Agar, M. (1973). Ripping and Running: A Formal Ethnography of Urban Heroin Addicts, New York: Seminar Press.Google Scholar

Aijmer, K. (2002). English Discourse Particles: Evidence from a Corpus. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Albert, E. (1964). “‘Rhetoric,’ ‘Logic,’ and ‘Poetics’ in Burundi: Cultural Patterning of Speech Behavior.” In Gumperz, J. J. and Hymes, D. (Eds.), The Ethnography of Communication. American Anthropologist66: 6, part 2 (special publication).

Allsopp, R. (1996). Dictionary of Caribbean English Usage. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Argyle, M., and Cook, M. (1976). Gaze and Mutual Gaze. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Argyle, M., and Dean, J. (1965). “Eye-Contact, Distance and Affiliation.”Sociometry 28 (3): 289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Argyle, M., and Graham, J. A. (1976). “The Central Europe Experiment: Looking at Persons and Looking at Things.”Journal of Environmental Psychology and Nonverbal Behavior 1 (1): 6–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (Eds.) (1984). Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge University Press.

Auer, P. (1984). “Referential Problems in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 8: 627–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Auer, P. and Uhmann, S. (1982). “Aspekte Der Konversationellen Organisation Von Bewertungen.” Deutsche Sprache 10: 1–32.Google Scholar

Bavelas, J. B., Coates, L. and Johnson, T. (2002). “Listener Responses as a Collaborative Process: The Role of Gaze.” Journal of Communication 52 (3): 566–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beach, W. A. (1993). “Transitional Regularities for Casual ‘Okay’ Usages.” Journal of Pragmatics 19 (4): 325–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beach, W. and Lindström, A. (1992). “Conversational Universals and Comparative Theory: Turning to Swedish and American Acknowledgment Tokens Interaction.” Communication Theory 2: 24–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beattie, G. W. (1978). “Floor Apportionment and Gaze in Conversational Dyads.” British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 17: 7–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beattie, G. W. (1979). “Planning Units in Spontaneous Speech: Some Evidence from Hesitations in Speech and Speaker Gaze Direction in Conversation.” Linguistics 17: 61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Betz, E. and Golato, A. (2008). “Remembering Relevant Information and Withholding Relevant Next Actions: The German Token Achja.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 41 (1): 58–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Billig, M. (1999a). “Conversation Analysis and the Claims of Naivete.” Discourse and Society 10: 572–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Billig, M. (1999b). “Whose Terms? Whose Ordinariness? Rhetoric and Ideology in Conversation Analysis.” Discourse and Society 10: 543–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bitextin, A. B. (1994). “Chastitsy -TO, ZHE, VED' i vvodnye konstruktsii tipa KAK IZVESTNO kak sredstva ukazanija na izvestnost' propozitsional'nogo soderzhanija predlozhenija slushajuschemu.” Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Moskovskij gosudarstvennyj universitet, Moscow.

Blass, R. (2000). “Particles, Propositional Attitude and Mutual Manifestness.” In Andersen, G. and Fretheim, T. (Eds.), Pragmatic Markers and Propositional Attitude (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam and Philadelphia:John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Bloomfield, L. (1946). Language. New York: Henry Holt & Co.Google Scholar

Bloomfield, L. (1970). “Meaning.” In Hockett, C. (Ed.), A Leonard Bloomfield Anthology (pp. 400–405). Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., and Kasper, G. (Eds.) (1989). Cross-Cultural Pragmatics. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.

Boersma, P. and Weenink, D. (2006). “Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer (Version 4.4.24 [Computer program].” Available online at www.praat.org. (Accessed 19 June 2006.)

Bolden, G. B. (2003). “Doing Being Late: The Use of the Russian Particle -to in Personal State Inquiries.” CLIC (Crossroads of Language, Interaction, and Culture) 5: 3–27.Google Scholar

Bolden, G. B. (2005). “Delayed and Incipient Actions: The Discourse Markers ‘-To’ and ‘So’ in Russian and English Conversation.” Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar

Bolden, G. B. (2006). “Little Words That Matter: Discourse Markers ‘So’ and ‘Oh’ and the Doing of Other-Attentiveness in Social Interaction.” Journal of Communication 56 (4): 661–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bolden, G. B. (2008). “Reopening Russian Conversations: The Discourse Particle -to and the Negotiation of Interpersonal Accountability in Closings.” Human Communication Research 34: 99–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bolden, G. B. (2009). “Implementing incipient actions: The discourse marker ‘so’ in English conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics. 41 (5): 974–998CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bonnot, C. (1987). “-To Particule de rappel et de thématisation.” In Les Particules énonciatives en russe contemporain (Vol. II (pp. 113–171). Paris: Institut D'Études Slaves.Google Scholar

Bonnot, C. (1990). “La Particule -to et la polémique chachée en russe moderne: A propos du statut énuonciatif du thème.” Revue des Études Slaves 62 (1–2): 67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boyd, E., and Heritage, J. (2006). “Taking the Patient's Medical History: Questioning During Comprehensive History Taking.” In Heritage, J. and Maynard, D. (Eds.), Practicing Medicine: Talk and Action in Primary-Care Encounters (pp. 151–184). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Brown, G., and Yule, G. (1983). Discourse Analysis. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brown, P. (1979). “Language, Interaction and Sex Roles in a Mayan Community: A Study of Politeness and the Position of Women.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley.

Brown, P. (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

Brown, P. (2007). “Principles of Person Reference in Tzeltal Conversation.” In Enfield, N. J. and Stivers, T. (Eds.), Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives (pp. 172–202). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Brown, P. (in press). “Questions and Their Responses in Tzeltal.” In Stivers, T., Enfield, N. J. and Levinson, S. C. (Eds.), Question-Response Sequences in 10 Languages, Special Issue of Journal of Pragmatics.

Brown, P., and Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brown, P., and Levinson, S. C. (2005). Comparative Response Systems. Paper presented at the 104th Annual Meetings of the American Anthropological Association.

Button, G., and Casey, N. (1984). “Generating Topic: The Use of Topic Initial Elicitors.” In Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 167–190). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Button, G., and Casey, N. (1985). “Topic Nomination and Topic Pursuit.” Human Studies 8: 3–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Button, G., and Casey, N. (1988/9). “Topic Initiation: Business-at-Hand.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 22: 61–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cassidy, F. G. and Page, R. (1980). Dictionary of Jamaican English, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Chang, Y.-C. (1998). “Les Indices acoustiques et perceptifs des questions totales en Mandarin parlé de Taiwan” [“An Acoustic and Perceptual Study of Yes/No-Questions in Taiwan Mandarin Chinese”], Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 27: 51–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chui, K. (1996). “Organization of Repair in Chinese Conversation.” Text 16: 343–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clayman, S. E. and Heritage, J. (2002). “Questioning Presidents: Journalistic Deference and Adversarialness in the Press Conferences of U.S. Presidents Eisenhower and Reagan.” Journal of Communication 52 (4): 749–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clayman, S. E., Heritage, J., Elliott, M. N. and McDonald, L. (2007). “When Does the Watchdog Bark? Conditions of Aggressive Questioning in Presidential News Conferences.” American Sociological Review 72 (1): 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clift, R. (1999). “Grammar in Interaction: The Case of ‘Actually’.” Essex Research Reports in Linguistics.Google Scholar

Clift, R. (2006a). “Getting There First: The Non-Narrative Use of Reported Speech in Interaction.” In Holt, E. and Clift, R. (Eds.), Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction (pp. 120–149). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Clift, R. (2006b). “Indexing Stance: Reported Speech as an Interactional Evidential.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 10 (5): 569–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cohen, J. (1960). “A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales.” Educational and Psychological Measurement 20 (1): 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Comrie, B. (1981). Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1992). “Contextualizing Discourse: The Prosody of Interactive Repair.” In P. Auer, and Luzio, A. di (Eds.), The Contextualization of Language (pp. 337–364). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2004). “Prosody and Sequence Organization in English Conversation: The Case of New Beginnings.” In Couper-Kuhlen, E. and Ford, C. E. (Eds.), Sound Patterns in Interaction: Cross-Linguistic Studies from Conversation (pp. 335–376). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Couper-Kuhlen, E. and Ford, C. E. (2004). Sound Patterns in Interaction: Cross-Linguistic Studies from Conversation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Couper-Kuhlen, E., and Selting, M. (Eds.). (1996). Prosody in Conversation. Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Curl, T. S. (2005). “Practices in Other-Initiated Repair Resolution: The Phonetic Differentiation of ‘Repetitions’.” Discourse Processes 39: 1–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Darwin, C. R. (1872). The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. London: John Murray.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dersley, I., and Wootton, A. (2000). “Complaint Sequences Within Antagonistic Argument.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 33 (4): 375–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dittman, A. T. and Llewellyn, L. G. (1967). “The Phonemic Clause as a Unit of Speech Decoding.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 6: 341–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dittmann, J. (1980). “Auch Und Denn Als Abtönungspartikeln.” Zeitschrift Für Germanische Linguistik 8: 51–73.Google Scholar

Drew, P. (1984). “Speakers' Reportings in Invitation Sequences.” In Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 152–164). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Drew, P. (1991). “Asymmetries of Knowledge in Conversational Interactions.” In Markova, I. and Foppa, K. (Eds.), Asymmetries in Dialogue (pp. 29–48). Hemel Hampstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar

Drew, P. (1992). “Contested Evidence in Courtroom Cross-Examination: The Case of a Trial for Rape.” In Drew, P. and Heritage, J. (Eds.), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings (pp. 470–520). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Drew, P. (1997). “‘Open’ Class Repair Initiators in Response to Sequential Sources of Troubles in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 28: 69–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Drew, P. (2003). “Comparative Analysis of Talk-in-Interaction in Different Institutional Settings.” In Glenn, P. J., LeBaron, C. D. and Mandelbaum, J. (Eds.), Studies in Language and Social Interaction: In Honor of Robert Hopper (pp. 293–308). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Drew, P. and Holt, E. (1998). “Figures of Speech: Figurative Expressions and the Management of Topic Transition in Conversation.” Language in Society 27: 495–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Duncan, S. (1972). “Some Signals and Rules for Taking Speaking Turns in Conversations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 23: 283–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Duncan, S. (1974). “On the Structure of Speaker-Auditor Interaction During Speaking Turns.” Language in Society 2: 161–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Duncan, S. (1975). “Interaction Units During Speaking Turns in Dyadic, Face-to-Face Conversations.” In Kendon, A., Harris, R. M. and Key, M. R. (Eds.), Organization of Behaviour in Face-to-Face Interaction (pp. 199–212). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Duncun, S. and Fiske, D. (1977). Face-to-Face Interaction: Research, Methods, and Theory. Hillsdale, N.J.: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar

Duncan, S. and Niederehe, G. (1974). “On Signalling That It's Your Turn to Speak.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 10 (3): 234–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Durrell, M. (1992). Using German: A Guide to Contemporary Usage. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Egbert, M. (1993). Schisming: The Transformation from a Single Conversation to Multiple Conversations. Ph.D. Dissertation. UCLA, Department of Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar

Egbert, M. (1996). “Context-Sensitivity in Conversation: Eye Gaze and the German Repair Initiator ‘bitte?’” Language in Society 25 (4): 587–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Egbert, M. (1997a). “Schisming: The Collaborative Transformation from a Single Conversation to Multiple Conversations.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 30 (1): 1–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Egbert, M. (1997b). “Some Interactional Achievements of Other-Initiated Repair in Multiperson Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 27 (5): 611–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Egbert, M. (2002). Der Reparatur-Mechanismus in deutschen und interkulturellen Gesprächen. Habilitation. University of Oldenburg.Google Scholar

Egbert, M. (2004). “Other-Initiated Repair and Membership Categorization: Some Conversational Events That Trigger Linguistic and Regional Membership Categorization.” Journal of Pragmatics 36 (8): 1467–1498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ekman, P., and Friesen, W. V. (1974). “Nonverbal Leakage and Clues to Deception.” In Weitz, S. (Ed.), Nonverbal Communication (pp. 269–290). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Enfield, N. J. (2007). “Meanings of the Unmarked: How ‘Default’ Person Reference Does More Than Just Refer.” In Enfield, N. J. and Stivers, T. (Eds.), Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives (pp. 97–120). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Enfield, N. J., and Stivers, T. (Eds.) (2007). Person Reference in Interaction. Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Erickson, F. (1979). “Talking Down: Some Cultural Sources of Miscommunication in Interracial Interviews.” In Wolfgang, A. (Ed.), Nonverbal Communication: Applications and Cultural Implications (pp. 99–126). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Evans, N., and Wilkins, D. (2000). “In the Mind's Ear: The Semantic Extensions of Perception Verbs in Australian Languages.” Language 76 (3): 546–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Exline, R. V. (1963). “Explorations in the Process of Person Perception: Visual Interaction in Relation to Competition, Sex, and Need for Affiliation.” Journal of Personality 31 (1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ferrara, K. (1997). “Form and Function of the Discourse Marker Anyway: Implications for Discourse Analysis.” Linguistics 35 (2): 343–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Filipi, A., and Wales, R. (2003). “Differential Uses of Okay, Right, and Alright, and Their Function in Signaling Perspective Shift or Maintenance in a Map Task.” Semiotica 147–1 (4): 429–455.Google Scholar

Fincke, S. (1999). “The Syntactic Organization of Repair in Bikol.” In Fox, B., Jurafsky, D., and Michaelis, L. (Eds.), Cognition and Function in Language (pp. 252–267). Palo Alto, Calif.: CSLI.Google Scholar

Fishman, P. (1983). “Interaction: The Work Women Do.” In Thorne, B., Kramarae, C., and Henley, N. (Eds.), Language, Gender, and Society (pp. 89–101). London: Newbury House.Google Scholar

Foolen, A. (2006). “Polysemy Patterns in Contrast: The Case of Dutch Toch and German Doch.” In Aijmer, K. and Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M. (Eds.), Pragmatic Markers in Contrast (pp. 59–72). Amsterdam: Elsevier,Google Scholar

Ford, C., Fox, B. A., and Thompson, S. A. (1996). “Practices in the Construction of Turns: The ‘TCU’ Revisited.” Pragmatics 6: 427–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ford, C. E., Fox, B. A. and Thompson, S. A. (2002). “Social Interaction and Grammar.” In Tomasello, Michael (Ed.), The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure (Vol. II, pp. 119–143). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Fox, B. (2007). “Principles Shaping Grammatical Practices: An Exploration.” Discourse Studies 9: 299–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fox, B. and Wouk, F. (2003). A Cross-Linguistic Study of Self-Repair. Proposal to the National Science Foundation.

Fox, B., Hayashi, M., and Jasperson, R. (1996). “A Cross-Linguistic Study of Syntax and Repair.” In Ochs, E., Schegloff, E. A., and Thompson, S. A. (Eds.) Interaction and Grammar (pp. 185–237). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Franck, D. (1980). Grammatik und Konversation. Königstein im Taunus: Scriptor.Google Scholar

Fretheim, T. (2000). “Propositional Attitude in Norwegian Conditional Clauses.” In Andersen, G. and Fretheim, T. (Eds.), Pragmatic Markers and Propositional Attitude (pp. 53–84). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Fries, C. C. (1952). The Structure of English. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar

Gårding, E. (1987). “Speech Act and Tonal Patterns in Standard Chinese: Constancy and Variation.” Phonetica 44: 13–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gardner, R. (2001). When Listeners Talk: Response Tokens and Listener Stance. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gibson, J. J., and Pick, A. D. (1963). “Perception of Another Person's Looking Behavior.” American Journal of Psychology 76 (3): 386–394.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Goffman, E. (1953). “Communication Conduct in an Island Community.” Unpublished dissertation.

Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. (1964). “The Neglected Situation.” American Anthropologist 66 (6): pt. II: 133–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. (1976). “Replies and Responses.” Language in Society 5: 257–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar

Golato, A. (2005). Compliments and Compliment Responses: Grammatical Structure and Sequential Organization. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Golato, A. and Betz, E. (2008). “German Ach and Ach So in Repair Uptake: Resources to Sustain or Remove Epistemic Asymmetry.” Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 27 (1): 7–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Golato, A., and Fagyal, Z. (2008). “Comparing Single and Double Sayings of the German Response Token Ja and the Role of Prosody: A Conversation Analytic Perspective.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 41 (3):1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1979). “The Interactive Construction of a Sentence in Natural Conversation.” In Psathas, G. (Ed.), Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology (pp. 97–121). New York: Irvington.Google Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1980). “Restarts, Pauses, and the Achievement of Mutual Gaze at Turn-Beginning.” Sociological Inquiry 50 (3–4): 272–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational Organization: Interaction Between Speakers and Hearers. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1984). “Notes on Story Structure and the Organization of Participation.” In Atkinson, M. and Heritage, J. (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 225–246). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1986). “Between and Within: Alternative and Sequential Treatments of Continuers and Assessments.” Human Studies 9: 205–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1987). “Forgetfulness as an Interactive Resource.” Social Psychology Quarterly 50 (2): 115–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C., and Goodwin, M. H. (1987). “Concurrent Operations on Talk: Notes on the Interactive Organization of Assessments.” IPrA Papers in Pragmatics 1 (1): 1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C. and Goodwin, M. H. (1992). “Assessments and the Construction of Contexts.” In Duranti, A. and Goodwin, C. (Eds.), Rethinking Context. Language as an Interactive Phenomenon (pp. 147–190). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Goodwin, M. H. (1980). “Processes of Mutual Monitoring Implicated in the Production of Description Sequences.” Sociological Inquiry 50: 303–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, M. H. (1984). “Aggravated Correction and Disagreement in Children's Conversations.” Journal of Pragmatics 7: 657–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Greatbatch, D. (1988). “A Turn-Taking System for British News Interviews.” Language in Society 17 (3): 401–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gullberg, M. (2003). “Eye Movements and Gestures in Human Interaction.” In Hy#x00F6;n#x00E4;, J., Radach, R., and Deubel, H. (Eds.), The Mind's Eyes: Cognitive and Applied Aspects of Eye Movements (pp. 685–703). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Gullberg, M., and Holmqvist, K. (2006). “What Speakers Do and What Listeners Look at: Visual Attention to Gestures in Human Interaction Live and on Video.” Pragmatics and Cognition 14 (1): 53–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hacohen, G. and Schegloff, E. A. (2006). “On the Preference for Minimization in Referring to Persons: Evidence from Hebrew Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 38: 1305–1312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hakulinen, A. (1987) “Avoiding Personal Reference in Finnish.” In Verschueren, J. and Bertucelli-Papi, M. (Eds.), The Pragmatic Perspective (pp. 141–153). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Hakulinen, A. (1993). “Inandningen som kulturellt interaktionsfenomen [Inhalation as a Cultural Phenomenon in Interaction].” In Ivars, A.-M., Lehti-Eklund, H., Lilius, P., Londen, A.-M., and Solstrand-Pipping, H. (Eds.), Språk och social context (pp. 49–67). Publications of the department of Nordic Studies, University of Helsinki, Serie B: 15.Google Scholar

Hakulinen, A., Keevallik Eriksson, L. and Lindström, J. (2003). “Kuule, kule, hördu: projicerande pratiker i finska, estninska och svenska samtal [‘Listen’: Projecting Practices in Finnish, Estonian and Swedish Conversation].” In Nordberg, B., Eriksson, L. Keevallik, Thelander, K., and Thelander, M. (Eds.), Grammatik och samtal. Studier till minne av Mats Eriksson. Skrifter utgivna av Institutionen för nordiska språk vid Uppsala universitet, No. 63, pp. 199–218.

Hakulinen, A. and Sorjonen, M. -L. (forthcoming). “Designing Utterances for Action: Ways of Repeating the Verb as a Response to an Assessment.” In Haakana, M., Laakso, M., and Lindström, J. (Eds.), Comparative studies of talk in interaction. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.

Hakulinen, A., Vilkuna, M., Korhonen, R., Koivisto, V., Heinonen, T., and Alho, I. (2004). Iso suomen kielioppi [Comprehensive Grammar of Finnish]. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar

Hale, K. (1983). Warlpiri and the grammar of non-configurational languages. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1: 5–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hanks, W. F. (1992). “The Indexical Ground of Deictic Reference.” In Duranti, A. and Goodwin, C. (Eds.), Rethinking Context, Language as an Interactive Phenomenon (pp. 43–77). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hanks, W. F. (2007). “Person Reference in Yucatec Maya Conversation.” In Enfield, N. and Stivers, T. (Eds.), Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural, and Social Perspectives (pp. 149–171). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hansen, K. C., and Hansen, L. E. (1992). Pintupi/Luritja Dictionary, 3rd edn. Alice Springs: Institute for Aboriginal Development.Google Scholar

Harris, M. (1968). The Rise of Anthropological Theory. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.Google Scholar

Harris, R., and Taylor, T. (1997). Landmarks in Linguistic Thought I: The Western Tradition from Socrates to Saussure, 2nd edn. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Haviland, J. (2007). “Person Reference in Tzotzil Gossip: Referring Dupliciter.” In Enfield, N. J. and Stivers, T. (Eds.), Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives (pp. 226–52). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hayano, K. (2007). “Repetitional Agreement and Anaphprocal Agreement: Negotiation of Affiliation and Disaffiliation in Japanese Conversation.” Unpublished MA thesis. University of California at Los Angeles, Applied Linguistics and Teaching English as a Second Language.Google Scholar

Hayashi, M. (1999). “Where Grammar and Interaction Meet: A Study of Co-Participant Completion in Japanese Conversation.” Human Studies 22 (2–4): 475–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayashi, M. (2003). Joint Utterance Construction in Japanese Conversation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayashi, M. (2004a). “Discourse Within a Sentence: An Exploration of Postpositions in Japanese as an Interactional Resource.” Language in Society 33: 343–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hayashi, M. (2004b). “Projection and Grammar: Notes on the ‘Action-Projecting’ Use of the Distal Demonstrative Are in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1337–1374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heinämäki, O. (1976). “Problems of Basic Word Order.” In Enkvist, N. E. and Kohonen, V. (Eds.), Reports on Text Linguistics: Approaches to Word Order. Meddelanden från Stiftelsens för Åbo Akademi Forskningsintitut8: 95–106. Åbo.

Heinemann, T. (2003). “Negation in Interaction in Danish Conversation.” Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of York, UK.Google Scholar

Heinemann, T. (2006). “‘Will You or Can't You?’: Displaying Entitlement in Interrogative Requests.” Journal of Pragmatics 38 (7): 1081–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heinemann, T. (2008). “Questions of Accountability: Yes-No Interrogatives That Are Unanswerable.” Discourse Studies 10 (1): 55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heinemann, T. and Traverso, V. (Eds.) (in press). “Complaints, Social Solidarity, and Identity.” Journal of Pragmatics Special issue.

Heingartner, N. L. (1996). “The Effect of Age Upon Non-Indefinite -To Use: A Study of the Spoken Russian of Moscow Women.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Brown University, Providence, R.I.Google Scholar

Helasvuo, M. -L. (2001). Syntax in the Making: The Emergence of Syntactic Constructions in Finnish Conversation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Helbig, G. (1988). Lexikon deutscher Partikeln. Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar

Hentschel, E. and Weydt, H. (1983). “Der Pragmatische Mechanismus: Denn Und Eigentlich.” In Weydt, H. (Ed.), Partikeln und Interaktion (pp. 263–273). Tubingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar

Heritage, J. (1984a). “A Change-of-State Token and Aspects of Its Sequential Placement.” In Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 299–345). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Heritage, J. (1984b). Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Heritage, J. (1988). “Explanations as Accounts: A Conversation Analytic Perspective.” In Antaki, C. (Ed.), Understanding Everyday Explanation: A Casebook of Methods (pp. 127–144). Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar

Heritage, J. (1998). “Oh-Prefaced Responses to Inquiry.” Language in Society 27: 291–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heritage, J. (2002a). “Oh-Prefaced Responses to Assessments: A Method of Modifying Agreement/Disagreement.” In Ford, C. E., Fox, B. A., and Thompson, S. A. (Eds.), The Language of Turn and Sequence (pp. 196–224). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Heritage, J. (2002b). “The Limits of Questioning: Negative Interrogatives and Hostile Question Content.” Journal of Pragmatics 34: 1427–1446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heritage, J. (2007). “Intersubjectivity and Progressivity in References to Persons (and Places).” In Stivers, T. and Enfield, N. J. (Eds.), Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural, and Social Perspectives (pp. 255–280). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Heritage, J. and Greatbatch, D. (1986). “Generating Applause: A Study of Rhetoric and Response at Party Political Conferences.” American Journal of Sociology 92 (1): 110–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heritage, J., and Greatbatch, D. (1991). “On the Institutional Character of Institutional Talk: The Case of News Interviews.” In Boden, D. and Zimmerman, D. H. (Eds.), Talk and Social Structure (pp. 93–137). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Heritage, J., and Maynard, D. W. (2006). “Introduction: Analyzing Interaction Between Doctors and Patients in Primary Care Encounters.” In Heritage, J. and Maynard, D. W. (Eds.), Communication in Medical Care: Interaction Between Primary Care Physicians and Patients (pp. 1–21). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heritage, J., and Raymond, G. (2005). “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Assessment Sequences.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68: 15–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heritage, J., and Sorjonen, M.-L. (1994). “Constituting and Maintaining Activities Across Sequences: And-Prefacing as a Feature of Question Design.” Language in Society 23 (1): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heritage, J., Boyd, E. A., and Kleinman, L. (2001). “Subverting Criteria: The Role of Precedent in Decisions to Finance Surgery.” Sociology of Health and Illness 23 (5): 701–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heritage, J., Robinson, J. D., Elliott, M., Beckett, M., and Wilkes, M. (2007). “Reducing Patients' Unmet Concerns: The Difference One Word Can Make.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 22: 1429–1433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ho, A. T. (1977). “Intonation Variation in a Mandarin Sentence for Three Expressions: Interrogative, Exclamatory and Declarative.” Phonetica 34: 446–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Holm, J. and Shilling, A. (1982). Dictionary of Bahamian English. New York: Lexik House.Google Scholar

Holt, E., and Drew, P. (2005). “Figurative Pivots: The Use of Figurative Expressions in Pivotal Topic Transitions.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 38 (1): 35–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Howe, M. L. (1991). “Topic Change in Conversation.” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Kansas.Google Scholar

Iwasaki, S. (1997). “The Northridge Earthquake Conversations: The Floor Structure and the ‘Loop’ Sequence in Japanese Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 28: 661–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Iwasaki, S. (2007). “Construction of Units and Interactive Turn Spaces in Japanese Conversation.” In McGloin, N. and Mori, J. (Eds.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics15. Palo Alto, Calif.: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

Iwasaki, S. (forthcoming). “Initiating Interactive Turn Spaces in Japanese Conversation: Local Projection and Collaborative Action.” Discourse Processes.

Iwasaki, S. and Ono, T. (2002). “‘Sentence’ in Spontaneous Spoken Japanese Discourse.” In Bybee, J. and Noonan, M. (Eds.), Complex Sentences in Grammar and Discourse: Essays in Honor of Sandra A. Thompson (pp. 175–202). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Jasperson, R. (1998). “Repair After Cut-Off.” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder, Col.Google Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1972). “Side Sequences.” In Sudnow, D. N. (Ed.), Studies in Social Interaction (pp. 294–338). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1973). “A Case of Precision Timing in Ordinary Conversation: Overlapped Tag-Positioned Address Terms in Closing Sequences.” Semiotica 9: 47–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1974). “Error Correction as an Interactional Resource.” Language in Society 3: 181–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1978). “Sequential Aspects of Storytelling in Conversation.” In Schenkein, J. (Ed.), Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction (pp. 219–248). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1981). “The Abominable Ne? An Exploration of Post-Response Pursuit of Response.” In Schr#x00F6;der, P. and Steger, H. (Eds.), Dialogforschung (pp. 53–88). Dusseldorf: Pädagogischer Verlag Schwann.Google Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1983). “Notes on Some Orderlinesses of Overlap Onset.” In D'Urso, V. and Leonardi, P. (Eds.), Discourse Analysis and Natural Rhetoric (pp. 11–38). Padua: Cleup Editore.Google Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1984). “Notes on a Systematic Deployment of the Acknowledgment Tokens ‘Yeah’ and ‘Mm Hm’.” Papers in Linguistics 17: 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1993). “Caveat Speaker: Preliminary Notes on Recipient Topic-Shift Implicature.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 26: 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jefferson, G. (2004). “At First I Thought.” In Lerner, G. H. (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation (pp. 131–67). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Jurafsky, D., Bell, A., Fosler-Lussier, E., Girand, C., and Raymond, W. (1998). “Reduction of English Function Words in Switchboard.” Proceedings of ICSLP-98 7: 3111–3114.Google Scholar

Kärkkäinen, E., Sorjonen, M.-L., and M.-L. Helasvuo. (2007). “Discourse Structure.” In Shopen, Timothy (Ed.) Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Vol. II, Complex Constructions (pp. 301–371). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kendon, A. (1967). “Some Functions of Gaze-Direction in Social Interaction.” Acta Psychologica 26 (1): 22–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kendon, A. (1973). “The Role of Visible Behavior in the Organization of Social Interaction.” In Cranach, M. and Vine, I. (Eds.), Social Communication and Movement: Studies of Interaction and Expression in Man and Chimpanzee (pp. 29–74). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Kendon, A. (1977). “Spatial Organization in Social Encounters: The F-Formation System.” In Kendon, A. (Ed.), Studies in the Behavior of Social Interaction. Lisse: Peter DeRidder Press.Google Scholar

Kendon, A. (1978). “Looking in Conversation and the Regulation of Turns at Talk: A Comment on the Papers of G. Beattie and D. R. Rutter et al.” British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 17: 23–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kendon, A. (1990). Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kidwell, M. (2005). “Gaze as Social Control: How Very Young Children Differentiate ‘The Look’ from a ‘Mere Look’ by Their Adult Caregivers. Research on Language and Social Interaction 38 (4): 417–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kidwell, M. (2009). “Gaze Shift as an Interactional Resource for Very Young Children.” Discourse Processes 46: 1451–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kidwell, M. and Zimmerman, D. H. (2006). “‘Observability’ in the Interactions of Very Young Children.” Communication Monography 73 (1): 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kidwell, M. and Zimmerman, D. H. (2007). “Joint Attention in Action.” Journal of Pragmatics 39 (3): 592–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kim, H. (2004). “Backchannels as Achievements of Social Interaction in Korean Conversation.” Sahoe Onohak [Sociolinguistics] 12: 65–93.Google Scholar

Kim, K.-H. (1993). “Other-Initiated Repairs in Korean Conversation as Interactional Resources.” In Choi, S. (Ed.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics (Vol. III, pp. 3–18). Palo Alto, Calif.: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University.Google Scholar

Kim, K. -H. (1999a). “Other-Initiated Repair Sequences in Korean Conversation: Types and Functions.” Discourse and Cognition 6: 141–168.Google Scholar

Kim, K.-H. (1999b). “Phrasal Unit Boundaries and Organization of Turns and Sequences in Korean Conversation.” Human Studies 22 (2/4): 425–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kim, K.-H. (2001). “Confirming Intersubjectivity through Retroactive Elaboration: Organization of Phrasal Units in Other-Initiated Repair Sequences in Korean Conversation.” In Selting, M. and Couper-Kuhlen, E. (Eds.), Studies in Interactional Linguistics (pp. 345–372). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Kim, K.-H. (2007). “Sequential Organization of Post-Predicate Elements in Korean Conversation: Pursuing Uptake and Modulating Action.” Pragmatics 17 (4): 573–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kitaigorodskaia, M. V., and Rosanova, N. N. (1994). Russkii rechevoj portret [The portrait of Russian speech]. Moscow.Google Scholar

Kitzinger, C. (2000). “Doing Feminist Conversation Analysis.” Feminism and Psychology 10: 163–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kitzinger, C. (2005a). “‘Speaking as a Heterosexual’: (How) Does Sexuality Matter for Talk-in-Interaction?” Research on Language and Social Interaction 38 (3): 221–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kitzinger, C. (2005b). “Heteronormativity in Action: Reproducing Normative Heterosexuality in ‘After Hours’ Calls to the Doctor.” Social Problems 52 (4): 477–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kitzinger, C. (2008). “Developing Feminist Conversation Analysis: A Response to Wowk.” Human Studies 31: 179–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kleinke, C. L. (1986). “Gaze and Eye Contact: A Research Review.” Psychological Bulletin 100 (1): 78–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kobayashi, H. (1997). “Unique Morphology of the Human Eye.” Nature 387: 767–768.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kobayashi, H. (2001). “Unique Morphology of the Human Eye and Its Adaptive Meaning: Comparative Studies on External Morphology of the Primate Eye.” Journal of Human Evolution 40 (5): 419–435.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Koenig, C. J. (2007). “Question Initiated Oblique Sequences: A Recipient's Practice in Multi-Unit Turn Environments.” Unpublished manuscript, UCLA.Google Scholar

Kenkyuujo, Kokuritsu Kokugo (National Language Research Institute) (1960). Hanashi Kotoba no Bunkei (1): Taiwa Shiryoo ni yoru Kenkyuu [Sentence Types in Spoken Language (1): Research based on Dialogic Data]. Tokyo: Shuuei Shuppan.Google Scholar

Koshik, I. (2002). “A Conversation Analytic Study of Yes/No Questions Which Convey Reversed Polarity Assertions.” Journal of Pragmatics 34: 1851–1877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Koshik, I. (2003). “Wh-Questions Used as Challenges.” Discourse Studies 5: 51–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Koshik, I. (2005). Beyond Rhetorical Questions: Assertive Questions in Everyday Interaction. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Koshik, I. (forthcoming). “Responses to Wh-Question Challenges.” In Raymond, G., Lerner, G. H. and Heritage, J. (Eds.), Enabling Human Conduct: Naturalistic Studies of Talk-in-Interaction in Honor of Emanuel A. Schegloff. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Labov, W. (1970). “The Study of English in Its Social Context.” Studium Generale 23: 30–87.Google Scholar

Labov, W., and Fanshel, D. (1977). Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

LaFrance, M. (1974). “Nonverbal Cues to Conversational Turn-Taking Between Black Speakers.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1 (1): 240–242.Google Scholar

LaFrance, M., and Mayo, C. (1976). “Racial Differences in Gaze Behavior During Conversation: Two Systematic Observational Studies.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 33 (5): 547–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laitinen, L. (2006). “Zero Person in Finnish: A Grammatical Resource for Construing Human Reference.” In -L. Helasvuo, M. and Campbell, L. (Eds.), Grammar from the Human Perspective: Case, Space and Person in Finnish (pp. 209–231). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Laitinen, L. and Hakulinen, A. (2008). “Anaforinen nolla puhutussa ja kirjoitetussa tekstissä [Anaphoric Zero in Spoken and Written Texts], Virittäjä” 2: 162–185.

Land, V. and Kitzinger, C. (2005). “Speaking as a Lesbian: Correcting the Heterosexist Presumption.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 38 (4): 371–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Landis, J., and Koch, G. G. (1977). “The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data.” Biometrics 33 (1): 159–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lebra, T. (1976). Japanese Patterns of Behavior. Honolulu, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar

Lenk, U. (1995). “Discourse Markers and Conversational Coherence.” In Wårvik, B., Tanskanen, S.-K. and Hiltunen, R. (Eds.), Organization of Discourse: Proceedings from the Turku Conference (pp. 341–352). Turku: University of Turku.Google Scholar

Lenk, U. (1998). Marking Discourse Coherence: Functions of Discourse Markers in Spoken English, Vol. XV. Tubingen, Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar

Lerner, G. H. (1987). “Collaborative Turn Sequences: Sentence Construction and Social Action.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California at Irvine, Calif.Google Scholar

Lerner, G. H. (1989). “Notes on Overlap Management in Conversation: The Case of Delayed Completion.” Western Journal of Speech Communication 53 (2): 167–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lerner, G. H. (1991). “On the Syntax of Sentences-in-Progress.” Language in Society 20: 441–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lerner, G. H. (1996). “On the ‘Semi-Permeable’ Character of Grammatical Units in Conversation: Conditional Entry into the Turn Space of Another Speaker.” In Ochs, E., Schegloff, E. A., and Thompson, S. A. (Eds.), Interaction and Grammar (pp. 238–276). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lerner, G. H. (2003). “Selecting Next Speaker: The Context Sensitive Operation of a Context-Free Organization.” Language in Society 32 (2): 177–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lerner, G. H. (2004). “On the Place of Linguistic Resources in the Organization of Talk-in-Interaction: Grammar as Action in Prompting a Speaker to Elaborate.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 37: 151–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lerner, G. H. and Kitzinger, C. (2007). “Extraction and Aggregation in the Repair of Individual and Collective Self-Reference.” Discourse Studies 9 (4): 526–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lerner, G. H. and Takagi, T. (1999). “On the Place of Linguistic Resources in the Organization of Talk-in-Interaction: A Co-Investigation of English and Japanese Grammatical Practices.” Journal of Pragmatics 31 (1): 49–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lerner, G. H. and Zimmerman, D. H. (2003). “Action and the Appearance of Action in the Conduct of Very Young Children.” In Glenn, P., LeBaron, C., and Mandelbaum, J. (Eds.), Studies in Language and Social Interaction (pp. 441–457). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Lerner, G. H., Zimmerman, D. H., and Kidwell, M. (forthcoming). “Formal Structures of Practical Tasks: A Resource for Action in the Social Life of Very Young Children.” In Goodwin, C., LeBaron, C. and Streeck, J. (Eds.), Multimodality and Human Activity: Research on Human Behavior, Action and Communication. Cambridge University Press.

Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Levinson, S. C. (2006). “On the Human ‘Interactional Engine’.” In Enfield, N. J., Levinson, S. C. (Eds.), Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition and Interaction (pp. 39–69). Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar

Levinson, S. C. (2007). “Optimizing Person Reference: Perspectives from Usage on Rossel Island.” In Enfield, N. J. and Stivers, T. (Eds.), Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives (pp. 29–72). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Levinson, S. C., and Brown, P. (2004). “Comparative Feedback: Cultural Shaping of Response Systems in Interaction.” Paper presented at the Workshop on Feedback in Interaction. Max Planck University for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Li, C. and Thompson, S. A. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California.Google Scholar

Lindström, A. (1997). “Designing Social Actions: Grammar, Prosody, and Interaction in Swedish Conversation.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, Calif.Google Scholar

Lindström, Anna (1999). Language as Social Action: Grammar, Prosody and Interaction in Swedish conversation. (Skrifter utgivna av Institutionen för nordiska spräk, Uppsala universitet 46.) Diss. Uppsala.

Local, J., and Kelly, J. (1986). “Projection and ‘Silences’: Notes on Phonetic and Conversational Structure.” Human Studies 9: 185–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Local, J. K. (2004). “Getting Back to Prior Talk: And-Uh(m) as a Back-Connecting Device in British and American English.” In Couper-Kuhlen, E. (Ed.), Sound Patterns in Interaction: Cross-Linguistic Studies of Phonetics and Prosody for Conversation (pp. 377–400). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

LoCastro, V. (1987). “Aizuchi: A Japanese Conversational Routine.” In Smith, L. E. (Ed.), Discourse Across Cultures: Strategies in World Englishes (pp. 101–113). London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Luke, K. K. and Pavlidou, T.-S. (Ed.). (2002). Telephone Calls: Unity and Diversity in Conversational Structure Across Languages and Cultures. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRef

McCoy, S. G. (2001). “Colloquial Russian Particles -To, Zhe, and Ved' as Set-Generating (‘Kontrastive’) Markers: A Unifying Analysis.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Boston University, Boston, Mass.Google Scholar

McHoul, A. (1978). “The Organization of Turns at Formal Talk in the Classroom.” Language in Society 7: 183–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maheux-Pelletier, G. and Golato, A. (2008) Repair in Membership Categorization in French. Language in Society, 37 (05): 689–712.CrossRef

Mangione-Smith, R., Stivers, T., Elliott, M. N., McDonald, L., and Heritage, J. (2003) “Online Commentary During the Physical Examination: A Communication Tool for Avoiding Inappropriate Antibiotic Prescribing?” Social Science and Medicine 56 (2): 313–320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Maurer, D. W. (1964). Whiz Mob: A Correlation of the Technical Argot of Pickpockets with Their Behavior Pattern, New Haven, Conn.: College and University Press.Google Scholar

Maynard, D. W. (1980). “Placement of Topic Changes in Conversation.” Semiotica 30 (3–4): 263–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maynard, S. (1986). “On Back-Channel Behavior in Japanese and English Casual Conversation.” Linguistics 24: 1079–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maynard, S. (1989). Japanese Conversation: Self-Contextualization through Structure and Interactional Management. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar

Maynard, S. (1990). “Conversation Management in Contrast: Listener Response in Japanese and American English.” Journal of Pragmatics 14: 397–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mazeland, H. (1990). “‘Yes,’ ‘No’ and ‘Mhm’: Variations in Acknowledgment Choices.” In Coein, B., Fornel, M., and Quéré, L. (Eds.), Les Formes de la Conversation (pp. 251–282). Paris: CNET.Google Scholar

Mazeland, H., and Huiskes, M. (2001). “Dutch ‘But’ as a Sequential Conjunction: Its Use as a Resumption Marker.” In Selting, M. and Couper-Kuhlen, E. (Eds.), Studies in Interactional Linguistics (pp. 141–169). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Miller, L. (1983). “Aizuchi: Japanese Listening Behavior.” Masters thesis. University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, Calif.Google Scholar

Mizutani, N. (1982). “The Listener's Response in Japanese Conversation.” Sociolinguistic Newsletter 13: 33–38.Google Scholar

Mizutani, N. (1988). “Aizuchi ron [On aizuchi].” Nihongogaku 7.Google Scholar

Moerman, M. (1974). “Accomplishing Ethnicity.” In Turner, R. (Ed.), Ethnomethodology: Selected Readings (pp. 54–68). Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar

Moerman, M. (1977). “The Preference for Self-Correction in a Thai Conversational Corpus.” Language 53: 872–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Monzoni, C. M. (2008). “Introducing Direct Complaints through Questions: The Interactional Achievement of ‘Pre-Sequences’?” Discourse Studies 10 (1): 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Monzoni, C. M. (in press). “Direct Complaints in (Italian) Calls to the Ambulance: The Use of Negatively Framed Questions.” Journal of Pragmatics.

Mori, J. (1999). Negotiating Agreement and Disagreement in Japanese: Connective Expressions and Turn Construction. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mori, J. (2006). “The Workings of the Japanese Token Hee in Informing Sequences: An Analysis of Sequential Context, Turn Shape, and Prosody.” Journal of Pragmatics 38: 1175–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Morita, E. (2005). Negotiation of Contingent Talk: The Japanese Interactional Particles Ne and Sa. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Morris, D. (1985). Body Watching. Oxford: Equinox.Google Scholar

Nakayama, T. and Ichihashi-Nakayama, K. (1997). “Japanese Kedo: Discourse Genre and Grammaticization.” In Sohn, H. and Haig, J. (Eds.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics (Vol. VI, pp. 607–618). Palo Alto, Calif.: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

Nielsen, G. (1962). Studies in Self-Confrontation. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar

Nielsen, M. F. (2002). “Nå! En skiftemarkør med mange funktioner [Nå! A Marker of Change with Many Functions].” Studier i nordisk, 2000–2001: 51–67.

Ochs, E. (1984). “Clarification and Culture.” In Schiffrin, D. (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table in Languages and Linguistics (pp. 325–341). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Ochs, E. (1991). “Misunderstanding Children.” In Coupland, N., Giles, H., and Wiemann, J. M. (Eds.), Miscommunication and Problematic Talk (pp. 44–60). Newbery Park, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar

Ochs, E., Smith, R., and Taylor, C. (1989). “Dinner Narratives as Detective Stories.” Cultural Dynamics 2: 238–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ochs, E., Smith, R., and Taylor, C. (1992). “Story-Telling as a Theory-Building Activity.” Discourse Processes 15 (1): 37–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Owen, M. (1985). “The Conversational Function of ‘Anyway’.” The Nottingham Linguistic Circular 14: 72–90.Google Scholar

Park, Y.-Y. (1997). “A Cross-Linguistic Study of the Use of Contrastive Connectives in English, Korean, and Japanese Conversation.” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, Calif.Google Scholar

Park, Y.-Y. (1999). “The Korean Connective Nuntey in Conversational Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 31: 191–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Park, Y-Y. (2004). “Nonnative Speakers' Use of Yeah in English Spoken Discourse.” Discourse and Cognition 11: 85–105.Google Scholar

Pomerantz, A. (1978). “Compliment Responses: Notes on the Co-operation of Multiple Constraints.” In Schenkein, J. (Ed.), Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction (pp. 79–112). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Pomerantz, A. (1984). “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Pomerantz, A. (1986). “Extreme Case Formulations: A Way of Legitimizing Claims.” Human Studies 9: 210–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pomerantz, A. M. (1975). “Second Assessments: A Study of Some Features of Agreements/Disagreements.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California at Irvine, California, Calif.Google Scholar

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. New York: Longman.Google Scholar

Rathmayr, R. (1989). “Russische partikeln und ihre deutschen aquivalente glossar.” Rusistik 1: 18–40.Google Scholar

Raymond, G. (2000) “The Structure of Responding: Type-Conforming and Non-Conforming Responses to Yes/No Interrogatives.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles, Calif.Google Scholar

Raymond, G. (2003). “Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding.” American Sociological Review 68 (6): 939–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Raymond, G. (2004). “Prompting Action: The Stand-Alone ‘So’ in Ordinary Conversation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 37 (2): 185–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Raymond, G., and Heritage, J. (2006). “The Epistemics of Social Relations: Owning Grandchildren.” Language in Society 35 (5): 677–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reisman, K. (1974). “Contrapuntal Conversations in an Antiguan Village.” In Bauman, R. and Sherzer, J. (Eds.), Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking (pp. 110–124). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Robinson, J. (2006). “Managing Trouble Responsibility and Relationships During Conversational Repair.” Communication Monographs 73: 137–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Robinson, J. and Heritage, J. (2005). “The Structure of Patients' Presenting Concerns: The Completion Relevance of Current Symptoms.” Social Science and Medicine 61: 481–493.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Rossano, F. (2005). “On Sustaining Vs. Withdrawing Gaze in Face-to-Face Interaction.” Paper presented at the 91st Annual Convention National Communication Association (NCA).

Rossano, F. (2006a). Gaze Behavior in Multi-Unit Turns. Paper presented at the 92nd Annual Convention National Communication Association (NCA).

Rossano, F. (2006b). When the Eyes Meet: Using Gaze to Mobilize Response. Paper presented at the International Conference on Conversation Analysis (ICCA).

Rossano, F. (2009). “Gaze Behavior in Face-to-Face Interaction.” Ph.D. dissertation.

Rossano, F. (in press). “Questions and Responding in Italian.” In Enfield, N. J., Levinson, S. C., and Stivers, T. (Eds.), Questions and Responses in 10 Languages, Special Issue of Journal of Pragmatics.

Roth, A. (2002). “Social Epistemology in Broadcast News Interviews.” Language in Society 31 (3): 355–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rutter, D. R. (1984). Looking and Seeing: The Role of Visual Communication in Social Interaction. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar

Sacks, H. (1972a). “An Initial Investigation of the Usability of Conversational Data for Doing Sociology.” In Sudnow, D. N. (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 Gumperz, J. J. and Hymes, D. (Eds.), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication (pp. 325–345). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar

Sacks, H. (1974). “An Analysis of the Course of a Joke's Telling in Conversation.” In Bauman, R. and Sherzer, J. (Eds.), Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking (pp. 337–353). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sacks, H. (1978). “Some Technical Considerations of a Dirty Joke.” In Schenkein, J. (Ed.), Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction (pp. 249–269). New York: Academic Press. (Edited by Gail Jefferson from four lectures delivered at the University of California, Irvine, Calif., fall 1971).Google Scholar

Sacks, H. (1984). “On Doing ‘Being Ordinary’.” In Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 413–429). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sacks, H. (1987) “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation.” In Button, G. and Lee, J. (Eds.), Talk and Social Organization (pp. 54–69). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures on Conversation. Edited by Jefferson, G., with an introduction by Schegloff, E. A.. Oxford: Blackwell. Originally published in two volumes in 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sacks, H. and Schegloff, E. A. (1979). Two Preferences in the Organization of Reference to Persons and Their Interaction.” In Psathas, G. (Ed.), Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology (pp. 15–21). New York: Irvington Publishers.Google Scholar

Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., and Jefferson, G. (1974). “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 50 (4): 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sadler, M. (2006). “A Blurring of Categorization: The Japanese Connective De in Spontaneous Conversation.” Discourse Studies 8 (2): 303–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sadock, J. M., and Zwicky, A. (1985). “Speech Act Distinctions in Syntax.” In Shopen, T. (Ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description: Clause Structure (Vol. I, pp. 155–196). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Schack, K. (2000). “Comparison of Intonation Patterns in Mandarin and English for a Particular Speaker.” University of Rochester Working Papers in the Language Sciences (spring/summer).Google Scholar

Scheflen, A. E. (1964). “The Significance of Posture in Communication Systems.” Psychiatry 26: 316–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1968). “Sequencing in Conversational Openings.” American Anthropologist 70: 1075–1095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1970). Opening Sequences. University of California, Los Angeles, Calif.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1979). “The Relevance of Repair for to a Syntax-for-Conversation.” In Givon, T. (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics (Vol. XII, pp. 261–286). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1980). “Preliminaries to Preliminaries: ‘Can I Ask You a Question’.” Sociological Inquiry 50: 104–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1982). “Discourse as an Interactional Achievement: Some Uses of ‘Uh Huh’ and Other Things That Come Between Sentences.” In Tannen, D. (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics, Analyzing Discourse: Text and Talk (pp. 71–93). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1984). “On Some Questions and Ambiguities in Conversation.” In Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (Ed.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 28–52). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1987a). “Between Macro and Micro: Contexts and Other Connections.” In Alexander, J., Giesen, B., Munch, R., and Smelser, N. (Eds.), The Micro-Macro Link (pp. 207–234). Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1987b). “Analyzing Single Episodes of Interaction: An Exercise in Conversation Analysis.” Social Psychology Quarterly 50 (2): 101–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1987c). “Recycled Turn Beginnings: A Precise Repair Mechanism in Conversation's Turn-taking Organization.” In Button, G. and Lee, J. R. E. (Eds.), Talk and Social Organization (pp. 70–85). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1988). “On an Actual Virtual Servo-Mechanism for Guessing Bad News: A Single Case Conjecture.” Social Problems 35 (4): 442–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1990). “On the Organization of Sequences as a Source of ‘Coherence’ in Talk-in-Interaction.” In Dorval, B. (Ed.), Conversational Organization and Its Development (pp. 51–77). Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1991). “Reflections on Talk and Social Structure.” In Boden, D. and Zimmerman, D. H. (Eds.) Talk and Social Structure (pp. 44–70). Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1992a). “Repair After Next Turn: The Last Structurally Provided Defense of Intersubjectivity in Conversation.” American Journal of Sociology 97: 1295–1345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1992b). “On Talk and Its Institutional Occasions.” In Drew, P. and Heritage, J. (Eds.), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings (pp. 101–134). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1993). “Reflections on Quantification in the Study of Conversation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 26: 99–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1995a). “Parties and Talking Together: Two Ways in Which Numbers Are Significant for Talk-in-Interaction.” In Have, P. T. and Psathas, G. (Eds.), Situated Order: Studies in Social Organization and Embodied Activities (pp. 31–42). Washington, D.C.: University Press of America.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1995b). Sequence Organization. Los Angeles, Calif.: University of California.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1996a). “Some Practices for Referring to Persons in Talk-in-Interaction: A Partial Sketch of a Systematics.” In Fox, B. A. (Eds.), Studies in Anaphora (pp. 437–85). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1996b). “Confirming Allusions: Toward an Empirical Account of Action.” American Journal of Sociology 102 (1): 161–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1996c). “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” In Ochs, E., Schegloff, E. A. and Thompson, S. A. (Eds.), Interaction and Grammar (pp. 52–133). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1997a). “Whose Text? Whose Context?” Discourse and Society 8 (2): 165–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1997b). “Practices and Actions: Boundary Cases of Other-Initiated Repair.” Discourse Processes 23: 499–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1998a). “Reflections on Studying Prosody in Talk-in-Interaction.” Language and Speech 41: 235–263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Schegloff, E. A. (1998b). “Reply to Wetherell.” Discourse and Society 9 (3): 457–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1998c). “‘Body Torque.” Social Research 65 (3): 535–596.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1999a). “‘Schegloff's Texts’ as ‘Billig's Data’: A Critical Reply to Billig.” Discourse and Society 10: 558–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1999b). “Naivete vs. Sophistication or Discipline vs. Self-Indulgence: A Rejoinder to Billig.” Discourse and Society 10: 577–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (2000a). “On Granularity.” Annual Review of Sociology 26: 715–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (2000b). “When ‘Others’ Initiate Repair.” Applied Linguistics 21: 205–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (2000c). “Overlapping Talk and the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language in Society 29 (1): 1–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (2001). “Conversation Analysis: A Project in Process – ‘Increments’.” Forum lecture, LSA Linguistic Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, Calif.

Schegloff, E. A. (2002a). “Reflections on Research on Telephone Conversation: Issues of Cross-Cultural Scope and Scholarly Exchange, Interactional Import and Consequences.” In Luke, K. K. and Pavlidon, T. S. (Eds.), Telephone Calls: Unity and Diversity in Conversational Structure Across Languages and Cultures (pp. 249–281). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (2002b). “Accounts of Conduct in Interaction: Interruption, Overlap and Turn-Taking.” In Turner, J. H. (Ed.), Handbook of Sociological Theory (pp. 287–321). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (2002c). “Conversation Analysis, Then and Now.” Plenary Address for the Inaugural Session of the Section-in-Formation on Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis of the American Sociological Association, Chicago, Ill.

Schegloff, E. A. (2004). “On Dispensability.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 37 (2): 95–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (2006). “Interaction: The Infrastructure for Social Institutions, the Natural Ecological Niche for Language, and the Arena in which Culture is Enacted.” In Enfield, N. J. and Levinson, S. C. (Eds.), Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition and Interaction (pp. 70–96). Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (2007a). “A Tutorial on Membership Categorization.” Journal of Pragmatics 39: 462–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (2007b). Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis I. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. and Sacks, H. (1973). “Opening Up Closings.” Semiotica 8: 289–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. and Sacks, H. (1974). “Opening Up Closings.” In Turner, R. (Ed.), Ethnomethodology: Selected Readings (pp. 233–264). Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., Sacks, H. (1977). “The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation.” Language 53: 361–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A., Ochs, E., Thompson, S. (1996). “Introduction.” In Ochs, E., Schegloff, E. A., and Thompson, S. A. (Eds.), Interaction and Grammar (pp. 1–51). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Schiffrin, D. (1985). “Conversational Coherence: The Role of ‘Well’.” Language 61 (3): 640–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse Markers. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schubiger, M. (1972). “English Intonation and German Modal Particles: A Comparative Study.” In Bolinger, D. (Ed.), Intonation (pp. 175–193). Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar

Schwitalla, J. (2003). Gesprochenes Deutsch: Eine Einführung. Berlin: Erich Schmitdt.Google Scholar

Sebeok, T. (1981) Nonverbal Communication, Interaction, and Gesture: Selections from Semiotica, The Hague and New York: Mouton Publishers.Google Scholar

Selting, M. (1987a). “Fremdkorrekturen als Manifestationsformen von Verständigungsproblemen.” Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 6: 37–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Selting, M. (1987b). “Reparaturen Und Lokale Verstehensprobleme Oder: Zur Binnenstruktur Von Reparatursequenzen.” Linguistische Berichte 108: 128–149.Google Scholar

Selting, M. (1987c). Verständigungsprobleme. Eine Empirische Analyse Am Beispiel Der Bürger-Verwaltungs-Kommunikation. Tubingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Selting, M. (1988). “The Role of Intonation in the Organization of Repair and Problem Handling Sequences in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 12: 293–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Selting, M. (1992). “Prosody in Conversational Questions.” Journal of Pragmatics 15: 583–588.Google Scholar

Selting, M. (1995). Prosodie im Gespräch. Tubingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Selting, M. (1996). “Prosody as an Activity-Type Distinctive Cue in Conversation: The Case of So-Called ‘Astonished’ Questions in Repair Initiation.” In Couper-Kuhlen, E. and Selting, M. (Eds.), Prosody in Conversation: Interactional Studies (pp. 231–270). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Shen, X.-N. S. (1989). The Prosody of Mandarin Chinese. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Shopen, T. (Ed.). (1985). Language Typology and Syntactic Description, 3 vols. Cambridge University Press.

Sidnell, J. (2000). “Primus Inter Pares: Story-Telling and Male-Peer Groups in an Indo-Guyanese Rumshop.” American Ethnologist 27 (1): 72–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sidnell, J. (2001). “Conversational Turn-Taking in a Caribbean English Creole.” Journal of Pragmatics 33: 1263–1290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sidnell, J. (2005a). Talk and Practical Epistemology: The Social Life of Knowledge in a Caribbean Community. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sidnell, J. (2005b). “Gesture in the Pursuit and Display of Recognition: A Caribbean Case Study.” Semiotica 156 (1/4): 55–87.Google Scholar

Sidnell, J. (2006). “Repair.” In Verschueren, J. and Östman, J.-O. (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics (pp. 1–38). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Sidnell, J. (2007a). “Repairing Person Reference in a Small Caribbean Community.” In Enfield, N. J. and Stivers, T. (Eds.), Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural, and Social Perspectives (pp. 281–308). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sidnell, J. (2007b). “‘Look’-Prefaced Turns in First and Second Position: Launching, Interceding and Redirecting Action.” Discourse Studies 9 (3): 387–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sidnell, J. (2007c). “Comparative Studies in Conversation Analysis.” Annual Review of Anthropology 36: 229–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Simmel, G. (1969). “Sociology of the Senses: Visual Interaction.” In Park, R. E. and Burgess, W. (Eds.), Introduction to the Science of Sociology (pp. 356–361). University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Sommer, R. (1959). “Studies in Personal Space.” Sociometry 22 (3): 247–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sommer, R. (1962). “The Distance of Comfortable Conversation: A Further Study.” Sociometry 25 (1): 111–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sorjonen, M-L. (1996). “On Repeats and Responses in Finnish Conversations.” In Ochs, E., Schegloff, E. A., and Thompson, S. A., (Eds.), Interaction and Grammar (pp. 277–327). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sorjonen, M-L. (1997). “Recipient Activities: Particles Nii(n) and Joo as Responses in Finnish Conversation.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, Calif.Google Scholar

Sorjonen, M-L. (2001). Responding in Conversation: A Study of Response Particles in Finnish. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sorjonen, M-L. (2002). “Recipient Activities: The Particle No as a Go-Ahead Response in Finnish Conversations.” In Ford, C. E., Fox, B. A., and Thompson, S. A. (Eds.), The Language of Turn and Sequence (pp. 165–195). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Sperber, D. I., and Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Stivers, T. (2004). “‘No No No’ and Other Types of Multiple Sayings in Social Interaction.” Human Communication Research 30 (2): 250–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stivers, T. (2005). “Modified Repeats: One Method for Asserting Primary Rights from Second Position.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 38 (2): 131–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stivers, T. (2007). “Alternative Recognitionals.” In Enfield, N. J. and Stivers, T. (Eds.), Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural, and Social Perspectives. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Stivers, T., Enfield, N. J. and Levinson, S.C. (Eds.) (in press). “A Comparison of Question–Response Sequences Across 10 Languages.” Journal of Pragmatics.

Stivers, T. and Rossano, F. (in press) “Mobilizing Response.” Research on Language and social Interaction.

Stivers, T. and Majid, A. (2007). “Questioning Children: Interactional Evidence of Implicit Bias in Medical Interviews.” Social Psychology Quarterly 70 (4): 424–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stivers, T., and Robinson, J. (2006). “A Preference for Progressivity in Interaction.” Language in Society 35 (3): 367–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stivers, T. and Sidnell, J. (2005) “Multi-Modal Interaction.” Semiotica 156 (1/4): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stivers, T., Enfield, N. J. and Levinson, S. C. (2007) “Person Reference in Interaction.” In Enfield, N. J. and Stivers, T. (Eds.), Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural, and Social Perspectives. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Stivers, T., Mangione-Smith, R., Elliott, M. N., McDonald, L., and Heritage, J. (2003). “Why Do Physicians Think Parents Expect Antibiotics? What Parents Report Vs What Physicians Perceive.” The Journal of Family Practice 52 (2): 140–148.Google Scholar

Stokoe, E., and Edwards, D. (2008). “‘Did You Have Permission to Smash Your Neighbour's Door?’ Silly Questions and Their Answers in Police-Suspect Interrogations.” Discourse Studies 10 (1): 89–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tainio, L. (1993). “Kannanoton tulkinta keskustelussa.” [Interpretation of Assessment in Conversation.] Unpublished licentiate's thesis. Department of Finnish Language and Literature, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar

Takahara, P. O. (1998). “Pragmatic Functions of the English Discourse Marker Anyway and Its Corresponding Contrastive Japanese Discourse Markers.” In Jucker, A. H. and Ziv, Y. (Eds.), Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory (pp. 327–351). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamin.Google Scholar

Tanaka, H. (1999). Turn-Taking in Japanese Conversation: A Study in Grammar and Interaction. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Tanaka, H. (2000a). “The Particle Ne as a Turn-Management Device in Japanese Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 32: 1135–1176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tanaka, H. (2000b). “Turn-Projection in Japanese Talk-in-Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 33 (1): 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tanaka, H. (2004). “Prosody for Marking TRPs in Japanese Conversation.” In Couper-Kuhlen, E. and Ford, C. E. (Eds.), Sound Patterns in Interaction: Cross-Linguistic Studies from Conversation (pp. 63–96). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Tao, L., Fox, B., and Garcia, J. (1999). “Tone-Choice Repair in Conversational Mandarin Chinese.” In Fox, F., Jurafsky, D., and Michaelis, L. A. (Eds.), Cognition and Function in Language (pp. 268–281). Palo Alto, Calif.: CSLI.Google Scholar

Terasaki, A. K. (1976). “Pre-Announcement Sequences in Conversation.” Social Science Working Paper, #99. Irvine, University of California, Irvine, School of Social Science. Reprinted in Gotto Lerner (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation (pp. 171–219). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Thompson, S. A. and Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2005). “The Clause as a Locus of Grammar and Interaction.” Discourse Studies 7 (4/5): 481–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thurmair, M. (1989). Modalpartikeln und ihre Kombinationen. Tubingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thurmair, M. (1991). “Zum Gebrauch der Modalpartikeln denn in Fragesätzen. Eine Korpusbasierte Untersuchung.” In Klein, E., Duteil, F. Rouradier, and Wagner, K. H. (Eds.), Betriebslinguistik und Linguistikbetrieb: Akten des 24. Linguistischen Kolloquiums, Universität Bremen, 4. bis 6. September 1989 (pp. 377–387). Tubingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar

Tomasello, M. (1999). The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Tseng, C.-Y. (2003). “On the Role of Intonation in the Organization of Mandarin Chinese Speech Prosody.” Paper presented at Eurospeech 2003/Interspeech 2003, Geneva, Switzerland.

Uhmann, S. (2001). “Some Arguments for the Relevance of Syntax to Same-Sentence Self-Repair in Every German Conversation.” In Selting, M. and Couper-Kuhlen, E. (Eds.), Studies in Interactional Linguistics (pp. 373–404). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Vasilyeva, A. N. (1972). Particles in Colloquial Russian. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar

Vilkuna, M. (1989). Free Word Order: Its Syntax and Discourse Functions. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar

Walsh, M. (1991). “Conversational Styles and Intercultural Communication: An Example from Northern Australia.” Australian Journal of Communication 18 (1) pp. 1–12.Google Scholar

Wetherell, M. (1998). “Positioning and Interpretive Repertoires: Conversation Analysis and Post-Structuralism in Dialogue.” Discourse and Society 9: 387–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

White, S. (1989). “Backchannels Across Cultures: A Study of Americans and Japanese.” Language in Society 18: 59–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wilson, P. J. (1973) Crab Antics: The Social Anthropology of English-Speaking Negro Societies of the Caribbean. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Winford, D. (1993). Predication in Caribbean English Creoles, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wittgenstein, L. (1969). On Certainty. Edited by Anscombe, G. E. M. and Wright, G. H.. Translated by Paul, Denis and Anscombe, G. E. M.. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Wong, J. (2000). “Repetition in Conversation: A Look at ‘First and Second Sayings’.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 33 (4): 407–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wootton, A. J. (1994). “Object Transfer, Intersubjectivity and Third Position Repair: Early Developmental Observations of One Child.” Journal of Child Language 21: 543–564.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wouk, F. (2005) “The Syntax of Repair in Indonesian.” Discourse Studies 7 (2): 237–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wu, R.-J. R. (2004). Stance in Talk: A Conversation Analysis of Mandarin Final Particles. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wu, R. -J. R. (2006). “Initiating Repair and Beyond: The Use of Two Repeat-Formatted Repair Initiations in Mandarin Conversation.” Discourse Processes 4: 67–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Yoon, K. E. (2006). “Complaint Talk in Korean Conversation.” Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Ill.Google Scholar

Young, R. and Lee, J. (2004). “Identifying Units in Interaction: Reactive Tokens in Korean and English Conversations.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 8: 380–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Yuan, J., Shih, C., and Kochanski, G. P. (2002). “Comparison of Declarative and Interrogative Intonation in Chinese.” Proceedings of Speech Prosody (pp. 711–714).Google Scholar

Yuan, J. and Shih, C. (2004). “Confusability of Chinese Intonation.” Proceedings of Speech Prosody (pp. 131–134).Google Scholar

Zeng, X., Martin, P., and Boulakia, G. (2004). “Tones and Intonation in Declarative and Interrogative Sentences in Mandarin.” Paper presented at the International Symposium on Tonal Aspects of Languages: With Emphasis on Tone Languages, Beijing, China.

Zhang, W. (1998). “Repair in Chinese Conversation.” Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Hong Kong.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zifonun, G., Hoffmann, L. and Strecker, B. (1997). Grammatik der deutschen Sprache (3 Bände). Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Zimmerman, D. (1999). “Horizontal and Vertical Comparative Research in Language and Social Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 32: 195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zimmerman, D. (1993). “Acknowledgment Tokens and Speakership Incipiency Revisited.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 26: 179–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar