ‘Delayed next turn repair initiation in native/non-native speaker English conversation’, Applied Linguistics, 21(2): 244–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1971, Fighting with Food. Leadership, Values and Social Control in a Massim Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2004, Malinowski – Odyssee of an Anthropologist 1884–1920. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
, , and 1986, ‘Naming and categorizing faces and names’, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38A: 297–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993, ‘Reconstructing kinship or the pragmatics of kin talk’, Man, 28: 199–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1949, Human Behaviour and the Principle of Least Effort. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
and 2004, ‘I recognize your face but I can't remember your name: A question of expertise?’, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A: 819–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002, ‘Ethnic personal names and multiple identities in Anglophone Caribbean speech communities in Latin America’, Language in Society, 31(4): 577–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (eds.) 1984, Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1984, Referential Problems in Conversation (Occasional Paper No. 13). Department of Sociology, University of Manchester.Google Scholar
, and 2002, ‘Human temporal-lobe response to vocal sounds’, Brain Research Cognitive Brain Research, 13: 17–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bird-David, N. 1995, ‘Hunter-gatherers’ kinship organization’, in (ed.), Social Intelligence and Interaction, pp. 68–84. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (eds.) 2006, An Anthropology of Names and Naming. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
, , and 1995, ‘An interactive activation model of face naming’, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48A: 466–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 1997, ‘Dissociations between the processing of proper names and common names’, Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14: 209–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and 2005, ‘Naming very familiar people: When retrieving names is faster than retrieving semantic biographical information’, British Journal of Psychology, 96: 205–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and 1990, ‘Resolving semantically induced tip-of-the tongue states for proper nouns’, Memory and Cognition, 18: 339–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1970, ‘Relationship terms with the usative suffix in Tzotzil and Yucatec Maya’, Papers from the Sixth Regional Meeting, pp. 75–86. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
1998, ‘Conversational structure and language acquisition: The role of repetition in Tzeltal adult and child speech’, Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 8(2): 197–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1987, Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R. and Ford, M. 1964, ‘Address in American English’, in (eds.), Language in Culture and Society, pp. 234–44. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Brown, R. and Gilman, A. 1960, ‘The pronouns of power and solidarity’, in (ed.), Style in Language, pp. 253–76. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
and 1986, ‘Understanding face recognition’, British Journal of Psychology, 77: 305–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and 1991, ‘On the tip of the tongue: What causes word finding failures in young and older adults?’, Journal of Memory and Language, 30: 542–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1992, ‘I recognize your face but I can't remember your name: A simple explanation?’, British Journal of Psychology, 83: 45–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Button, G. 1987, ‘Moving out of closings’, in and (eds.), Talk and Social Organisation, pp. 101–51. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
1965, Economics and Prestige in a Maya Community: The Religious Cargo System in Zinacantan. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Capell, A. 1976, ‘General picture of Austronesian languages, New Guinea area’, in (ed.), Austronesian Languages – New Guinea Area Languages and Language Study. Vol. 2. Pacific Linguistics Series C-39, pp. 5–52. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Chafe, W. 1980, ‘The deployment of consciousness in the production of a narrative’, in (ed.), The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural, and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production, pp. 9–50. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
1994, Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chang, S.-J. 1978, ‘Anaphora in Korean’, in (ed.), Linguistic Research, pp. 223–78. Edmonton, AB: Linguistic Research Inc.Google Scholar
and 2005, ‘Working paper on non-recognitional person reference in English and Mandarin’, Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
