1887
Volume 7, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2210-4119
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4127
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

IADA History not only refers to the series of conferences and workshops which have been organized since the foundation of the Association but also to the discussions about a unified concept of dialogue which accompanied IADA’s activities during the last three decades. On the one hand, there is the basic question of what constitutes dialogue, while on the other hand there are multiple approaches which claim to be acknowledged as dialogic approaches. If we do not want to accept the plurality of models in the sense of ‘anything goes’ we need to address the difficult issue of how far individual models can contribute to an investigation of dialogue as a complex whole.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ld.7.1.05wei
2017-06-17
2019-10-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Arnett, Ronald
    2014 “Civic Dialogue: Attending to Locality and Recovering Monologue.” Journal of Dialogue Studies2 (2): 71–92.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Austin, J. L.
    1962How to Do Things with Words. The William James Lectures Delivered at Harvard University in 1955. London etc.: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Arnett, Ronald
    . (forthc.). “Language as the Originative House of Dialogic Ethics.” InLanguage and Dialogue: A Handbook of Key Issues in the Field ed. by Edda Weigand . New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Carbaugh, Donal
    2013 “On Dialogue Studies.” Journal of Dialogue Studies1 (1): 9–28.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Chomsky, Noam
    1959 “Review: B.F. Skinner: Verbal Behavior. New York 1957.” Language35: 26–58. doi: 10.2307/411334
    https://doi.org/10.2307/411334 [Google Scholar]
  6. Cissna, Kenneth N. and Rob Anderson
    2008 “Dialogic Rhetoric, Coauthorship, and Moments of Meeting.” InDialogue and Rhetoric, ed. by Edda Weigand , 39–53. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.2.05cis
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.2.05cis [Google Scholar]
  7. Clark, Herbert H.
    1996Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620539
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620539 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cooren, François
    2010Action and Agency in Dialogue. Passion, Incarnation and Ventriloquism. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.6
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.6 [Google Scholar]
  9. Dawkins, R.
    1976The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Fetzer, Anita
    2004Recontextualizing Context. Grammaticality Meets Appropriateness. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.121
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.121 [Google Scholar]
  11. Finkbeiner, Rita , Jörg Meibauer and Petra B. Schumacher
    (eds) 2012What is a context? Linguistic Approaches and Challenges. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/la.196
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.196 [Google Scholar]
  12. Frawley, William
    1987 “Review Article: van Dijk (ed.). Handbook of Discourse Analysis, I-IV.” Language63: 361–397. doi: 10.2307/415660
    https://doi.org/10.2307/415660 [Google Scholar]
  13. Humboldt, Wilhelm von
    1827/1963 “Ueber den Dualis.” InW. von Humboldt. Schriften zur Sprachphilosophie. Vol. 3, ed. by Andreas Flitner and Klaus Giel , 113–143. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hundsnurscher, Franz
    1980 “Konversationsanalyse versus Dialoggrammatik.” InAkten des VI. Internationalen Germanisten-Kongresses. Basel. 1980. Part 2, ed. by Heinz Rupp and Hans-Gert Roloff , 89–95. Bern etc.: Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 1992 “Does a Dialogic View of Language Amount to a Paradigm Change in Linguistics: Language as Dialogue.” InMethodologie der Dialoganalyse, ed. by Sorin Stati and Edda Weigand , 1–14. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Kretschmar, Jr., William A.
    2014Language and Complex Systems. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Lumsden, Charles J. and Edward O. Wilson
    2005Genes, Mind, and Culture: The Coevolutionary Process. New Jersey: World Scientific. doi: 10.1142/5786
    https://doi.org/10.1142/5786 [Google Scholar]
  18. Searle, John R.
    1972 “Chomsky’s Revolution in Linguistics.” The New York Review of BooksXVII, June29: 16–24.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 1992 “Conversation.” In(On) Searle on Conversation, ed. by John R. Searle et al. , 7–30. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.21.02sea
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.21.02sea [Google Scholar]
  20. Simon, Herbert A.
    1962 “The Architecture of Complexity: Hierarchic Systems.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society106: 467–482.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Stati, Sorin
    1982Il dialogo. Considerazioni di linguistica pragmatica. Napoli: Liguori.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Toulmin, Stephen
    2001Return to Reason. Cambridge, Mass./London: Cambrigde University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Weigand, Edda
    1989Sprache als Dialog. Sprechakttaxonomie und kommunikative Grammatik. 2nd, rev. ed. 2003 Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 1991 “The Dialogic Principle Revisited: Speech Acts and Mental States.” InDialoganalyse III. Referate der 3. Arbeitstagung, Bologna 1990, ed. by Sorin Stati , Edda Weigand and Franz Hundsnurscher , vol.1, 75–104. Tübingen: Niemeyer. − Reprinted in Edda Weigand 2009 Language as Dialogue. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins, 21–44. – Reprinted inInterdisciplinary Studies in Pragmatics, Culture and Society, ed. by Alessandro Capone and Jacob L. Mey , 209–232. Cham etc.: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 2004 “Empirical Data and Theoretical Models. Review Article on Eerdmans, Susan L. , Prevignano, Carlo L. , and Paul J. Thibault (eds), Language and Interaction. Discussions with John J. Gumperz .” Pragmatics & Cognition12: 375–388. doi: 10.1075/pc.12.2.10wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.12.2.10wei [Google Scholar]
  26. 2007 “The Sociobiology of Language.” InDialogue and Culture, ed. by Marion Grein and Edda Weigand , 27–49. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.1.04wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.1.04wei [Google Scholar]
  27. 2009Language as Dialogue. From Rules to Principles of Probability, ed. by Sebastian Feller . Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.5
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.5 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2010Dialogue: The Mixed Game. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.10
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.10 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2014 “Rationality of Performance.” Philosophia Scientiæ18 (3): 247–268. doi: 10.4000/philosophiascientiae.1023
    https://doi.org/10.4000/philosophiascientiae.1023 [Google Scholar]
  30. 2016 “How to Verify a Theory of Dialogue.” Language and Dialogue6: 349–369. doi: 10.1075/ld.6.3.01wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.6.3.01wei [Google Scholar]
  31. Weller, Paul
    2013 “Editorial Introduction.” Journal of Dialogue Studies1 (1): 5–7.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Wilson, Edward O.
    1999Consilience. The Unity of Knowledge. New York: Vintage Books.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ld.7.1.05wei
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ld.7.1.05wei
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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