Speech acts and conversational sequencing

Pragmatics and Cognition

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 1994, Pages 191-205

  Brassac, Christian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE LORRAINE   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84969478231     PISSN: 09290907     EISSN: 15699943     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1075/pc.2.1.08bra     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Brassac, C. 1992. “Analyse de conversations et théorie des actes de langage”. Cahiers de Linguistique Française 13: 62-76.
2. Brassac, C. and Trognon, A. 1990. “‘Implications’ entre énoncés, ‘engagements’ entre actes illocutoires”. Verbum 13(4): 195-221.
3. Dascal, M. 1992. “On the pragmatic structure of conversation”. In Searle et al., 35-57.
4. Franck, D. 1981. “Seven sins of pragmatics: theses about speech act theory, conversational analysis, linguistics, and rhetoric”. In Parret et al., 225-236.
5. Franck, D. 1984. “Speaking about speech acts”. Journal of Pragmatics 8: 87-92.
6. Holdcroft, D. 1992. “Searle on conversation and structure”. In Searle et al., 57-76.
7. Jucker, A.H. 1992. “Conversation: structure or process?”. In Searle et al., 77-90.
8. Levinson, S.C. 1981. “The essential inadequacies of speech act models of dialogue”. In Parret et al., 473-492.
9. Levinson, S.C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Moeschler, J. 1989. “Règles d’enchaînement et conversation. A propos de l’article d’A. Trognon et C. Brassac ‘Actes de langage et conversation’“. Intellectica 7(1): 97-111.
11. Moeschler, J. 1990. “Théorie des actes de langage et analyse de conversation”. In Charolles, M., Fisher, S., and Jayez, J. (eds). 1990. Le Discours: Représentations et Interprétations. Nancy: Preses Universitaires de Nancy, 53-69.
12. Parret, H., Sbisà, M., and Verschueren, J. (eds). 1981. Possibilities and Limitations of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
13. Sbisà, M. 1992. “Speech acts, effects, and responses”. In Searle et al., 101-111.
14. Schegloff, E.A. 1980. “Preliminaries to preliminaries: ‘Can I ask you a question?”’. Sociological Inquiry 50(3/4): 104-152.
15. Schegloff, E.A. 1988. “Presequences and indirection. Applying speech act theory to ordinary conversation”. Journal of Pragmatics 12: 55-62.
16. Schegloff, E.A. 1992. “To Searle on conversation: a note in return”. In Searle et al., 113-129.
17. Searle, J.R. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Searle, J.R. 1992. “Conversation”. In Searle et al., 7-29.
19. Searle, J.R. et al. 1992. (On) Searle on Conversation, compiled with an introduction by H. Parret and J. Verschueren. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
20. Searle, J.R. and Vanderveken, D. 1985. Foundations of Illocutionary Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Streek, J. 1992. “The dispreferred other”. In Searle et al., 57-76.
22. Trognon, A. and Brassac, C. 1988. “Actes de langage et conversation”. Intellectica 6(2): 211-232.
23. Trognon, A. and Brassac, C. 1992. “L’enchaînement conversationnel”. Cahiers de Linguistique Française 13: 76-107.
24. Trognon, A. and Brassac, C. 1993. “Formalizing the theory of intentionality”. Journal of Pragmatics [to appear].
25. Vanderveken, D. 1990a. Meaning and Speech Acts (vol. 1): Principles of Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26. Vanderveken, D. 1990b. Meaning and Speech Acts (vol. 2): Formal Semantics of Success and Satisfaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Van Eem eren, F.H. and Grootendorst, R. 1984. Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions. Dordrecht: Foris.
28. Van Eem eren, F.H. and Grootendorst, R. 1990. “The study of argumentation from a speech act perspective”. In J. Verschueren (ed), Pragmatics at Issue. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins, 151-176.
29. Van Rees, M.A. 1992. “The adequacy of speech act theory for explaining conversational phenomena: a response to some conversation analytical critics”. Journal of Pragmatics 17: 31-47.