Constituting climate change in dialogic practice

References

1. Althusser, Louis
   2014 [1970] On the reproduction of capitalism: Ideology and ideological state apparatuses. Transl. byG. M. Goshgarian. New York: Verso.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Barad, Karen
   2007 Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. 10.2307/j.ctv12101zq
   https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv12101zq [Google Scholar]
3. Baker, Carolyn
   2004 “Membership categorization and interview accounts.” InQualitative research: Theory, method and practice, ed. byDavid Silverman, 162–176. London: Sage.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bartesaghi, Mariaelena
   2014 “Coordination: Examining weather as a “matter of concern.”” Communication Studies65(5): 535–557. 10.1080/10510974.2014.957337
   https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2014.957337 [Google Scholar]
5. Bhatia, Vijay K., John Flowerdew, and Rodney H. Jones
   2008 “Approaches to discourse analysis.” InAdvances in discourse studies, ed. byVijay K. Bhatia, John Flowerdew, and Rodney H. Jones. 1–18. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203892299
   https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203892299 [Google Scholar]
6. Blommaert, Jan
   2013 Ethnography, superdiversity and linguistic landscapes: Chronicles of complexity. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783090419
   https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783090419 [Google Scholar]
7. Blommaert, Jan and Ben Rampton
   2011 “Language and superdiversity.” Diversities, 13(2): 1–21. https://www.unesco.org/shs/diversities/vol13/issue2/art1
   [Google Scholar]
8. Blommaert, Jan and Piia Varis
   2013 “Enough is enough: The heuristics of authenticity.” InLinguistic super-diversity in Urban areas: Research approaches, ed. byJoana Duarte and Ingrid Gogolin, 143–159. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hsld.2.10blo
   https://doi.org/10.1075/hsld.2.10blo [Google Scholar]
9. Burke, Kenneth
   1966 Language as symbolic action: Essays on life, literature, and method. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 10.1525/9780520340664
   https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520340664 [Google Scholar]
10. Caldarice, Ombretta, Nicola Tollin., and Maria Pizzorni
    2021 “The relevance of science-policy-practice dialogue: Exploring the urban climate resilience governance in Italy.” City, Territory and Architecture8(9): 1–11. 10.1186/s40410‑021‑00137‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-021-00137-y [Google Scholar]
11. Chakraborty, Jayajit
    2009 “Automobiles, air toxics, and adverse health risks: Environmental inequities in Tampa Bay, Florida.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers99(4): 674–697. 10.1080/00045600903066490
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00045600903066490 [Google Scholar]
12. Chakraborty, Jayajit, and M. Martin Bosman
    2010 “Spatial and Environmental Justice in the Metropolis.” InSpatial and environmental justice in the American metropolis: A study of Tampa Bay, ed. byJayajit Chakraborty and M. Martin Bosman, 1–22. Amherst, NY: Cambria Press.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Cheney, George
    1983 “The rhetoric of identification and the study of organizational communication.” Quarterly Journal of Speech69(2): 143–158. 10.1080/00335638309383643
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638309383643 [Google Scholar]
14. Cooren, François
    2014 “Pragmatism as ventriloquism: Creating a dialogue among seven traditions in the study of communication.” Language Under Discussion2(1): 1–26. 10.31885/lud.2.1.239
    https://doi.org/10.31885/lud.2.1.239 [Google Scholar]
15. Cox, J. Robert
    1999 “Reclaiming the “indecorous” voice: Public participation by low-income communities in environmental decision-making.” InProceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference on Communication and the Environment, ed. byC. Brant Short and Dayle Hardy-Short, 21–31. Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University School of Communication.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (n.d.). What is open space/green space?https://www3.epa.gov/region1/eco/uep/openspace.html
17. Garrard, Greg
    2012 Ecocriticism (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Gherardi, Silvia
    2017 “Sociomateriality in posthuman practice theory.” InThe nexus of practices: Connections, constellations, practitioners, ed. byAllison Hui, Theordore Schatzki, and Elizabeth Shove, 3851. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Goffman, Erving
    1956 The presentation of self in everyday life. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Social Sciences Research Centre.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Hirvela, Kyle R.
    2011 Park access and distributional inequities in Pinellas County, Florida. [Master’s thesis, University of South Florida].
    [Google Scholar]
21. Hulme, Mike
    2017 Weathered: Cultures of climate. London: Sage. 10.4135/9781473957749
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957749 [Google Scholar]
22. Korten, Tristram
    2015, March8. “In Florida, officials ban term ‘climate change.’” Florida Center for Investigative Reporting. https://fcir.org/2015/03/08/in-florida-officials-ban-term-climate-change/
    [Google Scholar]
23. Krueger, Katherine
    2015, March23. “Florida’s unspeakable issue leaves climate change official tongue-tied.” The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/23/climate-change-florida-official
    [Google Scholar]
24. Kuhn, Timothy, Karen L. Ashcraft, and François Cooren
    2017 The Work of communication: Relational perspectives on working and organizing in contemporary capitalism. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315680705
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315680705 [Google Scholar]
25. Lersch, Kim M. and Timothy C. Hart
    2014 “Environmental justice, lead, and crime: Exploring the spatial distribution and impact of industrial facilities in Hillsborough County Florida.” Sociological Spectrum34(1): 1–21. 10.1080/02732173.2014.857184
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02732173.2014.857184 [Google Scholar]
26. Linell, Per
    1998 Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction, and contexts in dialogic perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/impact.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.3 [Google Scholar]
27. Norris, Sigrid and Rodney H. Jones
    2005 “Discourse as action/discourse in action.” InDiscourse in action: Introducing mediated discourse analysis, ed. bySigrid Norris and Rodney H. Jones, 3–15. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203018767
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203018767 [Google Scholar]
28. Paglia, Eric
    2018 “The socio-scientific construction of global climate crisis.” Geopolitics23(1): 96–123. 10.1080/14650045.2017.1328407
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2017.1328407 [Google Scholar]
29. Roulston, Kathy
    2001 “Investigating the ‘cast of characters’ in a cultural world.” InHow to analyze talk in institutional settings: A casebook of methods, ed. byAlec McHoul and Mark Rapley, 100–112. New York: Continuum. 10.5040/9781350933927.ch‑008
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350933927.ch-008 [Google Scholar]
30. Sacks, Harvey
    1995 Lectures on conversation: Volumes I and II, ed. byGail Jefferson. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444328301
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444328301 [Google Scholar]
31. Smithberger, Leanna K.
    2021 The communicative constitution of environment: Land, weather, climate. PhD dissertation, University of South Florida. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd/8867
32. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    2007 “A tutorial on membership categorization.” Journal of Pragmatics39(3): 462–482. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.007 [Google Scholar]
33. Stevanovic, Melisa
    2018 “Social deontics: A nano-level approach to human power play.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour481: 369–389. 10.1111/jtsb.12175
    https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12175 [Google Scholar]
34. Stretesky, Paul B. and Michael J. Lynch
    2002 “Environmental hazards and school segregation in Hillsborough County, Florida, 1987–1999.” The Sociological Quarterly43(4): 553–573. 10.1111/j.1533‑8525.2002.tb00066.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2002.tb00066.x [Google Scholar]
35. Turner, Matthew D.
    2016 “Climate vulnerability as a relational concept. Geoforum681: 29–38. 10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.11.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.11.006 [Google Scholar]
36. Zinken, Jörg and Eva Ogiermann
    2011 “How to propose an action as objectively necessary: The case of Polish trzeba x (“one needs to x”).” Research on Language and Social Interaction44(3): 263–287. 10.1080/08351813.2011.591900
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2011.591900 [Google Scholar]