Clancy, P. M. 1980, ‘Referential choice in English and Japanese narrative discourse’, in (ed.), The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural, and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production, pp.–127–201. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
2005, ‘Indexing stance: Reported speech as an interactional evidential’, MS, Colchester, Essex: University of Essex.Google Scholar
and 1970, ‘Nicknames and social structure in Zinacantan’, American Anthropologist, 72: 289–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B. 1996, ‘Markedness’, in , , and (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics, pp. 1–13. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1968, Pronominal Reference in Thai, Burmese, and Vietnamese. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Cumming, S. 1995, ‘Agent position in the Sejarah Melayu’, in and (eds.), Word Order in Discourse, pp. 51–83. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, J. 1984, ‘Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests, and proposals dealing with potential or actual rejection’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action, pp. 102–28. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Davidson, J.1990, ‘Modifications of invitations, offers and rejections’, in (ed.), Interaction Competence, pp. 149–80. Washington, DC: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis and University Press of America.Google Scholar
1999, Demonstratives: Form, Function, and Grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downing, P. 1996, ‘Proper names as a referential option in English conversation’, in (ed.), Studies in Anaphora, pp. 95–143. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997, “Open” class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of trouble in conversation’, Journal of Pragmatics, 28: 69–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002, ‘Out of context: An intersection between domestic life and the workplace, as contexts for (business) talk’, Language & Communication, 22: 477–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drew, P.2006, ‘Mis-alignments in “after-hours” calls to a British GP's practice: A study in telephone medicine’, in and (eds.), Communication in Medical Care: Interaction Between Primary Care Physicians and Patients. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drew, P. and Holt, E. 1995, ‘Idiomatic expressions and their role in the organization of topic transition in conversation’, in , , and (eds.), Idioms: Structural and Psychological Perspectives, pp. 117–32. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
and 1998, ‘Figures of speech: Figurative expressions and the management of topic transition in conversation’, Language in Society, 27: 495–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984, ‘The social meaning of subject pronouns in Italian conversation’, Text, 4: 277–311.Google Scholar
2000, ‘Extreme case formulations: Softeners, investment, and doing nonliteral’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33: 347–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984, Die Biologie des menschlichen Verhaltens. Grundriß der Humanethologie. Munich: Piper.Google Scholar
and 1987, Studienbrief ‘Rituelle Kommunikation’. Hagen: Fernuniversität – Gesamthochschule, Fachbereich Erziehungs- und Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
2002, Language, Cognition and the Brain: Insights from Sign Language Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
2000, ‘The theory of cultural logic: How individuals combine social intelligence with semiotics to create and maintain cultural meaning’, Cultural Dynamics, 12(1): 35–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,2002, ‘Ethnosyntax: Introduction’, in (ed.), Ethnosyntax: Explorations in Culture and Grammar, pp. 1–30. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
,2003, ‘Demonstratives in space and interaction: Data from Lao speakers and implications for semantic analysis’, Language, 79(1): 82–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,2004, ‘Nominal classification in Lao: A sketch’, Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 57(2/3): 117–43.Google Scholar
,2005, ‘The body as a cognitive artifact in kinship representations. Hand gesture diagrams by speakers of Lao’, Current Anthropology, 46(1): 51–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J.,2006a, ‘Social consequences of common ground’, in and (eds.), Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition, and Interaction, pp. 399–430. London: Berg.Google Scholar
,2006b, ‘Code, context, and cognition in the Lao pronoun system: Under the hood of social deixis’, typescript, Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
, and 2005, ‘Primary and secondary pragmatic functions of pointing gestures’, typescript, Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 2006, Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition, and Interaction. London: Berg.Google Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, S. 1986 [1972], ‘On sociolinguistic rules: Alternation and co-occurence’, in and (eds.), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, pp. 150–213. London: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Evans, N. (n.d.), ‘Naming’, MS, University of Melbourne.
