Argumentation as an interactional process in conversation

References

1. Coulter, J.
   (1990) Elementary properties of argument sequences. In G. Psathas (ed.) Interaction competence. Lanham, University of America Press.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Gardner, R.
   (ed) (1995) Spoken interaction studies in Australia. (ARAL Series N° 12) Canberra, ALAA.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Goffman, E.
   (1971) Relations in public. Microstudies of the public order. New York, Harper and Rowe.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Goodwin, C. and M. Goodwin
   (1990) Interstitial argument. In A.D. Grimshaw (ed.) Conflict talk: Sociolinguistic investigations of arguments in conversations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Grootendorst, R.
   (1990) Everyday argumentation from a speech act perspective. Communication and Cognition24,1: 111–134.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Jackson, S. and S. Jacobs
   (1980) Structure of conversational argumentation: Pragmatic bases for the enthymeme. Quarterly Journal of Speech66: 251–165. doi: 10.1080/00335638009383524
   https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638009383524 [Google Scholar]
7. Jackson, S. and S. Jacobs
   (1982) Conversational argumentation: A discourse analytic approach. In J.R. Cox and C.A. Willard (eds) Advances in Argumentation Research. Carbondale, Ill, Southern Illinois University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Jacobs, S.
   (1987) The management of disagreement in conversation. In F.H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J.A. Blair and C.A. Willard (eds).
   [Google Scholar]
9. Jacobs, S.
   (1989) Speech acts and arguments. Argumentation3: 345–365. doi: 10.1007/BF00182603
   https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00182603 [Google Scholar]
10. Jefferson, G.
    (1984) Notes on a systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens ‘yeah’ and ‘mm hm’. Papers in Linguistics17, 2, 197–216. doi: 10.1080/08351818409389201
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351818409389201 [Google Scholar]
11. Legge, N.J.
    (1988) The management of interpersonal disputes within friendships: An analysis of discursive practices. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Pennsylvania State University.
12. Liddicoat, A.J. , S. Döpke , K. Love and A. Brown
    (1994) Presenting a point of view: Callers’ contributions to talkback radio in Australia. Journal of Pragmatics. 22: 139–156. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)90064‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)90064-7 [Google Scholar]
13. Piaget, J.
    (1966) La langue et la pensée chez l’ enfant: Etudes sur la logique de l’ enfant. Neuchatel, Delachaux and Niestle.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Pomerantz, A.
    (1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of social action: Studies in conversational analysis. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Sacks, H.
    (1987) On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In G. Button and J.R.E. Lee (eds) Talk and social organization. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters
    [Google Scholar]
16. Sacks, H.
    (1992) Lectures on Conversation. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Schiffrin, D.
    (1984) Jewish argument as sociability. Language in Society13: 311–335. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500010526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500010526 [Google Scholar]
18. Schiffrin, D.
    (1985) Everyday argument: The organization of diversity in talk. In T.A. van Dijk (ed.) Handbook of Discourse Analysisvol.3. London, Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Stubbs, M.
    (1983) Discourse analysis: The sociolinguistic analysis of natural language. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Tannen, D.
    (1981) New York Jewish conversational style. International Journal of the Sociology of Language30: 133–149.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Toulmin, S.E.
    (1958) The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
    [Google Scholar]
22. van Eemeren, F.H. and R. Grootendorst
    (1984) Speech acts in argumentative discussions: A theoretical model for the analysis of discussions directed towards solving conflicts of opinion. Dordrecht, Foris. doi: 10.1515/9783110846089
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110846089 [Google Scholar]
23. van Eemeren, F.H. and R. Grootendorst
    (1992) Argumentation, communication and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
24. van Eemeren, F.H. and T. Kruiger
    (1987) Identifying argumentation schemes. In F.H. van Eemeren , R. Grootendorst , J. A. Blair and C.A. Willard (eds). doi: 10.1515/9783110869163.70
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110869163.70 [Google Scholar]
25. van Eemeren, F.H. , R. Grootendorst , J.A. Blair and C.A. Willard
    (eds) (1987) Argumentation: Perspectives and Approaches. Dordrecht, Foris. doi: 10.1515/9783110869163
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110869163 [Google Scholar]
26. van Eemeren, F.H. , R. Grootendorst , S. Jackson and S. Jacobs
    (1993) Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa, University of Alabama Press.
    [Google Scholar]