German oh: Marking an Emotional Change of State

Research on Language and Social Interaction

Volumn 45, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 245-268

  Golato, Andrea ^a  

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

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864665698     PISSN: 08351813     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08351813.2012.699253     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Aijmer, K. 1987. "Oh and ah in English conversation". In Corpus linguistics and beyond, Edited by: Meijis, W. 61-86. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
2. Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. 1984. Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
3. Barske, T. 2009. Same token, different actions: A conversation analytic study of social roles, embodied actions, and ok in German business meetings. Journal for Business Communication, 46: 120-149.
4. 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.
5. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2006). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 4.4.24 [Computer program]). http://www.praat.org/ (http://www.praat.org/)
6. 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.
7. Bredel, U. 2000. Ach so-Eine rekonstruktion aus funktional-pragmatischer perspektive [Ach so-A reconstruction from a functional-pragmatic perspective]. Linguistische Berichte, 184: 401-421.
8. Couper-Kuhlen, E. 2009. "A sequential approach to affect: The case of "disappointment. In Talk in interaction: Comparative dimensions, Edited by: Haakana, M., Laakso, M. and Lindstrom, J. 94-123. Helsinki, Finland: Finnish Literature Society (SKS).
9. Couper-Kuhlen, E. and Ford, C. E. 2004. Sound patterns in interaction: Cross-linguistic studies from conversation, Amsterman, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.
10. Couper-Kuhlen, E. and Selting, M. 1996. Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
11. Drescher, M. 2003. Sprachliche affektivität. Darstellung emotionaler beteiligung am beispiel von gesprächen im Französischen [Speech affect. Presentation of emotional participation with examples of conversations in French], Tübingen, Germany: Max Niemeyer.
12. Edwards, D. 1994. Script formulations: An analysis of event descriptions in conversation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 13(3): 211-247.
13. Ehlich, K. 1986. Interjektionen [Interjections], Tübingen, Germany: Niedermeyer.
14. Emmertsen, S. and Heinemann, T. 2010. Realization as a device for remedying problems of affiliation in interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(2): 109-132.
15. Femø Nielsen, M. 2002. Nå! En skiftemarkør med mange funktioner [Oh! A multi functional shift marker]. Årsberetning for Selskab for Nordisk Filologi, 2000-2001,: 51-67.
16. Fiehler, R. 1990. Kommunikation und emotion. Theoretische und empirische untersuchungen zur rolle von emotionen in der verbalen interaktion [Communication and emotion. Theoretical and empirical investigation of the role of emotions in verbal interaction], Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter.
17. Fiehler, R. 2002. "How to do emotions with words: Emotionality in conversation". In The verbal communication of emotions: Interdisciplinary perspectives, Edited by: Fussell, S. R. 79-106. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Gardner, R. 2002. When listeners talk: Response tokens and listener stance, Vol. 92, Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.
19. Goffman, E. 1978. Response cries. Language, 54: 787-815.
20. Golato, A. 2005. Compliments and compliment responses: Grammatical structure and sequential organization, Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.
21. Golato, A. 2010. Marking understanding versus receipting information in talk: achso. and ach in German interaction. Discourse Studies, 12: 147-176.
22. Golato, A. 2011. "Appreciatory sounds and expressions of embodied pleasure used as compliments". In Pragmatics of society, Edited by: Aijmer, K. and Anderson, G. 359-390. Berlin, Germany: Mouton-de Gruyter.
23. Golato, A. and Betz, E. 2008. German ach and achso in repair uptake: A resource to sustain or remove epistemic asymmetry. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 27: 7-37.
24. 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.
25. Goodwin, C. 1986. Between and within: Alternative sequential treatments of continuers and assessments. Human Studies, 9(2/3): 205-218.
26. Goodwin, C. 2007. Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse & Society, 18: 53-73.
27. Günthner, S. 1997. "The contextualization of affect in reported dialogues". In The language of emotions, Edited by: Niemeier, S. and Dirven, R. 247-275. Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.
28. Harren, I. 2001. "Ne?" in alltagsgesprächen-Interaktive funktionen und positionierung in turn und sequenz ["Ne?" in mundane conversation-Interactive function and positioning in turn and sequence] (Unpublished master's thesis), Oldenburg, Germany: University of Oldenburg.
29. Heinemann, T. 2009. "Two answers to inapposite inquiries". In Conversation analysis: Comparative perspectives, Edited by: Sidnell, J. 159-186. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
30. Heritage, J. 1984. "A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement". In Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis, Edited by: Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. 299-345. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
31. Heritage, J. 1998. Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry. Language in Society, 27: 291-334.
32. Heritage, J. 2002. "Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement". In The language of turn and sequence, Edited by: Ford, C. E., Fox, B. A. and Thompson, S. A. 196-224. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
33. Heritage, J. 2005a. "Cognition in discourse. In H. te Molder". In Conversation and cognition, Edited by: Potter, J. 184-202. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
34. Heritage, J. 2005b. The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68: 15-38.
35. Heritage, J. and Raymond, G. 2005. The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in assessment sequences. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68: 15-38.
36. Jefferson, G. 1988. On the sequential organization of troubles-talk in ordinary conversation. Social Problems, 35: 418-441.
37. Kucharczik, K. 1989. "Sprecher- und hörerseitige verwendungen der interjektion HM [Speaker and hearer usages of the interjection HM]". In Zeitliche und inhaltliche aspekte der textproduktion [Temporal and content aspects of text production], Edited by: Kowal, S. and Posner, R. 168-191. Berlin, Germany: Institut für Linguistik.
38. Kühn, P. 1979. Aha! Pragmatik einer interjektion [Aha! Pragmatics of an interjection]. Deutsche Sprache, 4: 289-297.
39. Local, J. 1996. "Conversational phonetics: Some aspects of news receipts in everyday talk". In Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies, Edited by: Couper-Kuhlen, E. and Selting, M. 177-230. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
40. Local, J. and Walker, G. 2008. Stance and affect in conversation: On the interplay of sequential and phonetic resources. Text & Talk, 28: 723-737.
41. Maynard, D. W. 1989. "Notes on the delivery and reception of diagnostic news regarding mental disabilities". In The interactional order: New directions in the study of social order, Edited by: Helm, D. T., Anderson, W. T., Meehan, A. J. and Rawls, A. W. 55-67. New York, NY: Irvington.
42. Maynard, D. W. 1997. The news delivery sequence: Bad news and good news in conversational interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 20(2): 93-130.
43. 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.
44. Niemeier, S. and Dirven, R. 1997. The language of emotions: Conceptualization, expression, and theoretical foundation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.
45. Nübling, D. 2004. Die prototypische interjekton: Ein definierungsvorschlag [The prototypical interjection: An attempt at a definition]. Zeitschrift für Semiotik, 26(1/2 [Sonderband zu interjektionen]): 11-45.
46. Ochs, E. and Schieffelin, B. 1989. Language as a heart. Text, 9: 7-25.
47. Pudlinski, C. 2005. Doing empathy and sympathy: Caring responses to troubles tellings on a peer support line. Discourse Studies, 7: 267-288.
48. Pudlinski, C. 2008. Encouraging responses to good news on a peer support line. Discourse Studies, 10: 795-812.
49. Reber, E. and Couper-Kuhlen, E. 2010. "Interjektionen zwischen lexikon und vokalität: Lexem oder lautobjekt? [Interjection between lexicon and vocalization: Lexeme or sound?]". In Sprache intermedial. Stimme und schrift, bild und ton [Intermedial language. Voice and language, picture and sound], Edited by: Deppermann, A. and Linke, A. 69-96. Berlin, Germany/New York: NY: de Gruyter.
50. Schegloff, E. A. 1981. Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of "uh huh" and other things that come between sentences, Washington, DC: Paper presented at the Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics 1981, Analyzing Discourse: Text and Talk.
51. Schiffrin, D. 1987. Discourse markers, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
52. Selting, M. 1996. "Prosody as an activity-type distinctive signaling cue in conversation: The case of so-called "astonished questions" in repair-initiation". In Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies, Edited by: Couper-Kuhlen, E. and Selting, M. 231-270. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
53. Sorjonen, M.-L. 2001. Responding in conversation: A study of response particles in Finnish, Vol. 70, Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.
54. Tanaka, L. 2004. Gender, language and culture: A study of Japanese television interview discourse, Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.
55. Wahmhoff, S. and Wenzel, A. 1979. "Ein HM ist noch lange kein HM-Oder was heisst klientenbezogene gesprächsführung? [Not every HM is a HM-Or what does client centered conversation mean?]". In Arbeiten zur konversationsanalyse [Papers on conversation analysis], Edited by: Dittmann, J. 258-297. Tübingen, Germany: Niemeyer.
56. Weinrich, H. 2005. Textgrammatik der deutschen sprache [Textual grammar of German], 3rd rev., Hildesheim, Germany: Olms.
57. Whalen, J. and Zimmerman, D. H. 1998. Observations on the display and management of emotion in naturally occurring activities: The case of "hysteria" in calls to 9-1-1. Social Psychological Quarterly, 61: 141-159.
58. Wilkinson, S. and Kitzinger, C. 2006. Surprise as an interactional achievement: Reaction tokens in conversation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69: 150-182.
59. Willkop, E.-M. 1988. Gliederungspartikeln im dialog [Structuring particles in dialogue], München, Germany: Iudicium.
60. Zifonun, G., Hoffmann, L. and Strecker, B. 1997. Grammatik der deutschen Sprache (3 Bände) [Grammar of the German language (3 volumes)], Berlin, Germany/New York: NY: de Gruyter.