oa Enacting ‘Being with You’

References

1. Androutsopoulos, Jannis
   1998 Deutsche Jugendsprache. Untersuchungen zu ihren Strukturen und Funktionen. [German youth language. Investigations of its structures and functions.] Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Auer, Peter
   1996 “The Pre-front Field Position in Spoken German and its Relevance as a Grammaticalization Position.” Pragmatics6 (3): 295–322. 10.1075/prag.6.3.03aue
   https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.6.3.03aue [Google Scholar]
3. Auer, Peter
   2005 “Projection in Interaction and Projection in Grammar.” Text25 (1): 7–36. 10.1515/text.2005.25.1.7
   https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2005.25.1.7 [Google Scholar]
4. Auer, Peter, and Jan Lindström
   2016 “Left/right Asymmetries and the Grammar of Pre- vs. Post-positioning in German and Swedish Talk-in-interaction.” Language Sciences56: 68–92. 10.1016/j.langsci.2016.03.001
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2016.03.001 [Google Scholar]
5. Auer, Peter, and Anja Stukenbrock
   2018 “When ‘you’ means ‘I’: The German 2nd Ps.Sg. Pronoun du between Genericity and Subjectivity.” Open Linguistics4: 280–309. 10.1515/opli‑2018‑0015
   https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2018-0015 [Google Scholar]
6. Benveniste, Emile
   1966 Problèmes de linguistique générale. [Problems in general linguistics]. Paris: Éditions Gallimard.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bergmann, Jörg
   1990 “On the Local Sensitivity of Conversation.” InThe Dynamics of Dialogue, ed. byIvana Markovà, and Klaus Foppa, 201–226. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Biq, Yung-O.
   1991 “The Multiple Uses of the Second Singular Pronoun ni in Conversational Mandarin.” Journal of Pragmatics44: 929–957.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Bladas, Òscar, and Neus Nogué
   2016 “‘Que bé tu!’: An Emerging Emphatic Use of the Second Person Singular Pronoun tu (you) in Spoken Catalan.” Pragmatics26 (3): 473–500. 10.1075/prag.26.3.06bla
   https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.26.3.06bla [Google Scholar]
10. Brown, Roger, and Albert Gilman
    1960 “The Pronouns of Power and Solidarity.” InStyle in Language, ed. byThomas A. Sebeok, 253–276. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson
    1987 Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
12. Bühler, Karl
    1934/1965 Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. [Language theory. The representational function of language.] Stuttgart: Fischer.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Butler, Carly W., Susan Danby, and Michael Emmison
    2011 “Address Terms in Turn Beginnings: Managing Disalignment and Disaffiliation in Telephone Counseling.” Research on Language and Social Interaction44 (4): 338–358. 10.1080/08351813.2011.619311
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2011.619311 [Google Scholar]
14. Clayman, Steven
    2010 “Address Terms in the Service of Other Actions: The Case of News Interview Talk.” Discourse & Communication4 (2): 161–183. 10.1177/1750481310364330
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481310364330 [Google Scholar]
15. Clayman, Steven
    2012 “Address Terms in the Organization of Turns at Talk: The Case of Pivotal Turn Extensions.” Journal of Pragmatics44: 1853–1867. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.08.001 [Google Scholar]
16. Clayman, Steven
    2013 “Agency in Response: The Role of Prefatory Address Terms.” Journal of Pragmatics57: 290–302. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.12.001 [Google Scholar]
17. Clyne, Michael, Catrin Norrby, and Jane Warren
    2009 Language and Human Relations. Styles of Address in Contemporary Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511576690
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511576690 [Google Scholar]
18. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
    2004 “Prosody and Sequence Organization in English Conversation. The Case of New Beginnings.” InSound Patterns in Interaction, ed. byElizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, and Cecilia E. Ford, 335–376. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.62.17cou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.62.17cou [Google Scholar]
19. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
    2009 “Relatedness and Timing in Talk-in-interaction.” InWhere Prosody Meets Pragmatics, ed. byDagmar Barth-Weingarten, Nicole Dehé, and Anne Wichmann, 257–276. Bingley: Emerald. 10.1163/9789004253223_012
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004253223_012 [Google Scholar]
20. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, and Margret Selting
    2017 Interactional Linguistics. Studying Language in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
21. d’Avis, Franz, and Jörg Meibauer
    2013 “Du Idiot! Din idiot! Pseudo-vocative Constructions and Insults in German (and Swedish).” InVocative! Addressing between System and Performance, ed. byBarbara Sonnenhauser, and Patrizia Noel Aziz Hanna, 189–217. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110304176.189
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110304176.189 [Google Scholar]
22. Deppermann, Arnulf
    2013 “Turn-design at Turn-beginnings: Multimodal Resources to Deal with Tasks of Turn-construction in German.” Journal of Pragmatics46: 91–121. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.07.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.07.010 [Google Scholar]
23. Deppermann, Arnulf, and Susanne Günthner
    2015 “Introduction: Temporality in Interaction.” InTemporality in Interaction, ed. byArnulf Deppermann, and Susanne Günthner, 1–26. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Deppermann, Arnulf, and Jürgen Streeck
    (eds.) 2018 Time in Embodied Interaction. Synchronicity and Sequentiality of Multimodal Resources. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.293
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.293 [Google Scholar]
25. Droste, Pepe
    2018 Korpus ‚Multimodale Interaktion‘ [Corpus ‘multimodal interaction’]. University of Münster.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Droste, Pepe, and Susanne Günthner
