Indirect reporting and pragmatically enriched context

References

1. Allan, Dave
   1992 Oxford Placement Test 1: Test pack. Oxford University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Asher, Nicholas & Alex Lascarides
   2001 Indirect speech acts. Synthese128(1). 183–228. 10.1023/A:1010340508140
   https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010340508140 [Google Scholar]
3. Austin, John L.
   1975 How to do things with words. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001
   https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
4. Bastiaanse, Roelien
   2011 The retrieval and inflection of verbs in the spontaneous speech of fluent aphasic speakers. Journal of Neurolinguistics24(2). 163–72. doi:  10.1016/j.jneuroling.2010.02.006
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2010.02.006 [Google Scholar]
5. Biber, Douglas , Stig Johansson , Geoffrey Leech , Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan
   1999 Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Bohan, Jason , Alison J. S. Sanford , Sally Cochrane & Antony J. S. Sanford
   2008 Direct and indirect speech modulates depth of processing. Paper presented at14th Annual Conference on Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing (AMLaP), Cambridge, UK.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bortfeld, Heather
   2003 Comprehending idioms cross-linguistically. Experimental Psychology50(3). 1–14. 10.1026//1617‑3169.50.3.217
   https://doi.org/10.1026//1617-3169.50.3.217 [Google Scholar]
8. Capone, Alessandro
   2010 On the social practice of indirect reports (further advances in the theory of pragmemes). Journal of Pragmatics42(2). 377–391. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.06.013
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.06.013 [Google Scholar]
9. Charkova, Krassimira D. & Laura J. Halliday
   2011 Second- and foreign-language variation in tense backshifting in indirect reported speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition33(1). 1–32. 10.1017/S0272263110000513
   https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263110000513 [Google Scholar]
10. Choj, Chzhi En
    2001 Sposoby peredachi chuzhoj rechi v russkom yazyke [Ways of expression of another’s speech in Russian]. Moscow: Lomonosov Moscow State University dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Cieślicka, Anna
    2004 Bilingual language users’ sensitivity to semantic analyzability of L2 idioms: Testing the effect of idiom analyzability in L2 metalinguistic tasks. In Janusz Arabski (ed.), Pragmatics and language learning, 143–164. Kraków: Universitas.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Cieślicka, Anna
    2006 Literal salience in on-line processing of idiomatic expressions by second language learners. Second Language Research22(2). 114–144. 10.1191/0267658306sr263oa
    https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr263oa [Google Scholar]
13. Coulmas, Florian
    (ed.) 1986a Direct and indirect speech (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 31). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110871968
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110871968 [Google Scholar]
14. Coulmas, Florian
    1986b Reported speech: Some general issues. In Florian Coulmas (ed.), Direct and indirect speech, 1–28. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110871968.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110871968.1 [Google Scholar]
15. Eerland, Anita , Jan A. Engelen & Rolf A. Zwaan
    2013 The influence of direct and indirect speech on mental representations. PLoS One8(6): e65480. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0065480
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065480 [Google Scholar]
16. Gladkova, Anna
    2017 Communication modes, Russian. In: Young Y. Kim (eds.), The International encyclopedia of intercultural communication1–9Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:  10.1002/9781118783665.ieicc0147
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783665.ieicc0147 [Google Scholar]
17. Groefsema, Marjolein
    1992 Can you pass the salt? A short-circuited implicature?Lingua87(1). 103–135. 10.1016/0024‑3841(92)90028‑H
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(92)90028-H [Google Scholar]
18. Groenewold, Rimke , Roelien Bastiaanse , Lyndsey Nickels & Mike Huiskes
    2014 Perceived liveliness and speech comprehensibility in aphasia: The effects of direct speech in auditory narratives. International Journal for Language & Communication Disorders49(4). 486–497. doi:  10.1111/1460‑6984.12080
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12080 [Google Scholar]
19. Holt, Elizabeth
    2017 Indirect reported speech in storytelling: Its position, design, and uses. Research on Language and Social Interaction50(2). 171–187. doi:  10.1080/08351813.2017.1301302
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2017.1301302 [Google Scholar]
