Aaron, U. E. (1992). Reported speech in Obolo narrative discourse. In Hwang, S. J. J. and Merrifield, W. R. (eds.) Language in Context: Essays for Robert E. Longacre (Publications in Linguistics 107), pp. 227–240. Dallas/Arlington: Summer Institute of Linguistics and University of Texas.Google Scholar

Adelaar, W. F. H. (1990). The role of quotations in Andean discourse. In Pinkster, H. and Genee, I. (eds.) Unity in Diversity: Papers Presented to Simon C. Dik on his 50th Birthday, pp. 1–12. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Adelsward, V., Aronsson, K., Jonsson, L. and Linell, P. (1987). The unequal distribution of interactional space: dominance and control in courtroom interaction. Text 7(4): 313–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aikhenvald, A. Y. and Dixon, R. M. W. (eds.) (2003). Studies in Evidentiality. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Antaki, C. (1994). Explaining and Arguing: the Social Organization of Accounts. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Atkinson, J. M. and Drew, P. (1979). Order in Court. London: The Macmillan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

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

Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The Dialogic Imagination, ed. M. Holquist, trans. C. Emerson and M. Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar

Bally, C. (1914). Figures de pensée et formes linguistiques. Germanisch–Romanische Monatsschrift 6: 456–470.Google Scholar

Banfield, A. (1973). Narrative style and the grammar of direct and indirect speech. Foundations of Language, 10: 1–39.Google Scholar

Banfield, A. (1982). Unspeakable Sentences: Narration and Representation in the Language of Fiction. Boston, MA: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Basso, E. (1986). Quoted dialogues in Kalapalo narrative discourse. In Sherzer, J. and Urban, G. (eds.) Native South American Discourse, pp. 119–168. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beach, W. A. (2000). Inviting collaborations in stories about a woman. Language and Society, 29: 379–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bergmann, J. (1992). Veiled morality: notes on discretion in psychiatry. In Drew, P. and Heritage, J. (eds.) Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, pp. 137–162. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bergmann, J. R. (1993). Discreet Indiscretions: The Social Organization of Gossip. Walter de Gruyter: New York.Google Scholar

Besnier, N. (1993). Reported speech and affect on Nukulaelae Atoll. In Hill, J. H. and Irvine, J. T. (eds.) Responsibility and Evidence in Oral Discourse, pp. 161–181. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Blyth, C. Jr, Recktenvald, S. and Wang, J. (1990). I'm like, ‘say what?!’: a new quotative in American oral narrative. American Speech, 65(3): 215–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bolden, G. (2004). The quote and beyond: defining boundaries of reported speech in conversational Russian. Journal of Pragmatics, 36: 1071–1118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Buttny, R. (1997). Reported speech in talking race on campus. Human Communication Research, 23: 477–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Buttny, R. (1998). Putting prior talk into context: reported speech and reporting context. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 31(1): 45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Buttny, R. and Williams, P. L. (2000). Demanding respect: the use of reported speech in discursive constructions of interracial contact. Discourse and Society, 11: 109–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Byrne, J. and Sutton, J. (1993). The Psychic World of James Byrne. London: The Aquarian Press.Google Scholar

Clark, H. H. and Gerrig, R. J. (1990). Quotations as demonstrations. Language, 66: 764–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clayman, S. E. (1988). Displaying neutrality in television news interviews. Social Problems, 35(4): 474–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clayman, S. E. (1992). Footing in the achievement of neutrality: the case of news interview discourse. In Drew, P. and Heritage, J. (eds.) Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, pp. 163–198. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Clayman, S. E. and Heritage, J. (2002). The News Interview: Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clayman, S. E. and Whalen, J. (1988/1989). When the medium becomes the message: the case of the Rather–Bush encounter. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 22: 241–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clements, G. N. (1975). The logorophic pronoun in Ewe: its role in discourse. Journal of West African Languages, 10(2): 141–177.Google Scholar

Clift, R. (1999). Irony in conversation. Language in Society, 28(4): 523–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clift, R. (2003). Synonyms in action: a case study. International Journal of English Studies, 3(1): 167–187.Google Scholar

Clift, R. (2005) Discovering order. Lingua, 115: 1641–1665.CrossRef

Cohen, D., M.-C. Simeone-Senelle and M. Vanhove (2002). The grammaticalisation of ‘say’ and ‘do’: an areal phenomenon in East Africa. In Güldemann, T. and Roncador, M. (eds.) Reported Discourse: A Meeting Ground for Different Linguistic Domains, pp. 227–251. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Collins, J. (1987). Reported speech in Navajo myth-narratives. In Vershueren, J. (ed.) Linguistic Action: Some Empirical-Conceptual Studies (Advances in Discourse Processes 23), pp. 69–84. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar

Conley, J. M. and O'Barr, W. M. (1990). Rules versus Relationships: The Ethnography of Legal Discourse. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.Google Scholar

Coulmas, F. (ed.) (1986). Direct and Indirect Speech. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1999). Coherent voicing: on prosody in conversational reported speech. In Bublitz, W. and Lenk, U. (eds.) Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse: How to Create it and How to Describe it, pp. 11–32. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2003). Prosodische Stilisierungen im Gespräch. To appear in Assmann, A., Gaier, U. and Trommsdorf, G. (eds.) Zwischen Literatur und Anthropologie: Performanzen, Diskurse, Medien. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar

Cukor-Avila, P. (2002). She say, she go, she be like: verbs of quotation over time in African American Vernacular English. American Speech, 77(1): 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Danet, B. (1980). Language in the legal process. Law & Society Review, 14(3): 445–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davidson, D. (1968–9). On saying that. Synthèse, 19: 130–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davidson, D. (1980). Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Davidson, D. (1984). Quotation. In Davidson, D. (ed.), Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, pp. 79–92. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar

Davidson, J. (1984) Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests, and proposals dealing with potential or actual rejection. In Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (eds.) Structures of Social Actions: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 102–128. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Dersley, I. and Wootton, A. (2000). Complaint sequences within antagonistic argument. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33(4): 375–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Drew, P. (1979). The production of justifications and excuses by witnesses in cross-examination. In Atkinson, J. M. and Drew, P. (eds.) Order in Court, pp. 136–187. London: The Macmillan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Drew, P. (1984). Speakers' reportings invitation sequences. In Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (eds.) Structures of Social Actions: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 129–151. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Drew, P. (1987). Po-faced receipts of teases. Linguistics, 25: 219–253.CrossRefGoogle 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: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Drew, P. (1998a). Complaints about transgressions and misconduct. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 31: 295–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Drew, P. (1998b). Mis-alignments between doctor and callers in ‘after-hours’ telephone calls to a British GP's practice: a study in telephone medicine. Forthcoming in Heritage, J. and Maynard, D. (eds.) Doing Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Drew, P. and J. Heritage (1992). Analyzing talk at work: an introduction. In Drew, P.. and Heritage, J. (eds.) Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, pp. 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Drew, P. and Holt, E. (1998). Figures of speech: idiomatic expressions and the management of topic transition in conversation. Language in Society, 27: 495–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dubois, B. L. (1989). Pseudoquotation in current English communication: ‘Hey, she didn't really say it’. Language in Society, 18: 343–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Edwards, D. and Potter, J. (1993) Language and causation: a discursive action model of description and attribution. Psychological Review, 100: 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ferrara, K. and Bell, B. (1995). Sociolinguistic variation and discourse function of constructed dialogue introducers: the case of be+like. American Speech, 70: 265–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fludernik, M. (1993). The Fictions of Language and the Languages of Fiction: the Linguistic Representation of Speech and Consciousness. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Ford, C. E. (2001). At the intersection of turn and sequence: negation and what comes next. In Selting, M. and Couper-Kuhlen, E. (eds.) Studies in Interactional Linguistics, pp. 51–79. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Galatolo, R. (2003). Les stratégies de changement de footing dans le témoignage commun au tribunal: une resource pour la construction de crédibilité. In Bondi, M. and Stati, S. (eds.) Dialogue Analysis 2000, pp. 209–218. Niemeyer: Tubingen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Galatolo, R. and M. Mizzau (2003). Quoting dialogues and the construction of the narrative point of view in legal testimonies. Unpublished manuscript submitted for publication.

Goffman, E. (1972). The neglected situation. In Giglioli, P. P. (ed.) Language and Social Context, pp. 61–66. Baltimore: Penguin. Reprinted from American Anthropologist, 66: 133–136 (1964).Google Scholar

Goffman, E. (1974/1986). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. York, Pennsylvania: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. ed. (1981). Forms of Talk. Oxford, England: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Golato, A. (2000) An innovative German quotative for reporting on embodied actions: und ich so/und er so ‘And I'm like/and he's like’. Journal of Pragmatics 32(1): 29–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Golato, A. (2002). Self-quotation in German: reporting on past decisions. In Güldemann, T. and Roncador, M. (eds.) Reported Discourse: A Meeting Ground for Different Linguistic Domains, pp. 49–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.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 Publishers.Google Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1980). Restarts, pauses, and the achievement of mutual gaze at turn- beginning. Sociological Inquiry, 50: 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: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1986a). Audience diversity, participation and interpretation. Text, 6(3): 283–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1986b). Between and within: alternative treatments of continuers and assessments. Human Studies, 9: 205–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1987). Forgetfulness as an interactive resource. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50: 115–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1996). Transparent vision. In Ochs, E., Schegloff, E. and Thompson, S. A. (eds.) Interaction and Grammar, pp. 370–404. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C. (2000a). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32: 1489–1522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C. (2000b). Pointing and the collaborative construction of meaning in aphasia. Texas Linguistic Forum (Proceedings of the seventh annual Symposium About Language and Society Austin SALSA), 43: 67–76.Google Scholar

Goodwin, C. (2002). Time in action. Current Anthropology, 43 (Supplement August–October 2002): S19–S35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C. (2003a). The body in action. In Coupland, J. and Gwyn, R. (eds.) Discourse: The Body and Identity, pp. 19–42. Houndsmill, Hampshire and New York: Palgrave/Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goodwin, C. (2003b). Pointing as situated practice. In Kita, S. (ed.) Pointing: Where Language, Culture and Cognition Meet, pp. 217–241. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google 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 M. H. Goodwin(in press). Participation. In Duranti, A. (ed.) A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

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. (1990). He-Said-She-Said: Talk as Social Organization among Black Children. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

Goodwin, M. H. (1997). By-Play: negotiating evaluation in story-telling. In Guy, G. R., Feagin, C., Schriffin, D. and Baugh, J. (eds.) Towards a Social Science of Language: Papers in Honor of William Labov, vol. II, Social Interaction and Discourse Structures, pp. 77–102. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Güldemann, T. and Roncador, M. (eds.) (2002). Reported Discourse: A Meeting Ground for Different Linguistic Domains, pp. 227–251. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Güldemann, T., M. von Roncador and W. van der Wurff (2002). A comprehensive bibliography of reported discourse. In T. Güldemann, and Roncador, M. (eds.) Reported Discourse: A Meeting Ground for Different Linguistic Domains, pp. 363–415. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Günthner, S. (1997a). Complaint stories: constructing emotional reciprocity among women. In Kotthoff, H. and Wodak, R. (eds.) Communicating Gender in Context, pp. 179–218. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Günthner, S. (1997b). The contextualization of affect in reported dialogues. In Niemeier, S. and Dirven, R. (eds.) The Language of Emotions: Conceptualization, Expression and Theoretical Foundation, pp. 247–275. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Günthner, S. (1998). Polyphony and the ‘layering of voices’ in reported dialogues. (InList 3). Konstanz, Germany: University of Konstanz.Google Scholar

Günthner, S. (1999). Polyphony and the ‘layering of voices’ in reported dialogues: an analysis of the use of prosodic devices in everyday reported speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 31: 685–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haakana, M. (1999). Laughing matters: a conversation analytical study of laughter in doctor–patient interaction. Unpublished doctoral thesis. University of Helsinki, Department of Finnish.

Haakana, M. (2005). Sanottua, ajateltua ja melkein sanottua. Puheen ja ajatusten referointi valituskertomuksissa [Said, thought and almost said. Reported speech and thought in complaint stories]. In Haakana, M. and Kalliokoski, J. (eds.) Referointi ja Moniäänisyys [Reported speech and polyphony]. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura: Helsinki.Google Scholar

Haakana, M. (unpublished). From misconduct to misunderstanding: responding to patients' complaints about a third party in Finnish medical interactions. Manuscript.

Haiman., J. (1985). Natural syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar

Hanks, W. F. (1990). Referential Practice: Language and Lived Space Among the Maya. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Hayashi, M. (1997). An exploration of sentence-final uses of the quotative particle in Japanese spoken discourse. In Sohn, H.-m. and Haig, J. (eds.) Japanese/Korean Linguistics, vol. VI, pp. 565–581. Stanford: CSLI Publicatons.Google Scholar

Heath, C. (1986). Body Movement and Speech in Medical Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

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

Heritage, J. (1984b). 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: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Heritage, J. (1985). Analyzing news interviews: aspects of the production of talk for an overhearing audience. In Djik, T. A (ed.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis, vol. III, pp. 95–117. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Heritage, J. (1988). Explanations as accounts: a conversation analytic perspective. In Antaki, C. (ed.) Analysing Everyday Explanation: A Casebook of Methods, pp. 127–144. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Heritage, J. and Raymond, G. (2005). The terms of agreement: indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(1): 15–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heritage, J. and Roth, A. (1995). Grammar and institution: Questions and questioning in the broadcast news interview. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 28(1): 1–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heritage, J. C. and D. R. Watson (1979). Formulations as conversational objects. In Psathas, G. (ed.) Everyday Language. Studies in Ethnomethodology, pp. 123–162. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar

Heritage, J. C. and Watson, D. R. (1980). Aspects of the properties of formulations in natural conversations: Some instances analysed. Semiotica, 30: 245–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Holt, E. (1996). Reporting on talk: the use of direct reported speech in conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 29(3): 219–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Holt, E. (1999). Just gassing: an analysis of direct reported speech in a conversation between employees of a gas supply company. Text, 19: 505–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Holt, E. (2000). Reporting and reacting: Concurrent responses to reported speech. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33: 425–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hyvättinen, E. (1999). Ajatteleminen ja referointi: nuortenpalstojen ajatella-verbin sisältävien referaattirakenteiden analyysia [Thinking and reporting]. Unpublished MA thesis, Department of Finnish, University of Helsinki.

Irvine, J. T. (1996). Shadow conversations: The indeterminacy of participant roles. In Silverstein, M. and Urban, G. (eds.) Natural Histories of Discourse, pp. 131–159. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Iso suomen Kieloppi [The Descriptive Grammar of Finnish] (2004). Auli Hakulinen (ed. in-chief), Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen and Irja Alho. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura: Helsinki.

Jakobson, R. (1971). Shifters, verbal categories and the Russian verb. In Jakobson, RomanSelected Writings, vol. II, Word and Language, pp. 130–147. The Hague: Mouton.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. (1979). A technique for inviting laughter and its subsequent acceptance/declination. In Psathas, G. (ed.) Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, pp. 79–96. NewYork: Irvington.Google Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1983). Caveat speaker: preliminary notes on recipient topic-shift implicature. Tilburg Papers in Language and Literature, 30.Google Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1984a). Notes on a systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens ‘yeah’ and ‘mm hm’. Papers in Linguistics, 17: 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1984b). On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately next-positioned matters. In Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 191–222. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1986). On the sequential organisation of troubles talk in ordinary conversation. Social Problems 35(4): 418–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1989). Notes on a possible metric for a ‘standard maximum silence of approximately one second in conversation’. In Roger, D. and Bull, P. (eds.) Conversation: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, pp. 166–196. Clevedon and Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Jefferson, G. (1990). List construction as a task and resource. In Psathas, G. (ed.) Interaction Competence, pp. 63–92. Washington, DC: University Press of America: 63–92.Google Scholar

Jefferson, G., H. Sacks and E. Schegloff (1987). Notes on laughter in the pursuit of intimacy. In Button, G. and Lee, J. R. E. (eds.) Talk and Social Organisation, pp. 152–205. Clevedon and Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Jespersen, O. (1924). The Philosophy of Grammar. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar

Kendon, A. (1990). Behavioral foundations for the process of frame-attunement in face-to-face interaction. In Kendon, A. (ed.) Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters, pp. 239–262. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kerby, J. and Rae, J. (1998). Moral identity in action: young offenders' reports of encounters with the police. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37: 439–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Klewitz, G. and Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1999). Quote-unquote: the role of prosody in the contextualization of reported speech sequences. Pragmatics, 9: 459–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Komter, M. L. (1998). Dilemmas in the Courtroom: A Study of Violent Crime in The Netherlands. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Koppel, T. and K. Gibson, (1995). Nightline: History in the Making and the Making of Television. Norwalk, CT: Crown Publishing.Google Scholar

Kuiri, K. (1984). Referoiniti Kainuun ja pohjois – karjalan murteissa [Reported speech in the dialects of Kainuu and North Carelia]. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura: Helsinki.Google Scholar

Labov, W. (1972). Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar

Labov, W. and J. Waletzky (1967). Narrative analysis: oral versions of personal experience. In Helm, J. (ed.) Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts, pp. 12–44. Washington: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar

Larson, M. L. (1987). The Functions of Reported Speech in Discourse. Arlington: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar

Leech, G. N. and Short, M. H. (1981). Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose. New York: Longman.Google Scholar

Lehrer, A. (1989) Remembering and presenting prose: quoted speech as a data source. Discourse Processes, 12: 105–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lerner, G. H. (1991). On the syntax of sentence-in-progress. Language in Society, 20: 441–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lerner, G. H. (1993). Collectivities in action: establishing the relevance of conjoined participation in conversation. Text, 13(2): 213–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Leudar, I. (1998). Who is Martin McGuinness 1: on contextualizing reported. political talk. In Cmejrkova, S. et al. (eds.) Dialogue Analysis, 6(2): 217–224. Tubingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar

Levinson, S. C. (1988). Putting linguistics on a proper footing: explorations in Goffman's concepts of participation. In Drew, P. and Wootton, A. (eds.) Erving Goffman: Exploring the Interaction Order, pp. 161–227. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Li, C. (1986). Direct and indirect speech: a functional study. In Coulmas, C. (ed.) Direct and Indirect Speech, pp. 29–45. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Longacre, R. (1985). Sentences as combinations of clauses. In Shopen, T. (ed.) Language Typology and Syntactic Description, pp. 235–286. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Luchjenbroers, J. (1997). ‘In your own words…’ Questions and answers in a Supreme Court trial. Journal of Pragmatics 27(4): 477–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lucy, J. A. (ed.) (1993). Reflexive Language: Reported Speech and Metapragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Macaulay, R. (2001). You're like ‘why not’: the quotative expressions of Glasgow adolescents. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(1): 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCawley, J. (1999) Participant roles, frames, and speech acts. Linguistics and Philosophy, 22: 595–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGregor, W. (1994). The grammar of reported speech and thought in Gooniyandi. Journal of Linguistics, 14: 63–92.Google Scholar

McHale, B. (1978). Free indirect discourse: a survey of recent accounts. PTL: A Journal for Descriptive Poetics and Theory of Literature 3: 249–287.Google Scholar

McNeill, D. (1992). Hand & Mind: What Gestures Reveal about Thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Mandelbaum, J. (1991/1992). Conversational non-cooperation: an exploration of disattended complaints: Research on Language and Social Interaction 25: 97–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mathis, T. and Yule, G. (1994). Zero quotatives. Discourse Processes, 18: 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mayes, P. (1990). Quotation in spoken English, Studies in Language 14: 325–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maynard, D. W. (1996). Introduction to Harold Garfinkel for the Mead Cooley award. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59: 1–4.Google Scholar

Maynard, D. W. and C. L. Marlaire (1999). Good reasons for bad testing performance: the interactional substrate of educational testing. In Kovarksky, D., Duchan, J. and Maxwell, M. (eds.) Constructing (In)Competence: Disabling Evaluations in Clinical and Social Interaction, pp. 171–196. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Maynard, S. K. (1996). Multivoicedness in speech and thought representation: the case of self-quotation in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 25: 207–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mills, C. Wright (1940). Situated actions and vocabularies of motive. American Sociological Review, 5: 904–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mizzau, M. (1999). Parola a più voci: il discorso riportato. In Galatolo, R. and Pallotti, G. (eds.) La Conversazione, pp. 187–204. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.Google Scholar

Moore, R. E. (1993). Performance form and the voices of characters in five versions of the Wasco Coyote Cycle. In Lucy, J. A. (ed.) Reflexive Language: Reported Speech and Metapragmatics, pp. 213–240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Myers, G. (1999). Functions of reported speech in group discussions. Applied Linguistics, 20(3): 376–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

O'Barr, W. (1982). Linguistic Evidence. San Diego, New York and Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar

O'Brien, S. (1992). In Touch With Eternity: Contact With Another World. London: Bantam Books.Google Scholar

Parmentier, R. J. (1993). The political function of reported speech: a Belauan example. In Lucy, J. A. (ed.) Reflexive Language: Reported Speech and Metapragmatics, pp. 261–286. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Partee, B. H. (1973). The syntax and semantics of quotation. In Anderson, S. R. and Kiparsky, P. (eds.) A Festschrift for Morris Halle, pp. 410–418. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Wilson.Google Scholar

Penman, R. (1987). Discourse in courts: cooperation, coercion and coherence. Discourse Processes, 10(3): 201–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Philips, S. U. (1986). Reported speech as evidence in an American trial. In Tannen, D. and Alatis, J. E. (eds.) Languages and Linguistics: The Interdependence of Theory, Data and Application, pp. 154–179. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Philips, S. U. (1992). Evidentiary standards for American trials: just the facts. In Hill, J. H. and Irvine, J. T. (eds.) Responsibility and Evidence in Oral Discourse, pp. 248–259. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Polanyi, L. (1982). Literary complexity in everyday storytelling. In Tannen, D. (ed.) Spoken and Written Language: Exploring Orality and Literacy, pp. 155–170. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.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. (1980). Telling my side: ‘limited access’ as a ‘fishing’ device. Sociological Inquiry, 50: 186–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pomerantz, A. (1984a). 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 Conversational Analysis, pp. 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Pomerantz, A. M. (1984b). Giving a source or basis: the practice in conversation of telling ‘how I know’. Journal of Pragmatics 8: 607–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pomerantz, A. (1986). Extreme case formulations: a way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies, 9: 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Potter, J. (1996). Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Psathas, G. (1995). Conversation Analysis: The Study of Talk in Interaction. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Quine, W. V. O. (1960). Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Rae, J. (2001). Organizing participation in interaction: doing participation framework. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 34(2): 253–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Raymond, G. (2000). The structure of responding: type-conforming and nonconforming responses to yes/no type interrogatives. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, UCLA.

Romaine, S. and Lange, D. (1991). The use of like as a marker of reported speech and thought: a case of grammaticalization in progress. American Speech, 66(3): 227–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Routarinne, S. (2003). Tytöt äänessä. Parenteesit ja nouseva sävelkulku kertojan vuorovaikutuskeinovia [Girls talking. Parenthesis and rising intonation as narrators' interactional devices]. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura: Helsinki.Google Scholar

Sacks, H. (1970). Hypothetical second stories and explanations for first stories: sound-related terms (Poetics); ‘what I didn't do’. In Jefferson, G. (ed.) (1992) Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Sacks, H. (1971). Produced similarities in first and second stories; poetics; ‘fragile stories’; etc. In Jefferson, G. (ed.) (1992) Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Sacks, H. (1987). On the preference for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In Button, G. and Lee, J. R. E. (eds.) Talk and Social Organization, pp. 54–69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Sacks, H. (1992a). Lectures on conversation, vol. I, ed. G. Jefferson. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Sacks, H. (1992b). Lectures on conversation, vol II, ed. G. Jefferson. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. and Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50(4): 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sapir, E. (1968). Language defined. In Gleeson, P. and Wakefield, N. (eds.) Language and Culture: A Reader, pp. 3–19. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: some uses of ‘uh uh’ and other things that come between sentences. In Tannen, D. (ed.) Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics, pp. 71–93. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1984). On some questions and ambiguities in conversation. In Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (eds.) Structures of Social Actions: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 28–52. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1988). Goffman and the analysis of conversation. In Drew, P. and Wootton, A. (eds.) Erving Goffman: Exploring the Interaction Order, pp. 89–135. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1993). Reflections on quantification in the study of conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26(1): 99–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1995). Sequence organization. Unpublished manuscript.

Schegloff, E. A. (1996a). Confirming allusions: toward an empirical account of action. American Journal of Sociology, 102(1): 161–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1996b). Some practices for referring to persons in talk-in-interaction: a partial sketch of a systematics. In Fox, B. (ed.) Studies in Anaphora, pp. 437–485. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.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: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1997). Whose text? Whose context?Discourse and Society, 8(2): 165–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

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

Schegloff, E. A. (2000b). Overlapping talk and the organization of turntaking for conversation. Language in Society, 29(1): 1–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. and Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 7: 289–327.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G. and Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53: 361–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schenkein, J. (ed.) (1978). Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Schudson, M. (1978). Discovering the News. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Scott, M. B. and Lyman, S. M. (1968). Accounts. American Sociological Review, 33: 46–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Selting, M. (2003). Lists as embedded structures and prosody of list construction as an interactional resource. InList 35, Konstanz, Germany: University of Konstanz.

Shine, B. (1996). My Life as a Medium. London: Thorsons.Google Scholar

Shoaps, R. (2004) ‘Moral irony’: modal particles, moral persons and indirect evaluative stance-taking in Sakapultek discourse. Unpublished manuscript.

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

Sternberg, M. (1982). Proteus in quotation-land: mimesis and the forms of reported discourse. Poetics Today, 3: 107–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stivers, T. and Heritage, J. (2001). Breaking the sequential mold: answering ‘more than the question’ during comprehensive history taking. Text, 21: 151–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stygall, G. (1994). Trial Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tagliamonte, S. and Hudson, R. (1999). Be like et al. Beyond America: the quotative system in British and Canadian youth. Journal of Sociolinguistics 3: 147–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tannen, D. (1986). Introducing constructed dialogue in Greek and American conversational and literary narrative. In Coulmas, F. (ed.) Direct and Indirect Speech, pp. 311–332. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tannen, D. (1989). Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

ten Have, P. and Psathas, G. (1995). Situated Order: Studies in the Social Organization of Talk and Embodied Activities. Washington, DC: University Press of America.Google Scholar

Thompson, G. (1984). Voices in the text: discourse perspectives on language reports. Applied Linguistics, 17: 501–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tuchman, G. (1972). Objectivity as strategic ritual: an examination of newsmen's notions of objectivity. American Journal of Sociology, 77: 660–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Urban, G. (1993). The represented functions of speech in Shokleng myth In Lucy, J. A. (ed.) Reflexive Language: Reported Speech and Metapragmatics, pp. 241–259. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Vincent, D. and Perrin, L. (1999). On the narrative vs non-narrative functions of reported speech: a socio-pragmatic study. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 3: 291–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Volosinov, V. N. (1971). Reported speech. In Matejka, L. and Pomorska, K. (eds.) Readings in Russian Poetics: Formalist and Structuralist Views, pp. 149–175. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Volosinov, V. N. (1973). Exposition of the problem of reported speech. In Marxism and the Philosophy of Language, pp. 115–174. New York and London: Seminar Press.Google Scholar

Wierzbicka, A. (1974). The semantics of direct and indirect discourse. Papers in Linguistics, 7(3/4): 267–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wilkinson, R., S. Beeke and J. Maxim (2003). Adapting to conversation: on the use of linguistic resources by speakers with fluent aphasia in the construction of turns at talk. In Goodwin, C. (ed.) Conversation and Brain Damage, pp. 59–89. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Wooffitt, R. (1992). Telling Tales of the Unexpected: the Organisation of Factual Discourse. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar

Wooffitt, R. (2000). Some properties of the interactional organisation of displays of paranormal cognition in psychic–sitter interaction. Sociology, 43: 457–479.Google Scholar

Wooffitt, R. (2001). Raising the dead: reported speech in medium–sitter interaction. Discourse Studies, 3: 351–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Yule, G. (1995). The paralinguistics of reference: representation in reported discourse. In Cook, G. and Seidlhofer, B. (eds.) Principle & Practice in Applied Linguistics, pp. 185–196. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Yule, G., Mathis, T., et al. (1992). On reporting what was said. ELT Journal 46: 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar