Chapter published in:
The ‘Noun Phrase’ across Languages: An emergent unit in interaction
Edited by Tsuyoshi Ono and Sandra A. Thompson
[Typological Studies in Language 128] 2020
► pp. 180207
References

References

Auer, Peter
2005Projection in interaction and projection in grammar. Text 25(1): 7–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Projection in minimalistic syntax in interaction. Discourse Processes 46: 180–205. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, Scott & Ferguson, Alison
2015Conversation partner responses to problematic talk produced by people with aphasia: Some alternatives to initiating, completing, or pursuing repair. Aphasiology 29(3): 315–336. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bloch, Steven
2011Anticipatory other-completion of augmentative and alternative communication talk: A conversation analysis study. Disability and Rehabilitation 33(3): 261–269. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bloch, Steven & Wilkinson, Ray
2004The understandability of AAC: A conversation analysis study of acquired dysarthria. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 20(4): 272–282. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Acquired dysarthria in conversation: Methods of resolving understandability problems. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders 46(5): 769–783. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chevalier, Fabienne H. G. & Clift, Rebecca
2008Unfinished turns in French conversation: Projectability, syntax and action. Journal of Pragmatics 40: 1731–1752. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Collins, Sarah
1996Referring expressions in conversations between aided and natural speakers. In Augmentative and Alternative Communication: European Perspectives, Stephen von Tetzchner & Mogens Hygum Jensen (eds), 89–100. San Diego CA: Singular.Google Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark & Enfield, Nicholas J.
2015Other-initiated repair across languages: Towards a typology of conversational structures. Open Linguistics 1: 96–118. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dionigi, Alberto & Canestrari, Carla
2018The role of laughter in cognitive-behavioral therapy: Case studies. Discourse Studies 20(3): 323–339. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul
1984Speakers’ reportings in invitation sequences. In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds), 129–151. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
1997‘Open’ class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 28: 69–101. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ekberg, Stuart
2012Addressing a trouble source outside of the repair space. Journal of Pragmatics 44: 374–386. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E. & Thompson, Sandra A.
1996Interactional units in conversation: Syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. In Interaction and Grammar, Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 134–184. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Glenn, Phillip
2013Interviewees volunteered laughter in employment interviews: A case of ‘nervous’ laughter? In Studies of Laughter in Interaction, Phillip Glenn & Elizabeth Holt (eds), 255–275. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
2003Introduction. In Conversation and Brain Damage, Charles Goodwin (ed), 3–20. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Haakana, Markku
2001Laughter as a patient’s resource: Dealing with delicate aspects of medical interaction. Text 21(1–2): 187–219.Google Scholar
Hayashi, Makoto
2004Projection and grammar: Notes on the ‘action-projecting’ use of the distal demonstrative are in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1337–1374. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hayashi, Makoto & Hayano, Kaoru
2013Proffering insertable elements: A study of other-initiated repair in Japanese. In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding [Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics 30], Makoto Hayashi, Geoffrey Raymond & Jack Sidnell (eds), 293–321. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Hayashi, Makoto, Raymond, Geoffrey & Sidnell, Jack
2013Conversational repair and human understanding: An introduction. In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding [Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics 30], Makoto Hayashi, Geoffrey Raymond & Jack Sidnell (eds), 1–40. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa
2004Shared syntax: The grammar of co-constructions. Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1315–1336. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
1984A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds), 299–345. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
2007Intersubjectivity and progressivity in person (and place) reference. In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural, and Social Perspectives, Nicholas J. Enfield & Tanya Stivers (eds), 255–280. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
1987On exposed and embedded correction in conversation. In Talk and Social Organisation, Graham Button & John R. E. Lee (eds), 86–100. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
2004Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 125], Gene H. Lerner (ed), 13–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo
2012Compromising progressivity: ‘No’-prefacing in Estonian. Pragmatics 22(1): 119–146. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin H.
2015aThe intersection of turn-taking and repair: The timing of other-initiations of repair in conversation. Frontiers in Psychology 6: 1–16. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015bOther-initiated repair in English. Open Linguistics 1: 164–190. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, Gene H.
1996On the “semi-permeable” character of grammatical units in conversation: Conditional entry into the turn space of another speaker. In Interaction and Grammar, Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 238–76. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, Gene H. & Kitzinger, Celia
2010Repair prefacing: Preparing the way for same-turn self-repair. Paper presented at the International Conference for Conversation Analysis, Mannheim, Germany.
Lilja, Niina
2014Partial repetitions as other-initiations of repair in second language talk: Re-establishing understanding and doing learning. Journal of Pragmatics 71: 98–116. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mayes, Patricia & Clinkenbeard, Mary
2015Identifying referents in everyday conversation involving Augmentative and Alternative Communication Systems. Paper presented at the 5th Annual Meeting of the Language and Social Interaction Working Group. Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY.
2016The trouble with repair in AAC Interaction. Paper presented at the 3rd Atypical Interaction Conference. University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Müller, Eve & Soto, Gloria
2002Conversation patterns of three adults using aided speech: Variations across partners. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 18(2): 77–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Penn, Claire, Frankel, Tali & Wilkinson, Ray
2015Problems with the understandability of aphasic talk: Mentions of persons as trouble sources in interaction. Aphasiology 29(3): 291–314. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Perkins, Lisa
2003Negotiating repair in aphasic conversations. In Conversation and Brain Damage, Charles Goodwin (ed.), 147–162. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Petitjean, Cécile & Cangemi, Francesco
2016Laughter in correction sequences in speech therapy sessions. Journal of Pragmatics 99: 17–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Potter, Jonathan & Hepburn, Alexa
2010Putting aspiration into words: ‘Laugh particles’, managing descriptive trouble and modulating action. Journal of Pragmatics 42: 1543–1555. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Saldert, Charlotta, Ferm, Ulrika & Bloch, Steven
2014Semantic trouble sources and their repair in conversations affected by Parkinson’s disease. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders 49(6): 710–721. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1979The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation. In Discourse and Syntax [Syntax and Semantics 12], Talmy Givón (ed.), 261–286. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1990On the organization of sequences as a source of ‘coherence’ in talk-in-interaction. In Conversational Organization and its Development [Advances in Discourse Processes 38], Bruce Dorval (ed.), 51–77. Ablex NJ: Norwood.Google Scholar
1992Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology 97(5): 1295–1345. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000When ‘others’ initiate repair. Applied Linguistics 21(2): 205–243. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Ten operations in self-initiated, same-turn repair. In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding [Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics 30], Makoto Hayashi, Geoffrey Raymond & Jack Sidnell (eds), 41–70. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., Jefferson, Gail & Sacks, Harvey
1977The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language 53(2): 361–382. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya & Robinson, Jeffrey D.
2006A preference for progressivity in interaction. Language in Society 35(3): 367–392. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vöge, Monika
2010Local identity process in business meetings displayed through laughter in complaint sequences. Journal of Pragmatics 42(6): 1556–1576. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, Ray
1995Doing ‘being ordinary’: Aphasia as a problem of interaction. In Work in Progress 5, M. Kersner & S. Pepe (eds), 134–150. London: Department of Human Communication Sciences, University College of London.Google Scholar
2007Managing linguistic incompetence as a delicate issue in aphasic talk-in-interaction: On the use of laughter in prolonged repair sequences. Journal of Pragmatics 39(3): 542–569. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Conversation analysis and communication disorders. In The Handbook of Clinical Linguistics, Martin Ball & Nicole Müller (eds), 92–106. Hoboken NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
2016Known-response elicitation sequences in aphasic conversation. Paper presented at the 3rd Atypical Interaction Conference. University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Wilkinson, Sue & Weatherall, Ann
2011Insertion repair. Research on Language and Social Interaction 44(1): 65–91. CrossrefGoogle Scholar