20. Karimvand, Parisa N.
    2011 Psycholinguistic perspectives on comprehension in second language acquisition. Journal of Language Teaching and Research2(6). 1268–1273. 10.4304/jltr.2.6.1268‑1273
    https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.2.6.1268-1273 [Google Scholar]
21. Kecskés, István
    2006 On my mind: Thoughts about salience, context, and figurative language from a second language perspective. Second Language Research22(2). 219–237. 10.1191/0267658306sr266ra
    https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr266ra [Google Scholar]
22. Kecskés, István
    2007 Formulaic language in English lingua franca. In István Kecskés & Laurence R. Horn (eds.), Explorations in pragmatics: Linguistic, cognitive and intercultural aspects, 191–219. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Kecskes, Istvan
    2008 Dueling contexts: A dynamic model of meaning. Journal of Pragmatics401, 385-406. 10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.004 [Google Scholar]
24. Kecskés, István
    2014 Intercultural pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Kecskés, István
    2015 Is the idiom principle blocked in bilingual L2 production?In Roberto Heredia & Anna Cieślicka (eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing, 28–53. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139342100.005
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139342100.005 [Google Scholar]
26. Kecskés, István
    2016 Indirect reporting in bilingual language production. In Alessandro Capone , Ferenc Kiefer & Franco Lo Piparo (eds.), Indirect reports and pragmatics, perspectives in pragmatics (Philosophy & Psychology 5), 9–29. Heidelberg: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑21395‑8_2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21395-8_2 [Google Scholar]
27. Kecskés, István , Olga A. Obdalova , Ludmila Yu Minakova & Aleksandra V. Soboleva
    2018 Study of the perception of situation-bound utterances as culture-specific pragmatic units by Russian learners of English. System761, 219–232. doi:  10.1016/j.system.2018.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.06.002 [Google Scholar]
28. Latysheva, Svetlana V.
    2008 Modusnaya obuslovlennost’ aspektual’noj formy predikata v pridatochnom predlozhenii vyskazyvaniya s kosvennoj rech’yu [Modus conditionality of the aspectual form of predicates in a subclause with indirect speech]. Irkutsk: Baikal State University of Economics and Law dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Li, Charles
    1986 Direct and indirect speech: A functional study. In Florian Coulmas (ed.), Direct and indirect speech, 29–45. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110871968.29
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110871968.29 [Google Scholar]
30. Marinchenko, Diana B.
    2006 Sposoby peredachi chuzhoj rechi v rechi mladshih shkol’nikov [Methods of transferring someone else’s speech in the speech of junior schoolchildren]. Taganrog: Taganrog State Pedagogical Institute dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Rost, Michael
    2005 L2 listening. In: Eli Hinkel (ed.), Handbook of research on second language learning and teaching, 503–527. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Smemoe, Wendy B. & Rachel Hansen
    2010 The effects of direct and indirect speech acts on native English and ESL speakers’ perception of teacher written feedback. System38(1). 75–84. doi:  10.1016/j.system.2009.12.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.12.007 [Google Scholar]
33. Vandergrift, Larry
    2006 Second language listening: Listening ability or language proficiency?The Modern Language Journal90(1). 6–18. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2006.00381.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00381.x [Google Scholar]
34. Vandergrift, Larry & Marzieh H. Tafaghodtari
    2010 Teaching L2 learners how to listen does make a difference: An empirical study. Language Learning60(2). 470–497. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00559.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00559.x [Google Scholar]
35. Wieland, Nellie
    2010 Context sensibility and indirect reports. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research81(1). 40–48. 10.1111/j.1933‑1592.2010.00360.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2010.00360.x [Google Scholar]
36. Wieland, Nellie
    2013 Indirect reports and pragmatics. In Alessandro Capone , Franco Lo Piparo , Marco Carapezza (eds.), Perspectives on Pragmatics and Philosophy, 389–411. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑01011‑3_17
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01011-3_17 [Google Scholar]
37. Wierzbicka, Anna
    2002 Russian cultural scripts: The theory of cultural scripts and its applications. Ethos30(4). 401–432. 10.1525/eth.2002.30.4.401
    https://doi.org/10.1525/eth.2002.30.4.401 [Google Scholar]
38. Yao, Bo & Christoph Scheepers
    2011 Contextual modulation of reading rate for direct versus indirect speech quotations. Cognition121(3). 447–453. doi:  10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.007 [Google Scholar]
39. Yao, Bo , Pascal Belin & Christoph Scheepers
    2012 Brain ‘talks over’ boring quotes: Top-down activation of voice-selective areas while listening to monotonous direct speech quotations. NeuroImage60(3). 1832–1842. doi:  10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.01.111
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.01.111 [Google Scholar]