2003, ‘Context, culture, and structuration in the languages of Australia’, Annual Review of Anthropology, 32: 13–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984, Maya Society Under Colonial Rule, The Collective Enterprise of Survival. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
1992, ‘The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations’, Psychological Review, 99(4): 689–723.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ford, C. A., Fox, B. A. and Thompson, S. A. 2002, ‘Constituency and the grammar of turn increments’, in , and (eds.), The Language of Turn and Sequence, pp. 14–38. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1987, Discourse Structure and Anaphora: Written and Conversational English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1967, Kinship and Marriage: An Anthropological Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gair, J. W. 1988, ‘Kinds of markedness’, in and (eds.), Linguistic Theory in Second Language Acquisition, pp. 225–50. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003, ‘Social deixis in Bininj Kun-wok conversation’, D.Phil., diss., University of Queensland.Google Scholar
Gergely, G. and Gergely C. 2006, ‘Sylvia's recipe: The role of imitation and pedagogy in the transmission of cultural knowledge’, in and (eds.), Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition, and Interaction. London: Berg.Google Scholar
, and The ABC Research Group 1999, Simple Heuristics that Make Us Smart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1990, Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction. Vol. II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1993, English Grammar: A Function-Based Introduction. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1977, ‘Same setting, different norms: Phone call beginnings in France and the United States’, Language in Society, 6: 209–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goethe, J. W. 1795, ‘Das Mädchen von Oberkirch’, in (ed.), 1949, Johann Wolfgang Goethe. Sämtliche Werke. Artemis-Gedenkausgabe zu Goethes 200. Geburtstag. Band 6. Die Weimarer Dramen, pp. 759–68. Zürich: Artemis-Verlag.Google Scholar
1974, Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Goodenough, W. H. 1965, ‘Personal names and modes of address in two Oceanic societies’, in (ed.), Context and Meaning in Cultural Anthropology, pp. 265–76. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
1986, ‘Audience diversity, participation and interpretation’, Text, 6: 283–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1987, ‘Forgetfulness as an interactive resource’, Social Psychology Quarterly, 50(2): 115–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. 1975, ‘Logic and conversation’, in and (eds.), Speech Acts, pp. 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
, and 1989, ‘Givenness, implicature, and demonstrative expressions in English discourse’, Chicago Linguistic Society, 25(2): 89–103.Google Scholar
, and 1993, ‘Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse’. Language, 69(2): 274–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2006, ‘On the preference for minimization in referring to persons: Evidence from Hebrew conversation’, Journal of Pragmatics, 38: 1305–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996, ‘Korean caki as a reflexive and a bound pronoun’, Master's thesis, University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
1990, Referential Practice: Language and Lived Space Among the Maya. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2005, ‘Explorations in the deictic field’, Current Anthropology, 46(2): 191–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1988, ‘The effects of different types of retrieval cues on the recall of names of famous faces’, Memory and Cognition, 16: 545–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2006, ‘Against markedness (and what to replace it with)’, Journal of Linguistics, 42(1): 25–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993, ‘Anchoring, iconicity, and orientation in Guugu Yimithirr pointing gestures’, Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 3: 3–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005, ‘“Whorish Old Man” and “One (Animal) Gentleman”: The intertextual construction of enemies and selves’, Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 15(1): 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haviland, J.2006, ‘Documenting lexical knowledge’, in and (eds.), Language Documentation, pp. 129–62. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Havránek, B. 1964 (1932), ‘The functional differentiation of the standard language’, in (eds.), A Prague School Reader on Esthetics, Literary Structure, and Style, pp. 3–16. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
, and 1991, ‘Routes through the face recognition system’, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43A: 761–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005, ‘Referential problems and turn construction: An exploration of an intersection between grammar and interaction’, Text, 25(4): 437–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinemann, T. 2005, ‘Where grammar and interaction meet: The preference for matched polarity in responsive turns in Danish’, in and (eds.), Syntax and Lexis in Conversation: Studies on the Use of Linguistic Resources in Talk-in-Interaction, pp. 375–402. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J.1984b, ‘A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action, pp. 299–345. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2002a, ‘The limits of questioning: Negative interrogatives and hostile question content’, Journal of Pragmatics, 34: 1427–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J.2002b, ’Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement’, in , , and (eds.), The Language of Turn and Sequence, pp. 196–224. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heritage, J. and Atkinson, J. M. 1984, ‘Introduction’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 1–15. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
and 2005, ‘The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in assessment sequences’, Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(1): 15–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, N. 1996, ‘Demonstratives in narrative discourse: A taxonomy of universal uses’, in (ed.), Studies in Anaphora, pp. 205–54. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2005, ‘Figurative pivots: The use of figurative expressions in pivotal topic transitions’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38: 35–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1987, ‘Discourse binding of the Korean reflexive caki’, Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics, 2: 196–208.Google Scholar
and 1996, ‘Languages, cultures, relationships: Telephone openings in Taiwan’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 29: 291–313.Google Scholar
, , and 1991, ‘Universals and particulars in telephone openings’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 24: 369–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, R. and Koleilat-Doany, N. 1989, ‘Telephone openings and conversational universals: A study in three languages’, in and (eds.), Language, Communication and Culture, pp. 157–79. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. 1991, ‘Opening sequences in Dutch telephone conversations’, in and (eds.), Talk and Social Structure: Studies in Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis, pp. 232–50. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
1989, ‘Formal forms and discernment: Two neglected aspects of linguistic politeness’, Multilingua, 8(2/3): 223–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ide, S.2005, ‘How and why honorifics can signify dignity and elegance: The indexicality and reflexivity of linguistic rituals’, in and (eds.), Broadening the Horizon of Linguistic Politeness, pp. 45–64 Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G. 1983, ‘Notes on some orderlinesses of overlap onset’, in and (eds.), Discourse Analysis and Natural Rhetoric, pp. 11–38. Padua: Cleup Editore.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G.1984, ‘On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately next-positioned matters’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action, pp. 191–221. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G.1987, ‘On embedded and exposed correction in conversation’, in and (eds.), Talk and Social Organization, pp. 86–100. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
1988, ‘On the sequential organization of troubles-talk in ordinary conversation’, Social Problems, 35(4): 418–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1990, ‘Lost properties? Retrieval differences between name codes and semantic codes for familiar people’, Psychological Research, 52: 62–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1988, ‘Functional inheritance, anaphora, and semantic interpretation in a generalized categorial grammar’, D.Phil., diss., Providence, RI: Brown University.Google Scholar
1988, Sign Languages of Aboriginal Australia: Cultural, Semiotic and Communicative Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1989, ‘Nominal reference in discourse: Introducing and tracking referents in Korean spoken narratives’, Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics, 3: 431–44.Google Scholar
1992, ‘Korean pronouns caki and ku: The grammatical distinction between selective and unselective binding’, Master's thesis, University of Maryland at College Park.Google Scholar
1994, ‘Grammatical relations and anaphora in Korean’, D.Phil., diss., University of Colorado. Boulder: Colorado.Google Scholar
Kirsner, R. S. 1979, ‘Deixis in discourse: An exploratory quantitative study of the modern Dutch demonstrative adjectives’, in (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 12: Discourse and Syntax, pp. 355–75. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
2005, ‘Speaking as a heterosexual: (How) does sexuality matter for talk-in-interaction’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38(3): 221–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2005, ‘Speaking as a lesbian: Correcting the heterosexist presumption’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38(4): 371–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Volume I, Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1983, The Kula – New Perspectives on Massim Exchange. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1973, ‘Abstract syntax of Korean with reference to English’, D.Phil., diss., Indiana University. Bloomington.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. 1987, ‘Minimization and conversational inference’, in and (eds.), The Pragmatic Perspective, pp. 61–129. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
2000, Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, MA and London: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
2006a, ‘Matrilineal clans and kin terms on Rossel island’, Anthropological Linguistics 48(1): 1–43.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C.2006b, ‘On the human “interactional engine”’, in and (eds.), Roots of Human Sociality: Cognition, Culture, and Interaction, pp. 39–69. London: Berg.Google Scholar
2006c, Parts of the body in Yélî Dnye, the Pauan language of Rossel Island. Language Science, 28: 221–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. C.in press, ‘Landscape, seascape and the ontology of places on Rossel Island, Papua New Guinea’, Language Sciences.
and 2004, ‘Comparative feedback: Cultural shaping of response systems in interaction’, paper presented at the Workshop on Feedback in Interaction, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
1969, The Elementary Structures of Kinship (2nd edition). London: Eyre and Spottiswoode.Google Scholar
2003, Grammar, Gesture, and Meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linde, C. 1979, ‘Focus of attention and the choice of pronouns in discourse’, in (ed.), Syntax and Semantics (12): Discourse and Syntax, pp. 337–54. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1994). Identification and Recogition in Swedish Telephone conversation openings. Language in Society, 23(2), 231–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lounsbury, F. G. 1965, ‘Another view of the Trobriand kinship categories’, in (ed.), Formal Semantic Analysis. American Anthropologist Special Publication 4 (67), part 2, pp. 142–85. Menasha, WI: American Anthropological Association.Google Scholar
Lounsbury, F. G.1969, ‘A formal account of the Crow- and Omaha-type kinship terminologies’, in (ed.), Cognitive Anthropology, pp. 212–55. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
1992, Language Diversity and Thought: A Reformulation of the Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 1997, Readings in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 2002, Telephone Calls: Unity and Diversity in Conversational Structure Across Languages and Cultures. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984, ‘“Brother” and “Uncle”: An analyis of rules, structural contradictions, and meaning in Vietnamese kinship’, American Anthropologist, 86: 290–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1995, Linguistic Semantics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 2004, ‘Semantics, cross cultural style’, Cognition, 92 64: B1–B12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1929. The Sexual Life of Savages in North-Western Melanesia. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Maybury-Lewis, D. 1984, ‘Name, person and ideology in central Brazil’, in and (eds.), Naming Systems: The 1980 Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society, pp. 1–10. Washington, DC: American Ethnological Society.Google Scholar
and 1992, ‘Linear and non-linear effects of aging on categorizing and naming faces’, Psychology and Aging, 7: 217–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1980, ‘It's not who you are but how you give that counts: The role of exchange in a Melanesian society’, American Ethnologist, 7: 58–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 1987, ‘Putting names to faces’, British Journal of Psychology, 78: 143–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (eds.) 2002. Modality and Structure in Signed and Spoken Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff, M., Walker, J. A., Sidnell, J. ‘Varieties of English on Bequia (St Vincent & Grenadines): A social and linguistic overview’, University of Edinburgh Unpublished manuscript, MS, 46 pages.
, and 1999, ‘Retrieving familiar people's names in patients with severe closed-head injuries’, Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 21: 171–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mithun, M. 1984, ‘Principles of naming in Mohawk’, in and (eds.), The 1980 Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society: Naming Systems, pp. 40–54. Washington, DC: American Ethnological Society.Google Scholar
and 1997, ‘Social markers and the evolution of reciprocal exchange’, Current Anthropology, 38: 93–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1994, ‘English and Japanese demonstratives: A contrastive analysis of second language acquisition’, Issues in Applied Linguistics, 5(2): 329–51.Google Scholar
and 1996, ‘Contrastive analysis of English and Japanese demonstratives from the perspective of L1 and L2 acquisition’, Language Sciences, 18: 811–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996, ‘Demonstratives in academic written English discourse’, Master's thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Ochs, E. 1984, ‘Clarification and culture’, in (eds.), Georgetown University Round Table in Languages and Linguistics, pp. 325–41. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
2001, ‘A focus-based study of English demonstrative reference’, Journal of English Linguistics, 29: 124–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002, ‘Referring to people in Korean and English’, D.Phil., diss., University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Oh, S.-Y.Forthcoming, ‘Overt reference to speaker and recipitent in Korean,’ Discourse Studies.
1964, ‘Principles governing the usage of in-law terminology on Andros Island, Bahamas’, Man Ser. 1, 64: pp. 54–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997, ‘A cross-linguistic study of the use of contrastive connectives in English, Korean, and Japanese conversation’, D.Phil., diss., University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
and (eds.). 2004, Kinship and Family: An Anthropological Reader. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1965/1932, Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Volume II, Elements of Logic). Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
1999, Sagali and the Kula. A Regional Systems Analysis of the Massim. Lund Monographs in Social Anthropology. Lund: Department of Sociology, Lund University.Google Scholar
1980, ‘Telling my side: “Limited Access” as a “Fishing’ Device”, Sociological Inquiry, 50: 186–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, A. M.1984, ‘Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1986, ‘Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims’, Human Studies, 9: 219–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1972, ‘Saramaka onomastics: An Afro-American naming system’, Ethnology, 4: 341–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1975, Philosophical Papers, Vol. 2, Mind, Language, and Reality, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ree, J. J. 1975, Demonstratives and number in Korean. In (ed.), The Korean Language: Its structure and social projection, pp. 33–46. Hawaii: Center for Korean Studies.Google Scholar
and 2005, Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2006, ‘Managing trouble responsibility and relationships during conversational Repair’, Communication Monographs, 73: 137–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1982, ‘The things we do with words: Ilongot speech acts and speech act theory in philosophy’, Language in Society, 11: 203–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1988, Proto Oceanic and the Austronesian Languages of Western Melanesia. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Sacks H. 1995, Lectures on Conversation, ed. . Voulmes 1 and 2. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, H.1970, ‘Doing “being ordinary”. Lecture 1, Spring 1970’, in Sacks (1992), pp. 215–21.
Sacks, H.1972, Unpublished class lectures.
Sacks, H.1972a, ‘An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for doing sociology’, in (ed.), Studies in Social Interaction, pp. 31–74. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, H.1972b, ‘On the analyzability of stories by children’, in and (eds.), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, pp. 325–45. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Sacks, H.([1973]1987). ‘On the perferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation’, in and . (eds.), Talk and Social Organisation, pp. 54–69. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
1992, ‘Doing “being ordinary” ’ Lectures on Conversation Vol.2 (Fall 1968–Spring 1972). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. and Schegloff, E. A. 1979, ‘Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction’, in (eds.), Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, pp. 15–21. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
, and 1974, ‘A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation’, Language, 50: 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1968, ‘Sequencing in conversational openings’, American Anthropologist, 70(6): 1075–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.1972, ‘Notes on a conversational practice: Formulating place’, in (ed.), Studies in Social Interaction, pp. 75–119. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.1979a, ‘Identification and recognition in telephone openings’, in (eds.), Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, pp. 23–78. New York: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.1979b, ‘The relevance of repair for syntax-for-conversation’, in (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 12: Discourse and Syntax, pp. 261–88. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1980, ‘Preliminaries to preliminaries: “Can I ask you a question”’, Sociological Inquiry, 50: 104–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.1984, ‘On some gestures’ relation to talk’, in and (eds.), Structures of Social Action, pp. 266–96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1988, Presequences and indirection: Applying speech act theory to ordinary conversation’, Journal of Pragmatics, 12(1): 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1992, ‘Repair after next turn: the last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation’, American Journal of Sociology, 95(5): 1295–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.1996a, ‘Some practices for referring to persons in talk-in-interaction: A partial sketch of a systematics’, in (eds.), Studies in Anaphora, pp. 437–85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996b. ‘Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action’, American Journal of Sociology, 102: 161–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997, ‘Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair’, Discourse Processes, 23: 499–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2000b, ‘Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation’, Language in Society, 29(1): 1–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2001, ‘Increments’. Forum Lecture, LSA Linguistic Institute, Santa Barbara, July 2001.
Schegloff, E. A.2002 [1970], ‘Opening sequencing’, in and (eds.), Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance, pp. 321–85. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2002a, ‘On ‘opening sequencing’: An introductory note’, in and (eds.), Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance, pp. 321–25. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2002b, ‘Beginnings in the telephone’, in and (eds), Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance, pp. 284–300. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2002c, ‘Reflections on research on telephone conversation: Issues of cross-cultural scope and scholarly exchange, interactional import and consequences’, in and (eds.), Telephone Calls: Unity and Diversity in Conversational Structure Across Languages and Cultures, pp. 249–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2004 [1970], ‘Answering the phone’, in (ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies From the First Generation, pp. 63–107. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2006a, ‘Interaction: The infrastructure for social institutions, the natural ecological niche for language, and the arena in which culture is enacted’, in and (eds.), Roots of Human Sociality: Cognition, Culture, and Interaction, pp 70–96, Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A.2006b, A Primer for Conversation Analysis: Sequence Organization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
, , 1977, ‘The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation’, Language 53: 361–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 2001, ‘Priming the access to names of famous faces’, British Journal of Psychology, 92: 303–07.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Searle, J. R. 1997 [1958], ‘Proper names’, in (ed.), Readings in the Philosophy of Language, pp. 585–92. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Selting, M. 1996, ‘Prosody as an activity-type distinctive cue in conversation: The case of so-called ‘astonished’ questions in repair initiation’, in and (eds.), Prosody in Conversation, pp. 231–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1985, ‘Trauer auf Trobriand-eine ethnologisch/linguistische Fallstudie’, Anthropos, 80: 471–92.Google Scholar
1986, Kilivila – The Language of the Trobriand Islanders. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Senft, G.1999, ‘Bronislaw Kasper Malinowski’, in , , and (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Supplement 1998. 20 pp. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Senft, G.2004, ‘Aspects of spatial deixis in Kilivila’, in (ed.), Deixis and Demonstratives in Oceanic languages, pp. 59–80. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Senft, G.in press, ‘Ich Weiβ nicht, was soll es bedeuten…’. Ethndinguistische Winke Zur Rolle von umfasseden Metadaten beider Arbeit mit Corpora. ‘In Sprachcorpona – Datenmengen und Exkennthisfortschritt. Jauhrbuch des Instituts für deutscne Sprache 2006. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
, and 1992, ‘Functional neuroanatomy of face and object processing. A positron emission tomography study’, Brain Research Cognitive Brain Research, 115: 15–36.Google ScholarPubMed
2001, ‘What children know when they know what a name is: The Non-Cartesian view of language acquisition’, Current Anthropology, 42(4): 481–514.Google Scholar
1983, Kuna Ways of Speaking. An Ethnographic Perspective. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
2004, ‘There's risks in everything: Extreme-case formulations and accountability in inquiry’, Discourse and Society, 15: 745–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005, ‘Gesture in the pursuit and display of recognition: A Caribbean case study’, Semiotica, 156(1/4): 55–87.Google Scholar
Sidnell, J.2001, ‘Rules and situated conduct: Wittgenstein's late writings and the problem of ethnographic description’, MS, 16 pages. Department of Anthropology, Northwestern University.
Sidner, C. L. 1983, ‘Focusing in the comprehension of definite anaphora’, in and (eds.), Computational Models of Discourse, pp. 267–330. Cambridge: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. 1976, ‘Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description’, in and (eds.), Meaning in Anthropology, pp. 11–55. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
2004, ‘“Cultural” concepts and the language-culture nexus’, Current Anthropology, 45(5): 621–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, M.2005, ‘The ethics of the archive in the politics of “cultural heritage”’, MS, 30 pages.
1990, ‘A mechanism for social selection and successful altruism’, Science, 250: 1665–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2005a, ‘Modified repeats: One method for asserting primary rights from second position’, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38(2): 131–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T.2005b, ‘Stance, alignment and affiliation during story telling: Nodding as a token of preliminary affiliation’, unpublished paper, Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.
Strauss, S. 1993, ‘Why “this” and “that” are not complete without “it’”, in , , , , and (eds.), CLS 29: Papers From the 29th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 403–17. Chicago: The Society.Google Scholar
2002, ‘A conversation analytical study of telephone conversation openings between native and non-native speakers’, Journal of Pragmatics, 34: 1807–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2001, Language in the Body: Iconicity and Metaphor in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terasaki, A. K. 2004 (1976), ‘Pre-announcement sequences in conversation’, in (ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, pp. 171–223. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Toennies, F. 1961, ‘Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft’, in , , and (eds.), Theories of Society: Foundations of Modern Sociological Theory, pp. 191–201. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
and (eds.) 1984, Naming Systems: 1980 Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society. Washington, DC: American Ethnological Society.Google Scholar
, , and (eds.) 1998, Pheromone Communication in Social Insects. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
1978, ‘Los Elegidos de Dios: Etnografía de los Mayas de Quintana Roo’, Séria de Antropología Social, 56. Mexico: Instituto Nacional Indigenista.Google Scholar
, , and 2003, ‘Modulation of neural responses to speech by directing attention to voices or verbal content’, Brain Research Cognitive Brain Research, 17: 48–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 2005, ‘Interaction of face and voice areas during speaker recognition’, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17: 367–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1976, Women of Value, Men of Renown: New Perspectives in Trobriand Exchange. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
1956, Language, Thought, and Reality. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
1973, Crab Antics: The Social Anthropology of English-speaking Negro Societies of the Caribbean. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
2000, ‘Delayed next turn repair initiation in native/non-native speaker English conversation’, Applied Linguistics, 21(2): 244–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1971, Fighting with Food. Leadership, Values and Social Control in a Massim Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2004, Malinowski – Odyssee of an Anthropologist 1884–1920. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
, , and 1986, ‘Naming and categorizing faces and names’, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38A: 297–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1993, ‘Reconstructing kinship or the pragmatics of kin talk’, Man, 28: 199–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1949, Human Behaviour and the Principle of Least Effort. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar