Confrontation and collaboration in the course of the election debate

References

1. Aakhus, Mark
   2003 “Neither Naïve nor Normative Reconstruction: Dispute Mediators, Impasse, and the Design of Argumentation.” Argumentation: An International Journal on Reasoning17: 265–290.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Aakhus, Mark
   2007 “Communication as Design.” Communication Monographs74: 112–117. doi: 10.1080/03637750701196383
   https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750701196383 [Google Scholar]
3. Atkinson, J. Maxwell , and John Heritage
   1984 “Transcript Notation.” InStructures of Social Action, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage , ix–xvi. Cambridge, MA: University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Benoit, William L. , and Andrew A. Klyukovski
   2006 “A Functional Analysis of 2004 Ukrainian Presidential Debates.” Argumentation20: 209–225. doi: 10.1007/s10503‑006‑9007‑x
   https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-006-9007-x [Google Scholar]
5. Bonito, Joseph A. , and Robert E. Sanders
   2002 “Speakers’ Footing in a Collaborative Writing Task: A Resource for Addressing Disagreement While Avoiding Conflict.” Research on Language and Social Interaction35: 481–514. doi: 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3504_4
   https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3504_4 [Google Scholar]
6. Budzynska-Daca, Agnieszka , and Renata Botwina
   2015 “Pre-election TV Debates–Persuasive Games between Ethos, Logos, and Pathos.” InPersuasive Games in Political and Professional Dialogue, ed. by Răzvan Săftoiu , Maria-Ionela Neagu , and Stanca Măda , 39–53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.26.03bud
   https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.26.03bud [Google Scholar]
7. Clayman, Steven E
   1992 “Footing in the Achievement of Neutrality: The Case of News-interview Discourse.”InTalk at Work, ed. by Paul Drew , and John Heritage , 163–198. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Coulter, Jeff
   1990 “Elementary Properties of Argument Sequences.” InStudies in Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis, ed. by George Psathas , 181–203. Boston: University Press of America.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Drew, Paul , and John Heritage
   1992 “Analyzing Talk at Work: An Introduction.” InTalk at Work, ed. by Paul Drew and John Heritage , 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Garcia, Angela
    1991 “Dispute Resolution without Disputing: How the Interactional Organization of Mediation Hearings Minimizes Argument.” American Sociological Review56: 818–835. doi: 10.2307/2096258
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2096258 [Google Scholar]
11. Goffman, Erving
    1983 “The Interaction Order.” American Sociological Review48: 1–17. doi: 10.2307/2095141
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2095141 [Google Scholar]
12. Goodwin, Charles , and Marjorie Harness Goodwin
    1990 “Interstitial Argument.” InConflict Talk: Sociolinguistic Investigations of Arguments in Conversations, ed. by Allen D. Grimshaw , 85–117. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Greatbatch, David
    1992 “On the Management of Disagreement between News Interviewees.” InTalk at Work, ed. by Paul Drew and John Heritage , 268–301. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Greco Morasso, Sara
    2011 Argumentation in Dispute Mediation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/aic.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.3 [Google Scholar]
15. Grimshaw, Allen D
    1990 “Introduction.” InConflict Talk: Sociolinguistic Investigations of Arguments in Conversations, ed. by Allen D. Grimshaw , 1–20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Haaften, Ton van
    2010 “Dutch Parliamentary Debate as Communicative Activity Type.” InProceedings of the Seventh Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation: ISSA 2010 [cd-rom], ed. by Frans H. van Eemeren , Bart Garssen , David Godden , and Gordon Mitchell , 687–695. Amsterdam: Rosenberg SicSat.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Heisterkamp, Brian L
    2006 “Taking the Footing of a Neutral Mediator.” Conflict Resolution Quarterly23: 301–315. doi: 10.1002/crq.139
    https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.139 [Google Scholar]
18. Hutchby, Ian
    1996 Confrontation Talk: Arguments, Asymmetries, and Power on Talk Radio. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Ionescu-Ruxăndoiu, Liliana
    2010 “The Argumentum ad Hominem in a Romanian Parliamentary Debate.” InProceedings of the Seventh Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation: ISSA 2010 [cd-rom], ed. by Frans H. van Eemeren , Bart Garssen , David Godden , and Gordon Mitchell , 875–880. Amsterdam: Rosenberg SicSat.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Jacobs, Scott
    2002 “Maintaining Neutrality in Dispute Mediation: Managing Disagreement while Managing not to Disagree.” Journal of Pragmatics34: 1403–1426. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00071‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00071-1 [Google Scholar]
21. Kangasharju, Helena
    1996 “Aligning as a Team in Multiparty Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics26: 291–319. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(95)00051‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00051-8 [Google Scholar]
22. Kangasharju, Helena
    2002 “Alignment in Disagreement: Forming Oppositional Alliances in Committee Meetings.” Journal of Pragmatics34: 1447–1471. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00073‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00073-5 [Google Scholar]
23. Mohammed, Dima
    2008 “Institutional Insights for Analysing Strategic Manoeuvering in the British Prime Minister’s Question Time.” Argumentation22: 377–393. doi: 10.1007/s10503‑008‑9090‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-008-9090-2 [Google Scholar]
24. Neagu, Maria-Ionela
    2015 “Political Debates: Deliberation, Persuasion, and Ethos Construction.” InPersuasive Games in Political and Professional Dialogue, ed. by Răzvan Săftoiu , Maria-Ionela Neagu , and Stanca Măda , 85–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.26.05nea
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.26.05nea [Google Scholar]
25. Schiffrin, Deborah
    1990 “The Management of a Co-operative Self during Argument: The Role of Opinions and Stories.” InConflict Talk: Sociolinguistic Investigations of Arguments in Conversations, ed. by Allen D. Grimshaw , 241–259. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Searle, John R
    1970 Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Ştefănescu, Ariadna
    2015 “Analysing the Rhetoric Use of the Epistemic Marker Eu cred că (I think) in Romanian Parliamentary Discourse.” InPersuasive Games in Political and Professional Dialogue, ed. by Răzvan Săftoiu , Maria-Ionela Neagu , and Stanca Măda , 101–141. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.26.06ste
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.26.06ste [Google Scholar]
28. Suzuki, Takeshi , and Takayuki Kato
    2010 “An Analysis of TV Debate: Democratic Party of Japan Leadership between Hatoyama and Okada.” InProceedings of the Seventh Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation: ISSA 2010 [cd-rom], ed. by Frans H. van Eemeren , Bart Garssen , David Godden , and Gordon Mitchell , 1849–1859. Amsterdam: Rosenberg SicSat.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Toska, Bledar
    2015 “…Every Time you’ve Offered an Opinion, you’ve been Wrong: Obama Dialogically Interacting in the Last 2012 Presidential Debate.” InPersuasive Games in Political and Professional Dialogue, ed. by Răzvan Săftoiu , Maria-Ionela Neagu , and Stanca Măda , 55–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.26.04tos
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.26.04tos [Google Scholar]
30. Vasilyeva, Alena L
    2012a “Argumentation in the Context of Mediation Activity.” Journal of Argumentation in Context1: 209–233. doi: 10.1075/jaic.1.2.04vas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.1.2.04vas [Google Scholar]
31. Vasilyeva, Alena L
    2012b “Topics as Indication of Being On-task/Off-task.” Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication3: 61–82. doi: 10.1386/ejpc.3.1.61_1
    https://doi.org/10.1386/ejpc.3.1.61_1 [Google Scholar]
32. Vasilyeva, Alena L
    2015 “Identity as a Resource to Shape Mediation in Dialogic Interaction.” Language and Dialogue5: 355–380. doi: 10.1075/ld.5.3.01vas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.5.3.01vas [Google Scholar]
33. Vuchinich, Samuel
    1990 “The Sequential Organization of Closing in Verbal Family Conflict.”InConflict Talk: Sociolinguistic Investigations of Arguments in Conversations, ed. by Allen D. Grimshaw , 118–138. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Weigand, Edda
    2010 Dialogue: Mixed Game. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.10
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.10 [Google Scholar]
35. Zarefsky, David
    2008 “Strategic Maneuvering in Political Argumentation.” Argumentation, 22: 317–330. doi: 10.1007/s10503‑008‑9096‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-008-9096-9 [Google Scholar]