Remembering relevant information and withholding relevant next actions: The German token achja

Research on Language and Social Interaction

Volumn 41, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 58-98

  Betz, Emma ^a   Golato, Andrea ^b  

^a KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 41249103752     PISSN: 08351813     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08351810701691164     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Aston, G. (1987). AH: A corpus-based exercise in conversational analysis. In J. Morley & P. A. Parington (Eds.), Spoken discourse (pp. 123-137). Camerino, Italy: Univiersita di Camerino.
2. Atkinson, J. M., & Heritage, J. (Eds.). (1984). Structures of social action. Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
3. Auer, P. (1984). Referential problems in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 8, 627-648.
4. Auer, P., & Uhmann, S. (1982). Aspekte der konversationellen Organisation von Bewertungen [Aspects of the conversational organization of assessments]. Deutsche Sprache, 10, 1-32.
5. Barske, T. (2006). Enacting the roles of boss and employee in German business meetings: A conversation analytic study of how social roles are co-constructed. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
6. Betz, E., & Golato, A. (2007, April). German 'ach' and 'achso' in repair uptake: A resource to sustain or remove epistemic asymmetry. Paper presented at the American Association of Applied Linguistics Annual Conference, Costa Mesa, CA.
7. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2006). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 4.4.24 [Computer program]. Retrieved June 19, 2006, from http://www.praat.org/
8. Bolden, G. (2004). Delayed and incipient actions: The discourse markers "-to " and "so " in Russian and English conversation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of California, Los Angeles.
9. Bolden, G. (2006). Little words that matter: Discourse markers "so" and "oh" and the doing of other-attentiveness in social interaction. Journal of Communication, 56, 661-688.
10. Bredel, U. (2000). Ach so - Eine Rekonstruktion aus funktional-pragmatischer Perspektive [A reconstruction from a functional-pragmatic perspective]. Linguistische Berichte, 184, 401-421.
11. Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1993). English speech rhythm: Form and function in everyday verbal interaction. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
12. Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1999). Coherent voicing: On prosody in conversational reported speech. In W. Bublitz & U. Lenk (Eds.), Coherence in spoken and written discourse (pp. 11-33). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
13. Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Ford, C. E. (2004). Sound patterns in interaction: Cross-linguistic studies from conversation. Amsterdam.: Benjamins.
14. Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (Eds.). (1996). Prosody in conversation. Interactional studies. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
15. Drew, P. (1989). Recalling someone from the past. In D. Roger & P. Bull (Eds.), Conversation: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 96-115). Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
16. Egbert, M. M. (1997). Some interactional achievements of other-initiated repair in multiperson conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 611-634.
17. Egbert, M. M. (2002). Der Reparatur-Mechanismus in deutschen und interkulturellen Gesprächen [The repair mechanism in German and intercultural conversation]. Habilitationsschrift. Universität Oldenburg.
18. Egbert, M. M. (2004). Other-initiated repair and membership categorization - Some conversational events that trigger linguistic and regional membership categorization. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1467-1498.
19. Ford, C. E., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2004). Conversation and phonetics. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & C. E. Ford (Eds.), Sound patterns in interaction: Cross-Linguistic Studies from Conversation (pp. 3-25). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
20. Gardner, R. (1995). On some uses of the conversational token mm. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
21. Gardner, R. (1997). The conversation object Mm: A weak and variable acknowledging token. Research on Language and Social. Interaction, 30, 131-156.
22. Gardner, R. (1998). Between listening and speaking: The vocalization of understandings. Applied Linguistics, 19, 204-224.
23. Gardner, R. (2002). When listeners talk: Response tokens and listener stance (Vol. 92). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
24. Golato, A. (2002). Self-quotation in German: Reporting on past decisions. In T. Güldemann & M. v. Roncador (Eds.), Reported discourse: A meeting ground for different linguistic domains (pp. 49-70). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
25. Golato, A. (2005). Compliments and compliment responses: Grammatical structure and sequential organization. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
26. Golato, A. (2006, November). Action and topic shifts in conversation: The case of 3rd-position 'naja 'in German. Paper presented at the Convention of the National Communication Association, San Antonio, TX.
27. Golato, A., & Fagyal, Z. (in press). 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.
28. Golato, A., & Fagyal, Z. (2006). Two contours, two meanings: The intonation of jaja in German phone conversations. In Speech Prosody, 3rd International Conference Dresden, May 2-5, 2006. Abstract Book and CD-Rom Proceedings. Dresden: TUD press Verlag der Wissenschaft.
29. Goodwin, G (1987). Forgetfulness as an interactive resource. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 115-131.
30. 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.
31. Harten, I. (2001). "Ne.? " in Alltagsgesprächen - interaktive Funktionen und Positionierung in Turn und Sequenz ["Ne?" in everyday conversation - Interactive functions and positioning in turns and sequences]. Unpublished master's thesis, Universität Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
32. Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 299-345). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
33. Heritage, J. (1998). Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry. Language in Society, 27, 291-334.
34. Heritage, J. (2002). Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement. In. C. E. Ford, B. A. Fox, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), The language of turn and sequence (pp. 196-224). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
35. Heritage, J. (2005). Cognition in discourse. In H. te Molder & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition (pp. 184-202). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
36. Heritage, J., & Atkinson, J. M. (1984). Introduction. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 1-15). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
37. Holt, E., & Clift, R. (Eds.). (2007). Reporting talk: Reported speech in interaction. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
38. Hutchby, I. (2001). "Oh," irony and sequential ambiguity in arguments. Discourse & Society, 12, 123-141.
39. James, D. (1972). Some aspects of the syntax and semantics of interjections. Chicago Linguistic Society, 8, 162-172.
40. James, D. (1974). Another look at, say, some grammatical constraints on, oh, interjections and hesitations. Chicago Linguistic Society, 10, 242-251.
41. Jefferson, G. (1978). Sequential aspects of storytelling in conversation. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp. 219-248). New York: Academic.
42. Jefferson, G. (1980a). The abominable Ne?: An Exploration of post-response pursuit of response. In P. Schröder & H. Steger (Eds.), Dialogforschung: Jahrbuch 1980 des Instituts für deutsche Sprache (pp. 53-88). Düsseldorf, Germany: Pädagogischer Verlag Schwann.
43. Jefferson, G. (1980b). On "trouble-premonitory" response to inquiry. Sociological Inquiry, 50(3-4), 153-185.
44. Jefferson, G. (1984). Notes on a systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens "yeah" and "Mm hm." Papers in Linguistics, 17, 197-216.
45. Kelly, J., & Local, J. (1989). Doing phonology: Observing, recording, interpreting. Manchester, England: Manchester University Press.
46. Klewitz, G., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1999). Quote-unquote? The role of prosody in the contextualization of reported speech sequences. Pragmatics, 9, 459-485.
47. Koshik, I. (2005). Beyond rhetorical questions: Assertive questions in everyday interaction. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
48. Lindström, A. (1999). Language as social action: Grammar, prosody and interaction in Swedish conversation. Vol. [Skrifter utgivna av institutionen för nordiska språk vid Uppsala universitet, 46.]). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
49. Local, J. (1996). Conversational phonetics: Some aspects of news receipts in everyday talk. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies (pp. 177-230). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
50. Lynch, M. (1982). Closure and disclosure in pre-trial argument. Human Studies, 5, 285-318.
51. Maynard, D. W. (1997). The news delivery sequence: Bad news and good news in conversational interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 20, 93-130.
52. Middleton, D. (1997). Conversational remembering and uncertainty: Interdependencies of experience as individual and collective concerns in teamwork. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16, 389-410.
53. Middleton, D. (2002). Succession and change in the sociocultural use of memory: Building-in the past in communicative action. Culture and Psychology, 8(1), 79-95.
54. 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.
55. Müller, F. E. (1996). Affiliating and disaffiliating with continuers: Prosodic aspects of recipiency. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in conversation (pp. 131-176). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
56. Pomerantz, A. (1984a). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 225-246). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
57. Pomerantz, A. (1984b). Pursuing a response. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 152-164). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
58. Reavey, P., & Brown, S. D. (2006). Transforming past agency and action in the present: Time, social remembering and child sex abuse. Theory and Psychology, 16, 179-202.
59. Rönfeldt, B., & Auer, P. (2002). Erinnern und Vergessen. Erschwerte Wortfindung als soziales und interaktives problem. In M. Schecker (Ed.), Wortfindung und Wortfindungsstörungen [Lexical access and impairment of lexical access] (pp. 77-108). Tübingen, Germany: Narr.
60. Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of "uh huh" and other things that come between sentences. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Analyzing discourse: Text and talk (pp. 7.1-93). (Georgetown University on Roundtahle on Languages and Linguistics). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
61. Schegloff, E. A. (1984). On some questions and ambiguities in conversation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 28-52). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press
62. Schegloff, E. A. (1987). Analyzing single episodes of interaction: An exercise in conversation analysis. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 101-114.
63. Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1295-1345.
64. Schegloff, E. A. (1993). Reflections on quantification in the study of conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26, 99-128.
65. Schegloff, E. A. (1996). Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 52-133). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
66. Schegloff, E. A. (1998). Reflections on studying prosody in talk-in-interaction. Language and Speech, 41, 235-263.
67. Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361-382.
68. Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
69. Selting, M. (1988). The role of intonation in the organization of repair and problem handling sequences in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 293-322.
70. Selting, M. (1995). Prosodie im Gespräch [Prosody in conversation]. Tübingen, Germany: Niemeyer.
71. Selting, M. (1998). TCUs and TRPs: The construction of "units" in conversational talk. Interaction and Linguistic Structures, 4, 1-48.
72. Selting, M. (2002, May). Lists: The prosody of list construction as an interactional resource. Paper presented at the International Conference on Conversation Analysis, Copenhagen, Denmark.
73. Sorjonen, M.-L. (2001). Responding in conversation: A study of response particles in Finnish (Vol. 70). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
74. Stivers, T. (2004). "No no no" and other types of multiple sayings in social interaction. Human Communication Research, 30, 260-293.
75. Taleghani-Nikazm, G (2006). Request sequences: The intersection of grammar, interaction and social context. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
76. Willkop, E.-M. (1988). Gliederungspartikeln im Dialog [Structuring particles in dialogues]. München, Germany: Iudicium.
77. Wu, R.-J. R. (2004). Stance in talk: A conversation analysis of Mandarin final particles. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
78. Zifonun, G., Hoffmann, L., & Strecker, B. (1997). Grammatik der deutschen Sprache (3 Bände. [Grammar of the German language]). Berlin: de Gruyter.
79. Zimmerman, D. H. (1993). Acknowledgment tokens and speakership incipiency revisited. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26, 179-194.