Creative resonance and misalignment stance

References

1. Becker, Alton L.
   1982 Beyond translation: Esthetics and language description. In Heidi Byrnes (ed.), GURT 1982: Contemporary perceptions of language: interdisciplinary dimensions, 124–138. Washington D.C., WA: Georgetown University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
   1987 Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or different?Journal of Pragmatics11(2). 131–146. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(87)90192‑5
   https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(87)90192-5 [Google Scholar]
3. Clayman, Stephen & John Heritage
   2014 Benefactors and beneficiaries: Benefactive status and stance in the management of offers and requests. In Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Paul Drew (eds.), Requesting in social interaction, 55–86. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Clift, Rebecca
   2006 Indexing stance: Reported speech as an interactional evidential. Journal of sociolinguistics10(5). 569–595. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2006.00296.x
   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2006.00296.x [Google Scholar]
5. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
   2014 What does grammar tell us about action?Pragmatics24(3). 623–647. doi: 10.1075/prag.24.3.08cou
   https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.24.3.08cou [Google Scholar]
6. Dori-Hacohen, Gonen
   2010 ‘You nag so much’: Description of confrontational discourse between two women. Hebrew Linguistics62–63. 201–230. [Hebrew]
   [Google Scholar]
7. Dori-Hacohen, Gonen
   2014 Establishing social groups in Hebrew: ‘We’ in political radio phone-in programs. In Theodossia-Soula Pavlidou (ed.), Constructing collectivity: ‘We’ across languages and contexts, 187–206. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.239.13dor
   https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.239.13dor [Google Scholar]
8. Du Bois, John W.
   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. Du Bois, John W.
   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]
10. Du Bois, John W.
    In prep. Reasons to resonate: Motivating Dialogic Syntax.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Du Bois, John W. & Elise Kärkkäinen
    2012 Taking a stance on emotion: Affect, sequence, and intersubjectivity in dialogic interaction. Text and Talk32(4). 433–451. doi: 10.1515/text‑2012‑0021
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0021 [Google Scholar]
12. Garfinkel, Harold
    1967 Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Goffman, Erving
    1981 Forms of talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Hacohen, Gonen & Emanuel A. Schegloff
    2006 On the preference for minimization in referring to persons: Evidence from Hebrew conversation. Journal of Pragmatics38(8). 1305–1312. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.04.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.04.004 [Google Scholar]
15. 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]
16. Heritage, John
    1984 Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Heritage, John
    2012 The epistemic engine: sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language & Social Interaction45(1). 30–52. doi: 10.1080/08351813.2012.646685
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646685 [Google Scholar]
18. Heritage, John & Geoffrey Raymond
    2005 The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly68. 15–38. doi: 10.1177/019027250506800103
    https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250506800103 [Google Scholar]
19. Jefferson, Gail
    Jefferson, Gail 2004 Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Gene H. Lerner (ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the first generation, 13–31. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.125.02jef
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.02jef [Google Scholar]
20. Labov, William & David Fanshel
    1977 Therapeutic discourse: Psychotherapy as conversation. New York, NY: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Maschler, Yael
    2009 Metalanguage in interaction: Israeli-Hebrew discourse markers. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.181
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.181 [Google Scholar]
22. 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]
23. Mondada, Lorenza
    2011 The management of knowledge discrepancies and of epistemic changes in institutional interactions. In Tanya Stivers , Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig (eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, 27–57. Cambridge: CUP. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511921674.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921674.003 [Google Scholar]
24. 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]
25. Pomerantz, Anita
    1984 Agreement and disagreement with assessment: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In John Heritage & Maxwell J. Atkinson (eds.), Structures of social action: studies in conversation analysis, 57–101. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Raymond, Geoffrey
    2003 Grammar and social organization: Yes/No interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review68(6). 939–967. doi: 10.2307/1519752
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1519752 [Google Scholar]
27. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1968 Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist70(6). 1075–1095. doi: 10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030 [Google Scholar]
28. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1972 Notes on a conversational practice: Formulating place. In David N. Sudnow (ed.), Studies in social interaction, 79–106. New York, NY: MacMillan.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1987 Analyzing single episodes of interaction: An exercise in conversation analysis. Social Psychology Quarterly50. 101–114. doi: 10.2307/2786745
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2786745 [Google Scholar]
30. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1988a On an actual virtual servo-mechanism for guessing bad news: A single case conjecture. Social problems35(4). 442–457. doi: 10.2307/800596
    https://doi.org/10.2307/800596 [Google Scholar]
31. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1988b Description in the social sciences I: Talk-in-interaction. IPRA Papers in Pragmatics2. 1–24. doi: 10.1075/iprapip.2.1‑2.01sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/iprapip.2.1-2.01sch [Google Scholar]
32. Schegloff, Emanuel
    2000 On granularity. Annual Review of Sociology26(1). 715–720.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    2003a On ESP puns. Studies in language and social interaction. In Phillip J. Glenn , Curtin D. LeBaron & Jennifer Mandelbaum (eds), Studies in language and social interaction: In honor of Robert Hopper, 452–461. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    2003b The surfacing of the suppressed. In Phillip J. Glenn , Curtin D. LeBaron & Jennifer Mandelbaum (eds.), Studies in language and social interaction: In honor of Robert Hopper, 204–223. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    2007 Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: CUP. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
36. Stivers, Tanya
    2013 Sequence organization. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis, 191–209. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell
    [Google Scholar]
37. Stivers, Tanya & Makoto Hayashi
    2010 Transformative answers: One way to resist a question’s constraints. Language in Society39. 1–25. doi: 10.1017/S0047404509990637
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404509990637 [Google Scholar]