1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Chinese Language and Discourse
  4. Volume 15, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 15, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1877-7031
  • E-ISSN: 1877-8798
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper introduces the  – a newly collected dataset of 150 mundane cell phone calls from Mainland China in Mandarin Chinese (audio and detailed transcripts) – which is now publicly available for use in research and teaching. In this report, we first describe the constitution and current contents of the DMC Corpus, as well as instructions for access. Additional calls will be added periodically to the Corpus, and so the quantitative overview presented here should be considered conservative. We then provide concrete examples of the sorts of phenomena that might be explored with these new data, underscoring how the Corpus offers researchers the ability to build systematic collections for analysis – no matter whether researchers prefer to begin with ‘forms’ (e.g., utterance-final particles), with ‘functions’ (e.g., complaining), and/or with the temporal organization of interaction itself (e.g., preference organization, repair). The paper concludes with an explicit call for increased research on Mandarin conversation, to which we hope the materials in the DMC Corpus will contribute.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/cld.23001.guo
2023-12-14
2025-04-23

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/cld.23001.guo
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Arminen, Ilkka, and Minna Leinonen
    2006 “Mobile phone call openings: Tailoring answers to personalized summonses.” Discourse Studies, 8(3):339–368. 10.1177/1461445606061791
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445606061791 [Google Scholar]
  2. Atkinson, J. Maxwell, and John Heritage
    1984 Structures of Social Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Baldauf-Quilliatre, H., I. Colón de Carvajal, C. Etienne, E. Jouin-Chardon, S. Teston-Bonnard, and V. Traverso
    2016 CLAPI, une base de données multimodale pour la parole en interaction: apports et dilemmes. Corpus151. Available online at: doi:https://doi.org/10.4000/corpus.2991
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Black, Steven P.
    2017 “Anthropological Ethics and the Communicative Affordances of Audio-Video Recorders in Ethnographic Fieldwork: Transduction as Theory.” American Anthropologist119(1):46–57. 10.1111/aman.12823
     https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.12823 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bolden, Galina B., John Heritage, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
    eds. 2023 Responding to Polar Questions across Languages and Contexts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slsi.35
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.35 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bolden, Galina B., and Jeffrey D. Robinson
    2011 “Soliciting accounts with ‘why’-interrogatives in naturally occurring English conversation.” Journal of Communication, 611:94–119. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2010.01528.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01528.x [Google Scholar]
  7. Canavan, Alexandra, and George Zipperlen
    1996a CALLFRIEND Mandarin Chinese-Mainland Dialect LDC96S55. Web Download. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.
  8. 1996b CALLHOME Mandarin Chinese Speech LDC96S34. Web Download. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.
  9. Chao, Yuen Ren
    1968 A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Oakland: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Chu, Chauncey C.
    1998 A Discourse Grammar of Mandarin Chinese. Berlin: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. 2009 “Relevance and the discourse functions of Mandarin utterance-final modality particles.” Language and Linguistics Compass3(1):282–299. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2008.00105.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00105.x [Google Scholar]
  12. Chui, Kawai
    1996 “Organization of repair in Chinese conversation.” Text & Talk, 16(3):343–372. 10.1515/text.1.1996.16.3.343
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1996.16.3.343 [Google Scholar]
  13. Chui, Kawai, and Huei-Ling Lai
    2008 “The NCCU Corpus of Spoken Chinese: Mandarin, Hakka, and Southern Min.” Taiwan Journal of Linguistics, 6(2):119–144.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Clayman, Steven E.
    2024, in press. Working with collections in Conversation Analysis. InThe Cambridge Handbook of Methods in Conversation Analysis, edited byJ. D. Robinson, R. Clift, K.-H. Kenrick, and C. W. Raymond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Clayman, Steven E., and Virginia Teas Gill
    2023 Conversation Analysis. InThe Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis, edited byM. Handford, and J. P. Gee, 64–84. London: Routledge. 10.4135/9781848608184.n26
     https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608184.n26 [Google Scholar]
  16. Clayman, Steven E., and John Heritage
    2014 Benefactors and beneficiaries: Benefactive status and stance in the management of offers and requests. InRequesting in Social Interaction, edited byP. Drew, and E. Couper-Kuhlen, 55–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slsi.26.03cla
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.26.03cla [Google Scholar]
  17. Clift, Rebecca
    2014 “Visible deflation: Embodiment and emotion in interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 47(4):380–403. 10.1080/08351813.2014.958279
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2014.958279 [Google Scholar]
  18. 2016 Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Clift, Rebecca, and Chase Wesley Raymond
    2018 “Actions in practice: On details in collections.” Discourse Studies, 20(1):90–119. 10.1177/1461445617734344
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445617734344 [Google Scholar]
  20. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
    2012 Some truths and untruths about final intonation in conversational questions. InQuestions: Formal, Functional and Interactional Perspectives, edited byJ. De Ruiter, 123–145. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139045414.009
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139045414.009 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2021 “Language over time: Some old and new uses of OKAY in American English.” Interactional Linguistics, 1(1):33–63. 10.1075/il.20008.cou
     https://doi.org/10.1075/il.20008.cou [Google Scholar]
  22. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, and Margret Selting
    2018 Interactional Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Curl, Traci S.
    2006 “Offers of assistance: Constraints on syntactic design.” Journal of Pragmatics, 381:1257–1280. 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.004 [Google Scholar]
  24. Curl, Traci S., and Paul Drew
    2008 “Contingency and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(2):1–25. 10.1080/08351810802028613
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810802028613 [Google Scholar]
  25. Davidson, Judy
    1984 Subsequent Versions of Invitations, Offers, Requests, and Proposals Dealing with Potential or Actual Rejection. InStructures of Social Action, edited byJ. M. Atkinson, and J. Heritage, 102–128. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Dersley, Ian, and Anthony Wootton
    2000 “Complaint Sequences Within Antagonistic Argument.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 331:375–406. 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_02
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_02 [Google Scholar]
  27. Dong, Boyu, and Yaxin Wu
    2020 “Generic solicitude in sequence-initial position as a practice for pre-closing proposals in Mandarin telephone calls.” East Asian Pragmatics, 5(3):393–418. 10.1558/eap.39605
     https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.39605 [Google Scholar]
  28. Drew, Paul
    1984 Speakers’ Reportings in Invitation Sequences. InStructures of Social Action, edited byJ. M. Atkinson, and J. Heritage, 152–164. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. 1997 “‘Open’ class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of trouble in conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics, 281:69–101. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)89759‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)89759-7 [Google Scholar]
  30. 1998 “Complaints about transgressions and misconduct.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 31(3/4):295–325. 10.1080/08351813.1998.9683595
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.1998.9683595 [Google Scholar]
  31. 2009 “Quit talking while I’m interrupting:” (a comparison between) positions of overlap onset in conversation. InTalk in Interaction: Comparative Dimensions, edited byM. Haakana, M. Laakso, and J. Lindström, 70–93. Finland: Finnish Literature Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 2013 “Turn design.” The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, edited byJ. Sidnell, and T. Stivers, 131–149. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. 2018 “Epistemics in social interaction.” Discourse Studies, 20(1):163–187. 10.1177/1461445617734347
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445617734347 [Google Scholar]
  34. 2022 The micro-politics of social actions. InAction Ascription in Social Interaction, edited byA. Deppermann, and M. Haugh, 57–82. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108673419.004
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108673419.004 [Google Scholar]
  35. Drew, Paul, and Alexa Hepburn
    2016 “Absent apologies.” Discourse Processes, 53(1–2):114–131. 10.1080/0163853X.2015.1056690
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2015.1056690 [Google Scholar]
  36. Drew, Paul, and Elizabeth Holt
    1988 “Complainable matters: The use of idiomatic expressions in making complaints.” Social Problems, 35(4):398–417. 10.2307/800594
     https://doi.org/10.2307/800594 [Google Scholar]
  37. Drew, Paul, and Traci S. Walker
    2009 “Going too far: Complaining, escalating and disaffiliation.” Journal of Pragmatics, 41(12):2400–2414. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.046
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.046 [Google Scholar]
  38. Drew, Paul, Ana Cristina Ostermann, and Chase Wesley Raymond
    2024, in press. Conversation analysis as a comparative methodology. InThe Cambridge Handbook of Methods in Conversation Analysis, edited byJ. D. Robinson, R. Clift, K. H. Kendrick, and C. W. Raymond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Drew, Paul, Traci Walker, and Richard Ogden
    2013 “Self-Repair and Action Construction.” InConversational Repair and Human Understanding, edited byM. Hayashi, G. Raymond, and J. Sidnell, 71–94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Du Bois, John W., Wallace L. Chafe, Charles Meyer, Sandra A. Thompson, Robert Englebretson, and Nii Martey
    2000–2005 Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English, Parts 1–4. Linguistic Data Consortium.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Du Bois, John W., Susanna Cumming, Stephan Schuetze-Coburn, and Danae Paolino
    1993 Outline of discourse transcription. InTalking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research, edited byJ. A. Edwards, and M. D. Lampert, London: Psychology Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Edwards, Derek
    2005 “Moaning, whinging and laughing: The subjective side of complaints.” Discourse Studies, 7(1):5–29. 10.1177/1461445605048765
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605048765 [Google Scholar]
  43. Enfield, N. J., Tanya Stivers, Penelope Brown, Cristina Englert, Katariina Harjunpää, Makoto Hayashi, Trine Heinemann, Gertie Hoymann, Tiina Keisanen, Mirka Rauniomaa, Chase Wesley Raymond, Federico Rossano, Kyung-Eun Yoon, Inge Zwitserlood, and Stephen C. Levinson
    2019 “Polar answers.” Journal of Linguistics, 55(2):277–304. 10.1017/S0022226718000336
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226718000336 [Google Scholar]
  44. Erbaggio, Pierluigi, Sangeetha Gopalakrishnan, Sandra Hobbs, and Haiyong Liu
    2012 “Enhancing student engagement through online authentic materials.” The IALLT Journal42(2):27–51. 10.17161/iallt.v42i2.8511
     https://doi.org/10.17161/iallt.v42i2.8511 [Google Scholar]
  45. Erickson, Frederick
    2011 “Uses of video in social research: a brief history.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14(3):179–189. 10.1080/13645579.2011.563615
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2011.563615 [Google Scholar]
  46. Fox, Barbara A., Sandra A. Thompson, Cecilia E. Ford, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
    2013 Conversation Analysis and Linguistics. InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis, edited byJ. Sidnell, and T. Stivers, 726–740. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Fox, Barbara A., Fay Wouk, Makoto Hayashi, Steven Fincke, Liang Tao, Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Miina Laakso, and Wilfrido Flores Hernandez
