oa Disagreements in television discussions

References

1. Baym, N.
   (1996) Agreements and disagreements in a computer-mediated discussion. Research on Language and Social Interaction 29:315–345. doi: 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2904_2
   https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2904_2 [Google Scholar]
2. Bennett, A.
   (1981) Interruptions and the interpretation of conversation. Discourse Processes 4:171–188. doi: 10.1080/01638538109544513
   https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538109544513 [Google Scholar]
3. Blum-Kulka, S.
   (1997) Dinner talk. Cultural patterns of sociability and socialization in family discourse. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Brand, G. & P. Scannell
   (1991) Talk, identity, and performance: The Tony Blackburn show. In P. Scannell (ed.), Broadcast Talk. London: Sage, pp.201–226.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Brown, P. and S. Levinson
   (1978) Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E.N. Goody (ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.56–289.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Brown, P. and S. Levinson
   (1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
7. dayman, S.E.
   (1992) Footing in the achievement of neutrality: The case of news-interview discourse. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.163–198.
   [Google Scholar]
8. dayman, S.
   (1988) Displaying neutrality in television news interviews. Social Problems35.4: 474–92. doi: 10.2307/800598
   https://doi.org/10.2307/800598 [Google Scholar]
9. Drew, P. and J. Heritage
   (1992) Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.3–65.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Fairclough, N.
    (1995) Media discourse. London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Georgakopoulou, A.
    (1997a) Self-presentation and interactional alliances in e-mail discourse: The style- and code-switches of Greek messages. Internationaljournal of Applied Linguistics 7:141–164. doi: 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.1997.tb00112.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.1997.tb00112.x [Google Scholar]
12. Georgakopoulou, A.
    (1997b) Narrative performances: A study of Modern Greek storytelling. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.46
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.46
13. Goffman, E.
    (1981) Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Greatbatch, D.
    (1992) On the management of disagreement between news interviewees. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.268–301.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Hayashi, T.
    (1996) Politeness in conflict management: A conversation anlysis of dispreferred messages from a cognitive perspective. Journal of Pragmatics25: 227–255. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)00080‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)00080-8 [Google Scholar]
16. Heritage. J. & D. Greatbatch
    (1991) On the institutional character of institutional talk: The case of news interviews. In D. Boden & D.H. Zimmerman (eds.), Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp.93–137.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Hill, J.H. & J.T. Irvine
    (1992) (eds.)Responsibility and evidence in oral discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Hutchby, I.
    (1991)  The organization of talk on talk radio. In P. Scannell (ed.), Broadcast talk. London: Sage, pp.119–37.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Hutchby, I.
    (1992) Confrontational talk: Aspects of ‘interruption’ in argument sequences on talk radio. Text12: 343–371.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Hutchby, I.
    (1997) Building alignments in public debate: A case study from British TV. Text17.2: 161–79.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Kotthoff, H.
    (1993) Disagreement and concession in disputes: On the context sensitivity of preference structures. Language in Society22: 193–216. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500017103
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500017103 [Google Scholar]
22. Levinson, S.
    (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Levinson, S.
    (1992) Activity types and language. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.66–100.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Livingstone, S. and P. Lunt
    (1994) Talk on television: Audience participation and public debate. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Mulkay, M.
    (1985) Agreement and disagreement in conversations and letters. Text5: 201–227.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Patrona, M.
    (in preparation)Constructing the expert in Greek television discussion programs. Ph.D thesis. King’s College London.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Pomerantz, A.
    (1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action. Cambridge: Maison des Sciences de 1’ Homme and Cambridge University Press, pp.57–101.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Schiffrin, D.
    (1984) Jewish argument as sociability. Language in Society13: 311–335. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500010526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500010526 [Google Scholar]
29. Sheldon, A.
    (1992) Conflict talk: Sociological challenges to self-assertion and how young girls meet them. New Merrill-Palmer Quarterly38: 95–117.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Sifianou, Maria
    (1992) Politeness Phenomena in England and Greece. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Sifianou, Maria
    (1997) Politeness and off-record indirectness. International Journal of the Sociology of Language126: 163–179. doi: 10.1515/ijsl.1997.126.163
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1997.126.163 [Google Scholar]
32. Tannen, D. & C. Kakava
    (1992) Power and solidarity in Modern Greek conversation: Disagreeing to agree. Journal of Modern Greek Studies10: 11–34. doi: 10.1353/mgs.2010.0203
    https://doi.org/10.1353/mgs.2010.0203 [Google Scholar]