Volume 24, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0929-998X
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9765
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes
Preview this article:


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Anward, Jan
    2003 Lexemes recycled. How categories emerge from interaction. Logos and Language2. 31–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bakhtin, Mikhail
    1984Problems of Dostoevsky’s poeticsEdited and translated by Caryl Emerson . Introduction by Wayne C. Booth . Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. (Theory and History of Literature 8).
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Berman, Ruth A.
    2005 Introduction: Developing discourse stance in different text types and languages. Journal of Pragmatics37(2). 105–124. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(04)00189‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(04)00189-4 [Google Scholar]
  4. Brône, Geert & Elisabeth Zima
    2014 Towards a dialogic construction grammar: A corpus-based approach to ad hoc routines and resonance activation. Cognitive Linguistics25(3). 457–495. doi: 10.1515/cog‑2014‑0027
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0027 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bybee, Joan
    1993 Mechanisms for the creation of grammar. In Eve V. Clark (ed.), The proceedings of the twenty-fifth annual child language research forum, 16–21. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bybee, Joan , Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca 1994The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Du Bois, John W.
    1998 Discourse and grammar. In Michael Tomasello (ed.), The new psychology of language: cognitive and functional approaches to language structure (Vol.2), 47–87. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2007 The stance triangle. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139–182. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.164.07du
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.07du [Google Scholar]
  9. 2011 Co-opting intersubjectivity: Dialogic rhetoric of the self. In Christian Meyer & Felix Girke (eds.), The rhetorical emergence of culture, 52–83. Oxford, NY: Berghahn.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 2014 Towards a Dialogic Syntax. Cognitive Linguistics25(3). 359–410. doi: 10.1515/cog‑2014‑0024
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0024 [Google Scholar]
  11. In prep. Reasons to resonate: Motivating Dialogic Syntax.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Du Bois, John W. & Rachel Giora
    2014 From cognitive-functional linguistics to dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics25(3). 351–357. doi: 10.1515/cog‑2014‑0023
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0023 [Google Scholar]
  13. Englebretson, Robert
    (ed.) 2007Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.164
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164 [Google Scholar]
  14. Ford, Cecilia , Barbara Fox & Sandra Thompson
    (eds.) 2002The language of turns and sequences. New York, NY: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Goutsos, Dionysis
    1997Modeling discourse topic: Sequential relations and strategies in expository text. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood Publishing Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Haddington, Pentti
    2006 The organization of gaze and assessments as resources for stance-taking. Text & Talk26(3). 281–328. doi: 10.1515/TEXT.2006.012
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2006.012 [Google Scholar]
  17. 2007 Positioning and alignment as activities of stance taking in news interviews. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: The intersubjectivity of interaction, 283–317. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.164.11had
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.11had [Google Scholar]
  18. Hermans, Hubert J. M. & Thorsten Gieser
    2012 History, main tenets and core concepts of Dialogical Self theory. In Hubert Hermans & Thorsten Gieser (eds.), Handbook of Dialogical Self theory, 1–22. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hobson, R. Peter , Jessica Hobson , Rosa García-Pérez & John W. Du Bois
    2012 Dialogic linkage and resonance in autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders42(12). 2718–2728. doi: 10.1007/s10803‑012‑1528‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012-1528-6 [Google Scholar]
  20. Holquist, Michael
    1983 Answering as authoring: Mikhail Bakhtin’s trans–linguistics. Critical Inquiry10(2). 307–319. doi: 10.1086/448248
    https://doi.org/10.1086/448248 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hopper, Paul
    1987 Emergent grammar. Proceedings of the thirteenth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. 139–157. doi: 10.3765/bls.v13i0.1834
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v13i0.1834 [Google Scholar]
  22. Kärkkäinen, Elise
    2006Epistemic stance in English conversation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Marková, Ivana
    2003 Constitution of the self: Intersubjectivity and dialogicality. Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing Newsletter, IEEE9(3). 249–259.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Maschler, Yael
    2009Metalanguage in interaction: Hebrew discourse markers. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.181
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.181 [Google Scholar]
  25. Maschler, Yael & Bracha Nir
    2014 Complementation in linear and dialogic syntax: The case of Hebrew divergently aligned discourse. Cognitive Linguistics25(3). 523–557. doi: 10.1515/cog‑2014‑0029
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0029 [Google Scholar]
  26. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice
    2002[1945]Phenomenology of perception. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Nir, Bracha , Gonen Dori-Hacohen & Yael Maschler 2014 Formulations on Israeli political talk radio: From actions and sequences to stance via dialogic resonance. Discourse Studies16(4). 534–571. doi: 10.1177/1461445613519525
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445613519525 [Google Scholar]
  28. Norrick, Neal
    2001 Discourse markers in oral narrative. Journal of Pragmatics33. 849–878. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(01)80032‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(01)80032-1 [Google Scholar]
  29. Oropeza-Escobar, Minerva
    2011Represented discourse, resonance and stance in joking interaction in Mexican Spanish. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.204
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.204 [Google Scholar]
  30. Sakita, Tomoko
    2006 Parallelism in conversation: Resonance, schematization, and extension from the perspective of dialogic syntax and cognitive linguistics. Pragmatics & Cognition14(3). 467–500. doi: 10.1075/pc.14.3.03sak
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.14.3.03sak [Google Scholar]
  31. 2013 Discourse markers as stance markers. Pragmatics & Cognition21(1). 81–116. doi: 10.1075/pc.21.1.04sak
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.21.1.04sak [Google Scholar]
  32. Schiffrin, Deborah
    1987 Discourse markers. Language in Society21(4). 683–687.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Siromaa, Maarit
    2012 Resonance in conversational second stories: A dialogic resource for stance taking. Text & Talk32(4). 525–545. doi: 10.1515/text‑2012‑0025
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0025 [Google Scholar]
  34. Zima, Elisabeth
    2013aKognition in der Interaktion: Eine kognitiv-linguistische und gesprächsanalytische Studie dialogischer Resonanz in österreichischen Parlamentsdebatten. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 2013b Cognitive Grammar and Dialogic Syntax: Exploring potential synergies. Review of Cognitive Linguistics11(1). 36–72. doi: 10.1075/rcl.11.1.02zim
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.11.1.02zim [Google Scholar]
  36. Zima, Elisabeth , Geert Brône , Kurt Feyaerts & Paul Sambre
    2009 “Ce n’est pas très beau ce que vous avez dit”. Resonance activation in French parliamentary debates. Discours4. Available online atdiscours.revues.org/.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
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