    2009 A cross-linguistic investigation of the site of initiation in same-turn self-repair. InComparative Studies in Conversation Analysis, edited byJ. Sidnell, 59–103. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511635670.004
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511635670.004 [Google Scholar]
  48. Gilmore, Alex
    2007 “Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning.” Language Teaching, 40(2):97–118. 10.1017/S0261444807004144
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444807004144 [Google Scholar]
  49. Glenn, Phillip
    2003 Laughter in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511519888
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519888 [Google Scholar]
  50. 2019 Conflict interaction: Insights from conversation analysis. InThe Routledge Handbook of Language in Conflict, edited byM. Evans, L. Jeffries, and J. O’Driscoll, 215–245. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429058011‑13
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429058011-13 [Google Scholar]
  51. Haakana, Markku
    2001 “Laughter as a patient’s resource: Dealing with delicate aspects of medical interaction.” Text, 21(1):187–219.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Hayano, Kaoru
    2013 Question design in conversation. InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis, edited byJ. Sidnell, and T. Stivers, 395–414. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Heath, Christian, Jon Hindmarsh, and Paul Luff
    2010 Video in Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Heritage, John
    1984a A change-of-state token and aspects of Its sequential placement. InStructures of Social Action, edited byJ. M. Atkinson, and J. Heritage, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. 1984b Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. 2012 “Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(1):1–29. 10.1080/08351813.2012.646684
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646684 [Google Scholar]
  57. 2018 Turn-initial particles in English: The cases of Oh and Well. InTurn-Initial Particles Across Languages, edited byJ. Heritage, and M.-L. Sorjonen, 155–189. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slsi.31.06her
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.31.06her [Google Scholar]
  58. Heritage, John, and Chase Wesley Raymond
    2016 “Are explicit apologies proportional to the offenses they address?” Discourse Processes, 53(1–2):5–25. 10.1080/0163853X.2015.1056695
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2015.1056695 [Google Scholar]
  59. 2021 “Preference and polarity: Epistemic stance in question design.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 54(1):39–59. 10.1080/08351813.2020.1864155
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2020.1864155 [Google Scholar]
  60. Heritage, John, Chase Wesley Raymond, and Paul Drew
    2019 “Constructing apologies: Reflexive relationships between apologies and offenses.” Journal of Pragmatics, 1421:185–200. 10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  61. Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond
    2012 Navigating epistemic landscapes: Acquiescence, agency and resistance in responses to polar questions. InQuestions: Formal, Functional and Interactional Perspectives, edited byJ. P. De Ruiter, 179–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139045414.013
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139045414.013 [Google Scholar]
  62. Hoey, Elliott M.
    2015 “Lapses: How people arrive at, and deal with, discontinuities in talk.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 48(4):430–453. 10.1080/08351813.2015.1090116
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2015.1090116 [Google Scholar]
  63. Hoey, Elliott M., and Kobin H. Kendrick
    2017 Conversation analysis. InResearch Methods in Psycholinguistics and the Neurobiology of Language: A Practical Guide, edited byA. M. B. de Groot, and P. Hagoort, 151–173. New Jersey: Wiley and Sons.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Hoey, Elliott M., and Chase Wesley Raymond
    2022 Managing conversation analysis data. InThe Open Handbook of Linguistic Data Management, edited byA. L. Berez-Kroeker, B. McDonnell, E. Koller, and L. B. Collister, 257–266. Cambridge: MIT Press. Online at: 10.7551/mitpress/12200.003.0025
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12200.003.0025 [Google Scholar]
  65. Holt, Elizabeth
    2012 “Using laugh responses to defuse complaints.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(4):430–448. 10.1080/08351813.2012.726886
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.726886 [Google Scholar]
  66. 2017 “Indirect reported speech in storytelling: Its position, design, and uses.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 50(2):171–87. 10.1080/08351813.2017.1301302
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2017.1301302 [Google Scholar]
  67. Hopper, Robert, Nada Doany, Michael Johnson, and Kent Drummond
    1990 “Universals and particulars in telephone openings.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 241:369–387. 10.1080/08351819009389348
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351819009389348 [Google Scholar]
  68. Houtkoop, Hanneke
    1987 Establishing Agreement: An Analysis of Proposal-Acceptance Sequences. New Jersey: Foris Publications. 10.1515/9783110849172
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110849172 [Google Scholar]
  69. Hsieh, Chen-Yu Chester
    2018 “From turn-taking to stance-taking: Wenti-shi ‘(the) thing is’ as a projector construction and an epistemic marker in Mandarin conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics, 1271:107–124. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.02.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.02.002 [Google Scholar]
  70. Huang, Shu-Yu
    2020 “Mandarin telephone closings among familiars: A comparison between natural speech and textbook dialogues.” Applied Pragmatics, 2(2):199–226. 10.1075/ap.19017.hua
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.19017.hua [Google Scholar]
  71. Hutchby, Ian, and Simone Barnett
    2005 “Aspects of the Sequential Organization of Mobile Phone Conversation.” Discourse Studies7(2): 147–71. 10.1177/1461445605050364
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050364 [Google Scholar]
  72. Jefferson, Gail
    1978 Exercise. Unpublished exercises in conversation analysis (private circulation).
     [Google Scholar]
  73. 1984 On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles. InStructures of Social Action, edited byJ. M. Atkinson, and J. Heritage, 346–369. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. 1985 An exercise in the transcription and analysis of laughter. InHandbook of Discourse Analysis (vol. 3), edited byT. A. van Dijk, 25–34. New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. 1986 “Notes on ‘latency’ in overlap onset.” Human Studies, 91:153–183. 10.1007/BF00148125
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148125 [Google Scholar]
  76. 1988 “On the sequential organization of troubles-talk in ordinary conversation.” Social Problems, 35(4):418–441. 10.2307/800595
     https://doi.org/10.2307/800595 [Google Scholar]
  77. 2004 Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. InConversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, edited byG. H. Lerner, 13–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.125.02jef
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.02jef [Google Scholar]
  78. 2019 Repairing the Broken Surface of Talk: Managing Problems in Speaking, Hearing, and Understanding in Conversation, edited byP. Drew and J. Bergmann. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Jepson, Marcus, Chris Salisbury, Matthew J. Ridd, Chris Metcalfe, Ludivine Garside, and Rebecca K. Barnes
    2017 “The ‘one in a million’ study: Creating a database of UK primary care consultations.” British Journal of General Practice67(658):e345–e351. 10.3399/bjgp17X690521
     https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp17X690521 [Google Scholar]
  80. Jing-Schmid, Zhuo
    2022 Sentence-final Particles: Sociolinguistic and Discourse Perspectives. InC. Huang, Y. Lin, I. Chen, & Y. Hsu (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Chinese Linguistics, 597–615. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108329019.031
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108329019.031 [Google Scholar]
  81. Jones, Nikki, and Geoffrey Raymond
    2012 “‘The camera rolls’: Using third-party video in field research.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 642(1):109–123. 10.1177/0002716212438205
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716212438205 [Google Scholar]
  82. Kendrick, Kobin H.
    2018 “Adjusting epistemic gradients: The final particle ‘ba’ in Mandarin Chinese conversation.” East Asian Pragmatics3(1):5–26. 10.1558/10.1558/eap.36120
     https://doi.org/10.1558/10.1558/eap.36120 [Google Scholar]
  83. Kendrick, Kobin H., and P. Drew
    2016 “Recruitment: Offers, requests, and the organization of assistance in interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49(1):1–19. 10.1080/08351813.2016.1126436
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2016.1126436 [Google Scholar]
  84. Lee, Jee Won, Hongyin Tao, and Ping Lu
    2017 “Transcribing Mandarin Chinese conversation: Linguistic and prosodic issues.” Asia-Pacific Journal of Multimedia Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and Sociology, 7(5):787–799. 10.14257/AJMAHS.2017.05.70
     https://doi.org/10.14257/AJMAHS.2017.05.70 [Google Scholar]
  85. Li, Charles N., and Sandra A. Thompson
    1981 Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Oakland: University of California Press. 10.1525/9780520352858
     https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520352858 [Google Scholar]
  86. Li, Lin
    2021 “A Spoken Chinese Corpus: Development, Description, and Application in L2 Studies.” Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Massey University. https://github.com/blculyn
  87. Li, Xiaoting
    2014 “Leaning and recipient intervening questions in Mandarin conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics, 671:34–60. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.03.011
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.03.011 [Google Scholar]
  88. 2020 “Click-initiated self-repair in changing the sequential trajectory of actions-in-progress.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 53(1):90–117. 10.1080/08351813.2020.1712959
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2020.1712959 [Google Scholar]
  89. Lim, Ni-Eng
    2019 Preliminaries to delicate matters: Some functions of ‘I say to you’ sequences in Mandarin Chinese conversations. InCurrent Studies in Chinese Language and Discourse: Global Context and Diverse Perspectives, edited byY. Xiao, and L. Tsung, 105–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scld.10.06lim
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scld.10.06lim [Google Scholar]
  90. Lindström, Anna
    1994 “Identification and recognition in Swedish telephone conversation openings.” Language in Society, 23(2):231–252. 10.1017/S004740450001784X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450001784X [Google Scholar]
  91. Love, Robbie
    2020 Overcoming Challenges in Corpus Construction: The Spoken British National Corpus 2014. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429429811
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429429811 [Google Scholar]
  92. Luke, K.-K.
    2002 The initiation and introduction of first topics in Hong Kong telephone calls. InTelephone Calls: Unity and Diversity in the Structure of Telephone Conversations across Languages and Cultures, edited byK.-K. Luke, and Theodossia-Soula Pavlidou, 171–200. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.101.12luk
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.101.12luk [Google Scholar]
  93. Luke, K.-K., and W. Zhang
    2010 “Insertion as a self-repair device and its interactional motivations in Chinese conversation.” Chinese Language and Discourse1(2):153–182. 10.1075/cld.1.2.01luk
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.1.2.01luk [Google Scholar]
  94. Lü, S. X., and D. X. Zhu
    1953 Yufa Xiuci Jianhua. Zhonguo Qingnian.
     [Google Scholar]
  95. MacWhinney, Brian
    2007 The TalkBank project. InCreating and Digitizing Language Corpora: Synchronic Databases (vol.1), edited byJ. C. Beal, K. P. Corrigan, and H. L. M. Moisl. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230223936_7
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230223936_7 [Google Scholar]
  96. MacWhinney, Brian, and Johannes Wagner
    2010 “Transcribing, searching and data sharing: The CLAN software and the TalkBank data repository.” Gesprächsforschung, 111:154–173.
     [Google Scholar]
  97. Mandelbaum, Jenny
    1991 “Conversational non-cooperation: An exploration of disattended complaints.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 251:97–138. 10.1080/08351819109389359
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351819109389359 [Google Scholar]
  98. Margutti, Piera, Liisa Tainio, Paul Drew, and Véronique Traverso
    2018 “Invitations and responses across different languages: Observations on the feasibility and relevance of a cross-linguistic comparative perspective on the study of actions.” Journal of Pragmatics, 1251:52–61. 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.12.010
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.12.010 [Google Scholar]
  99. Marrese, Olivia H., Chase Wesley Raymond, Barbara A. Fox, Cecilia E. Ford, and Megan Pielke
    2021 “The Grammar of Obviousness: Gesture in Argument Sequences.” Frontiers in Communication61:663067. 10.3389/fcomm.2021.663067
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.663067 [Google Scholar]
  100. Maynard, Douglas W.
    2013 Defensive mechanisms: I-mean-prefaced utterances in complaint and other conversational sequences. InConversational Repair and Human Understanding, edited byM. Hayashi, G. Raymond, and J. Sidnell, 198–233. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  101. McEnery, Anthony, and Zhonghua Xiao
    2004 The Lancaster Corpus of Mandarin Chinese: A Corpus for Monolingual and Contrastive Language Study. InProceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’04), Lisbon, Portugal. European Language Resources Association (ELRA).
     [Google Scholar]
  102. Ochs, Elinor
    1979 Transcription as theory. InDevelopmental Pragmatics, edited byE. Ochs, and B. B. Schieffelin, 43–72. New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  103. Ogden, Richard
    2013 “Clicks and percussives in English conversation.” Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 43(3):299–320. 10.1017/S0025100313000224
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100313000224 [Google Scholar]
  104. 2020 “Audibly not saying something with clicks.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 53(1):66–89. 10.1080/08351813.2020.1712960
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2020.1712960 [Google Scholar]
  105. Placencia, María Elena
    1997 “Opening up closings – The Ecuadorian way.” TEXT: An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 17(1):53–81.
     [Google Scholar]
  106. Pomerantz, Anita M., and John Heritage
    2013 Preference. InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis, edited byJ. Sidnell, and T. Stivers, 210–228. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  107. Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik
    1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  108. Qi, H.
    2011 The Dictionary of Mood Words in Contemporary Chinese (现代汉语语气成分用法词典). Beijing: The Commercial Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  109. Quan, Lihong, and Jinlong Ma
    2019 “A study of repeat-formatted repair initiations in Mandarin Chinese conversation.” Chinese Language and Discourse10(2): 158–186. 10.1075/cld.18014.qua
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.18014.qua [Google Scholar]
  110. Raymond, Chase Wesley, Saul Albert, Elliott M. Hoey, Sarah Adams, Natalie Grothues, Jacob Henry, Olivia H. Marrese, Megan Pielke, Emily Reynolds, and Regina Gayou Tom
    2023 De facto language policy in practice: Ideologies in action in everyday public life. Manuscript and dataset, University of Colorado, Boulder.
  111. Raymond, Chase Wesley, Rebecca Clift, Kobin H. Kendrick, and Jeffrey D. Robinson
    (2024, in press). Methods in Conversation Analysis. InThe Cambridge Handbook of Conversation Analysis, edited byJ. D. Robinson, R. Clift, K. H. Kendrick, and C. W. Raymond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  112. Raymond, Chase Wesley, Jeffrey D. Robinson, Barbara A. Fox, Sandra A. Thompson, and Kristella Montiegl
    2021 “Modulating action through minimization: Syntax in the service of offering and requesting.” Language in Society, 501:53–91. 10.1017/S004740452000069X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740452000069X [Google Scholar]
  113. Raymond, Chase Wesley, and Tanya Stivers
    2016 The omnirelevance of accountability: Off-record account solicitations. InAccountability in Social Interaction, edited byJ. D. Robinson, 321–353. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210557.003.0011
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210557.003.0011 [Google Scholar]
  114. Raymond, Geoffrey
    2003 “Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding.” American Sociological Review681: 939–67. 10.1177/000312240306800607
     https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240306800607 [Google Scholar]
  115. Robinson, Jeffrey D.
    2004 “The Sequential Organization of ‘Explicit’ Apologies in Naturally Occurring English.” Research on Language and Social Interaction37(3): 291–330. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3703_2
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3703_2 [Google Scholar]
  116. Sacks, Harvey
    1984 [1966, et seq.]. Notes on methodology. InStructures of Social Action, edited byJ. M. Atkinson, and J. Heritage, 21–27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  117. 1992 Lectures on Conversation (2 vols.). New Jersey: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  118. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1968 “Sequencing in conversational openings.” American Anthropologist, 701:1075–1095. 10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030
     https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030 [Google Scholar]
  119. 1979 Identification and recognition in telephone conversation openings. InEveryday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, edited byG. Psathas, 23–78. New Jersey: Irvington.
     [Google Scholar]
  120. Schegloff, Emanuel. A.
    1986 “The routine as achievement.” Human Studies, 91:111–151. 10.1007/BF00148124
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148124 [Google Scholar]
  121. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1991 Reflections on talk and social structure. InTalk and Social Structure, edited byD. Boden, and D. H. Zimmerman, 44–70. Oakland: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  122. 1996 “Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action.” American Journal of Sociology, 102(1):161–216. 10.1086/230911
     https://doi.org/10.1086/230911 [Google Scholar]
  123. 1997 “Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair.” Discourse Processes, 23(3):499–545. 10.1080/01638539709545001
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539709545001 [Google Scholar]
  124. 2000a “Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation.” Language in Society, 29(1):1–63. 10.1017/S0047404500001019
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500001019 [Google Scholar]
  125. 2000b “When ‘others’ initiate repair.” Applied Linguistics, 21(2):205–243. 10.1093/applin/21.2.205
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.2.205 [Google Scholar]
  126. 2004 “On dispensability.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 37(2):95–149. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3702_2
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3702_2 [Google Scholar]
  127. 2005 “On complainability.” Social Problems, 521:449–476. 10.1525/sp.2005.52.4.449
     https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2005.52.4.449 [Google Scholar]
  128. 2007 Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis (vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  129. 2013 Ten operations in self-initiated, same-turn repair. InConversational Repair and Human Understanding, edited byM. Hayashi, G. Raymond, and J. Sidnell, 41–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  130. Schegloff, Emanuel A., Gail Jefferson, and Harvey Sacks
    1977 “The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation.” Language, 531:361–382. 10.1353/lan.1977.0041
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041 [Google Scholar]
  131. Schegloff, Emanuel A., and Harvey Sacks
    1973 “Opening up closings.” Semiotica, 8(4):289–327. 10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289
     https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289 [Google Scholar]
  132. Schmidt, Thomas
    2016 “Good practices in the compilation of FOLK, the research and teaching corpus of spoken German.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics21(3):396–418. 10.1075/ijcl.21.3.05sch
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.21.3.05sch [Google Scholar]
  133. Seyfeddinipur, Mandana, and Felix Rau
    2020 “Keeping it real: Video data in language documentation and language archiving.” Language Documentation and Conservation, 141:503–519.
     [Google Scholar]
  134. Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä
    2012 “Deontic authority in interaction: The right to announce, propose, and decide.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(3):297–321. 10.1080/08351813.2012.699260
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.699260 [Google Scholar]
  135. Stivers, Tanya
    2010 “An overview of the question-response system in American English.” Journal of Pragmatics, 42(10):2772–2781. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.011
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.011 [Google Scholar]
  136. 2022 The Book of Answers: Alignment, Autonomy, and Affiliation in Social Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780197563892.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197563892.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  137. Stivers, Tanya, N. J. Enfield, Penelope Brown, Cristina Englert, Makoto Hayashi, Trine Heinemann, Gertie Hoymann, Federico Rossano, Jan Peter De Ruiter, Kyung-Eun Yoon, and Stephen C. Levinson
    2009 “Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(26):10587–10592. 10.1073/pnas.0903616106
     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903616106 [Google Scholar]
  138. Stivers, Tanya, N. J. Enfield, and Stephen C. Levinson
    2010 “Question-response sequences in conversation across ten languages.” Journal of Pragmatics421:2615–2860. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.002 [Google Scholar]
  139. Su, Danjie
    2019 The M. Chinese Video Corpus (MCVC). UCLA, Los Angeles and University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.
