Affiliation and detachment in interviewer answer receipts

Analyzing Race Talk: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on the Research Interview

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 178-199

  Koole, Tom ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84926973271     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511489792.011     Document Type: Chapter

References (26)

1. Atkinson, J. M. 1992. Displaying neutrality: formal aspects of informal court proceedings, in Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings, edited by P. Drew and J. Heritage. 199–211.
2. Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J., editors. 1984. Structures of social action: studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Boden, D. and Zimmerman, D. H., editors. 1991. Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press.
4. Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. 1987. Politeness: some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Drew, P. and Heritage, J., editors. 1992. Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Drummond, K. and Hopper, R. 1993. Back channels revisited: acknowledgment tokens and speakership incipiency. Research on Language and Social Interaction 26, 2: 57–177.
7. Ehlich, K. 1979. Formen und Funktionen von “hm”: eine phonologischpragmatische Analyse, in Die Partikeln der Deutschen Sprache, edited by H. Weydt. Berlin: de Gruyter. 503–517.
8. Gardner, R. 1997. The conversational object “mm”: aweak and variable acknowledging token. Research on Language and Social Interaction 30, 2: 131–156.
9. Greatbatch, D. 1988. A turn-taking system for British news interviews. Language in Society 17: 401–430.
10. Heritage, J. and Greatbatch, D. 1991. On the institutional character of institutional talk: the case of news interviews, in Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis, edited by D. Boden and D. H. Zimmerman. 93–137.
11. Heritage, J. and Watson, D. 1980. Aspects of the properties of formulations in natural conversations: some instances analyzed. Semiotica 30: 245–262.
12. James, D. and Clarke, S. 1993. Women, men, and interruptions: a critical review, in Gender and Conversational Interaction, edited by D. Tannen. Oxford University Press. 231–280.
13. Jefferson, G. 1984. Notes on a systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens “yeah” and “mh hm.” Papers in Linguistics 17: 197–216.
14. Jefferson, G. 1989. Preliminary notes on a possible metric which provides for a “standard maximum” silence of approximately one second in conversation, in Conversation: an interdisciplinary perspective, edited by D. Roger and P. Bull. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 166–196.
15. Jefferson, G. 1993 (1983). Caveat speaker: preliminary notes on recipient topic-shift implicature. Research on Language and Social Interaction 26, 1: 1–30.
16. Labov, W. and Fanshel, D. 1977. Therapeutic discourse. NewYork: Academic Press.
17. Lerner, G. 1991. On the syntax of sentences-in-progress. Language in Society 20, 3: 441–58
18. Lerner, G. 1996. On the “semi-permeable” character of grammatical units in conversation: conditional entry into the turn space of another speaker, in Interaction and grammar, edited by E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, and S. A. Thompson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 238–276.
19. Mazeland, H. 1992. Vraag/antwoord-sequenties (question/answer sequences). Amsterdam: Stichting Neerlandistiek VU.
20. Pomerantz, A. 1984. Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments, in Structures of social action: studies in conversation analysis, edited by J. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 57–101.
21. Pomerantz, A. and Fehr, B. J. 1997. Conversation analysis: an approach to the study of social action as sense making practices, in Discourse studies: a multidisciplinary introduction, edited by T. A. van Dijk. London: Sage. 64–91.
22. Psathas, G. 1995. Conversation analysis. The study of talk-in-interaction. London: Sage.
23. Schegloff, E. A. 1982. Discourse as an interactional achievement: some uses of “uh huh” and other things that come between sentences, in Analyzing discourse: text and talk, edited by D. Tannen. Wahington DC: Greorgetown University Press. 71–93.
24. Schegloff, E. and Sacks, H. 1973. Opening up closings. Semiotica 7: 289–327.
25. Ten Have, P. 1999. Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide. London: Sage.
26. Yngve, V. H. 1970. On getting a word in edgewise. Papers from the Sixth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society 6: 657–677.