     [Google Scholar]
  140. Su, Danjie, and Hongyin Tao
    2018a “Teaching the Mandarin utterance-final particle le through authentic materials.” Chinese as a Second Language Research, 7(1):15–45. 10.1515/caslar‑2018‑0002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/caslar-2018-0002 [Google Scholar]
  141. 2018b “Teaching the shi…de construction with authentic materials in elementary Chinese.” Chinese as a Second Language Research, 7(1):111–140. 10.1515/caslar‑2018‑0005
     https://doi.org/10.1515/caslar-2018-0005 [Google Scholar]
  142. Su, Lily I-wen, Li-May Sung, Shuping Huang, Fuhui Hsieh, and Zhemin Lin
    2008 “NTU corpus of Formosan languages: A state-of-the-art report.” Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 4(2):291–294. 10.1515/CLLT.2008.012
     https://doi.org/10.1515/CLLT.2008.012 [Google Scholar]
  143. Sun, Hao
    2004 “Opening moves in informal Chinese telephone conversations.” Journal of Pragmatics36(8):1429–1465. 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.01.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.01.007 [Google Scholar]
  144. 2005 “Collaborative strategies in Chinese telephone conversation closings: Balancing procedural needs and interpersonal meaning making.” Pragmatics15(1):109–128.
     [Google Scholar]
  145. Sung, Li-May, Lily I-wen Su, Fuhui Hsieh, and Zhemin Lin
    2008 “Developing an online Corpus of Formosan Languages.” Taiwan Journal of Linguistics, 61:79–117.
     [Google Scholar]
  146. Tao, Hongyin
    1996 Units in Mandarin Conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.5 [Google Scholar]
  147. 2005 “The gap between natural speech and spoken Chinese teaching material: Discourse perspectives on Chinese pedagogy.” Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, 401:1–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  148. Tao, Hongyin, M. Rafael Salaberry, Meng Yeh, and Alfred Rue Burch
    2018 “Using authentic spoken language across all levels of language teaching: Developing discourse and interactional competence.” Chinese as a Second Language Research, 7(1):1–13. 10.1515/caslar‑2018‑0001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/caslar-2018-0001 [Google Scholar]
  149. Tao, Hongyin, and Richard Xiao
    2012 The UCLA Chinese Corpus (2nd Ed.). UCREL, Lancaster.
     [Google Scholar]
  150. Tao, Liang
    1995 “Repair in natural conversation of Beijing Mandarin.” The Yuen Ren Society Treasury of Chinese Dialect Data11: 55–77.
     [Google Scholar]
  151. Thompson, Sandra A., Barbara A. Fox, and Chase Wesley Raymond
    2021 “The grammar of proposals for joint activities.” Interactional Linguistics, 1(1):123–151. 10.1075/il.20011.tho
     https://doi.org/10.1075/il.20011.tho [Google Scholar]
  152. Thompson, Sandra A., and Hongyin Tao
    2010 “Conversation, grammar, and fixedness: Adjectives in Mandarin revisited.” Chinese Language and Discourse1(1):3–30. 10.1075/cld.1.1.01tho
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.1.1.01tho [Google Scholar]
  153. Traverso, Véronique
    2009 “The dilemmas of third-party complaints in conversation between friends.” Journal of Pragmatics, 41(12):2385–2399. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.047
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.047 [Google Scholar]
  154. Walker, Gareth
    2013 “Phonetics and prosody in conversation.” The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, edited byJ. Sidnell, and T. Stivers, 455–474. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  155. Walker, Traci S.
    2014 “Form ≠ function: The independence of prosody and action.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 47(1):1–16. 10.1080/08351813.2014.871792
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2014.871792 [Google Scholar]
  156. Wang, L.
    1955 Zhongguo Xiandai Yufa. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju.
     [Google Scholar]
  157. Wang, Nan, Yan Song, and Fei Xia
    2018 “Constructing a Chinese medical conversation corpus annotated with conversational structures and actions.” LREC, 2933–2939.
     [Google Scholar]
  158. Wang, Wei
    2020 “Grammatical conformity in question-answer sequences: The case of ‘meijou’ in Mandarin conversation.” Discourse Studies22(5):610–31. 10.1177/1461445620916371
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445620916371 [Google Scholar]
  159. 2021 “The question-response system in Mandarin conversation.” Pragmatics, 31(4):589–616. 10.1075/prag.20019.wan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20019.wan [Google Scholar]
  160. Wang, Wei, and Hongyin Tao
    2020 From matrix clause to turn expansion: The emergence of ‘wo juede’ (‘I feel/think’) in Mandarin conversational interaction. InEmergent Syntax for Conversation: Clausal Patterns and the Organization of Action, edited byY. Maschler, S. P. Doehler, J. Lindström, and L. Keevallik, 151–82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slsi.32.06wan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.32.06wan [Google Scholar]
  161. Wen, Xiao Hong
    2012 Learning and Teaching Chinese as a Second Language. Beijing: Peking University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  162. Wright, M.
    2011 “On Clicks in English Talk-in-Interaction.” Journal of the International Phonetic Association41(2): 207–29. 10.1017/S0025100311000144
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100311000144 [Google Scholar]
  163. Wu, Ruey-Jiuan Regina
    2004 Stance in Talk: A Conversation Analysis of Mandarin Final Particles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.117
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.117 [Google Scholar]
  164. 2006 “Initiating repair and beyond: The use of two repeat-formatted repair initiations in Mandarin conversation.” Discourse Processes, 41(1):67–109. 10.1207/s15326950dp4101_5
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp4101_5 [Google Scholar]
  165. 2009 Repetition and the initiation of repair. InConversation Analysis: Comparative Perspectives, edited byJ. Sidnell, 31–59. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  166. 2016 “Doing conversation analysis in Mandarin Chinese: Basic methods.” Chinese Language and Discourse, 7(2):179–209. 10.1075/cld.7.2.01wu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.7.2.01wu [Google Scholar]
  167. 2022 “Gestural repair in Mandarin conversation.” Discourse Studies24(1):65–93. 10.1177/14614456211037451
     https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456211037451 [Google Scholar]
  168. Wu, Ruey-Jiuan Regina, and John Heritage
    2017 Particles and Epistemics: Convergences and Divergences between English and Mandarin. InEnabling Human Conduct: Naturalistic Studies of Talk-in-Interaction in Honor of Emanuel A. Schegloff, edited byG. Lerner, G. Raymond, and J. Heritage, 273–298. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.273.14wu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.273.14wu [Google Scholar]
  169. Wu, Yaxin, and Shuai Yang
    2022 “Power plays in action formation: The TCU-final particle ‘ba’ (吧) in Mandarin Chinese conversation.” Discourse Studies24(4):491–513. 10.1177/14614456221099166
     https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456221099166 [Google Scholar]
  170. Wu, Yaxin, and Guodong Yu
    2022 Action ascription and action assessment: Ya-suffixed answers to questions in Mandarin conversation. InAction Ascription in Social Interaction, edited byA. Deppermann, and M. Haugh, 234–255. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108673419.012
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108673419.012 [Google Scholar]
  171. Xiangjun, Deng, and Virginia Yip
    2018 “A multimedia corpus of child Mandarin: The Tong Corpus.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 46(1):69–92. 10.1353/jcl.2018.0002
     https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2018.0002 [Google Scholar]
  172. Xing, F.
    2016 The Grammatical Theory of Modern Chinese. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  173. Xing, Janet Zhiqun
    2006 Teaching and Learning Chinese as a Foreign Language. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  174. Xu, Jiajin
    2015 “Corpus-based Chinese studies: A historical review from the 1920s to the present.” Chinese Language and Discourse6(2):218–244. 10.1075/cld.6.2.06xu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.6.2.06xu [Google Scholar]
  175. Xun, E., G. Rao, X. Xiao, and J. Zang
    2016 “Da shuju beijing xia BCC yuliaoku de yanzhi (The construction of the BCC Corpus in the age of Big Data).” Yuliaoku Yuyanxue3(1):93–118.
     [Google Scholar]
  176. Yu, Guodong
    2022 什么是会话分析. (What is Conversation Analysis). Shanghai: Shanghai. Foreign Language Education Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  177. Yu, Guodong, and Paul Drew
    2017 “The role of búshì (不是) in talk about everyday troubles and difficulties.” East Asian Pragmatics2(2):195–227. 10.1558/eap.34673
     https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.34673 [Google Scholar]
  178. Yu, Guodong, and Yaxin Wu
    2018 “Inviting in Mandarin: Anticipating the likelihood of the success of an invitation.” Journal of Pragmatics1251:130–148. 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.06.013
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.06.013 [Google Scholar]
  179. 2021 “Managing expert/novice identity with actions in conversation: Identity construction and negotiation.” Journal of Pragmatics1781:273–286. 10.1016/j.pragma.2021.03.021
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.03.021 [Google Scholar]
  180. Yu, Guodong, Yaxin Wu, and Paul Drew
    2019 “Couples bickering: Disaffiliation and discord in Chinese conversation.” Discourse Studies, 21(4):458–480. 10.1177/1461445619842739
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445619842739 [Google Scholar]
  181. Zhang, Wei
    1998 “Repair in Chinese Conversation.” Ph.D. thesis, University of Hong Kong. 10.5353/th_b3018254
     https://doi.org/10.5353/th_b3018254
  182. 2016 “Organizing TCUs in a turn: Reordering and parenthesizing as operations for self-initiated same-turn repair in Mandarin conversation.” Chinese Language and Discourse7(2):272–296. 10.1075/cld.7.2.04zha
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.7.2.04zha [Google Scholar]
  183. Zhang, Wei, and K.-K. Luke
    2007 “Retrospective turn continuations in Mandarin Chinese conversation.” Pragmatics, 17(4):605–635.
     [Google Scholar]
  184. Zhang, Yanhong, and Guodong Yu
    2020 “The sequential environments of positive assessments as responsive actions in Mandarin daily interaction.” East Asian Pragmatics, 5(3):295–321. 10.1558/eap.36911
     https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.36911 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/cld.23001.guo
Loading
The DIG Mandarin Conversations (DMC) Corpus
Chinese Language and Discourse 15, 105 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.23001.guo
/content/journals/10.1075/cld.23001.guo
/content/journals/10.1075/cld.23001.guo
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conversation; conversation analysis (CA); corpus development; discourse; Mandarin (Chinese); open-access data; social interaction

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error