    2020 “‚das mAchst du bestimmt AUCH du;‘: Zum Zusammenspiel syntaktischer, prosodischer und sequenzieller Aspekte syntaktisch desintegrierter du-Formate. [‘das mAchst du bestimmt AUCH du;’: On the interplay of syntactic, prosodic and sequential aspects syntactically disintegrated formats of du.]” InProsodie und Konstruktionsgrammatik. [Construction Grammar and Prosody], ed. byWolfgang Imo, and Jens Philipp Lanwer, 75–110. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Goffman, Ervin
    1963 Behavior in Public Places. Notes on the Social Organization of Gatherings. New York: The Free Press.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Goffman, Ervin
    1971 Relations in Public. Microstudies of the Public Order. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Goffman, Ervin
    1981 Forms of Talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Goodwin, Charles
    1980 “Restarts, Pauses, and the Achievement of Mutual Gaze at Turn-beginning.” Sociological Inquiry50 (3–4): 272–302. 10.1111/j.1475‑682X.1980.tb00023.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1980.tb00023.x [Google Scholar]
31. Goodwin, Charles
    1981 Conversational Organization. Interaction between Speakers and Hearers. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Goodwin, Charles, and Marjorie H. Goodwin
    2004 “Participation.” InA Companion to Linguistic Anthropology, ed. byAlessandro Duranti, 222–244. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Günthner, Susanne
    2016 “Praktiken erhöhter Dialogizität: onymische Anredeformen als Gesten personifizierter Zuwendung. [Practices of increased dialogism: Onymic forms of address as gestures of personified other-orientation.]” Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik44 (3): 406–436. 10.1515/zgl‑2016‑0022
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zgl-2016-0022 [Google Scholar]
34. Günthner, Susanne
    2019 “Namentliche Anreden in onkologischen Aufklärungsgesprächen: eine interaktional ausgerichtete Studie zu Formen und Funktionen onymischer Anreden. [Onymic address in oncologic briefings: An interactional-oriented study of the forms and functions of onymic address.]” Arbeitspapiere Sprache und Interaktion (SpIn)82.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Hewitt, John P., and Stokes, Randall
    1975 “Disclaimers.” American Sociological Review40 (1): 1–11. 10.2307/2094442
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2094442 [Google Scholar]
36. Hickey, Raymond
    2003 “The German Address System: Binary and Scalar at once.” InDiachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems, ed. byIrma Taavitsainen, and Andreas H. Jucker, 401–425. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.107.16hic
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107.16hic [Google Scholar]
37. Jakobson, Roman
    1957/1971 “Shifters, Verbal Categories, and the Russian Verb”. InSelected Writings, Vol.2, 130–147. The Hague: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Jespersen, Otto
    1923 Language. Its Nature, Development, and Origin. New York: Allen & Unwin.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Kendon, Adam
    1990 Conducting Interaction. Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Kretzenbacher, Heinz L.
    1991 “Vom Sie zum Du – und retour? [From Sie to Du – and back?]” InVom Sie zum Du – mehr als eine neue Konvention? [From Sie to Du – More than a new convention?], ed. byHeinz L. Kretzenbacher, and Wulf Segebrecht, 9–78. Hamburg/Zürich: Luchterhand.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Kretzenbacher, Heinz L.
    2010 “‚Man ordnet ja bestimmte Leute irgendwo ein für sich…‘ Anrede und soziale Deixis. [‘Man ordnet ja bestimmte Leute irgendwo ein für sich…’ Address and social deixis.]” Deutsche Sprache38: 1–18.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Lerner, Gene H.
    1996 “On the Place of Linguistic Resources in the Organization of Talk-in-Interaction: ‘Second Person’ Reference in Multi-Party Conversation.” Pragmatics6 (3): 281–294. 10.1075/prag.6.3.02ler
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.6.3.02ler [Google Scholar]
43. Lerner, Gene H.
    2003 “Selecting Next Speaker: The Context-sensitive Operation of a Context-free Organization.” Language in Society32 (2): 177–201. 10.1017/S004740450332202X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450332202X [Google Scholar]
44. Liebscher, Grit, Jennifer Dailey-O’Cain, Mareike Müller, and Tetyana Reichert
    2010 “Negotiating Identities through Pronouns of Address in an Immigrant Community.” Pragmatics20 (3): 375–400. 10.1075/prag.20.3.04lie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20.3.04lie [Google Scholar]
45. Lindström, Anna, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
    2013 Affiliation in Conversation. InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. byJack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 350–369. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Lindström, Jan
    2014 “On the Place of Turn and Sequence in Grammar. Verb-first Clausal Constructions in Swedish Talk-in-interaction.” Pragmatics24 (3): 507–532. 10.1075/prag.24.3.04lin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.24.3.04lin [Google Scholar]
47. Mondada, Lorenza
    2009 “Emergent Focused Interactions in Public Places: A Systematic Analysis of the Multimodal Achievement of a Common Interactional Space.” Journal of Pragmatics41: 1977–1997. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.019
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.019 [Google Scholar]
48. Mondada, Lorenza
    2013a “Embodied and Spatial Resources for Turn-taking in Institutional Multi-party Interactions: Participatory Democracy Debates.” Journal of Pragmatics46, 39–68. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.03.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.03.010 [Google Scholar]
49. Mondada, Lorenza
    2013b “Interactional Space and the Study of Embodied Talk-in-interaction.” InSpace in Language and Linguistics. Geographical, Interactional, and Cognitive Perspectives, ed. byPeter Auer, Martin Hilpert, Anja Stukenbrock, and Benedikt Szmrecsanyi, 247–275. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110312027.247
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110312027.247 [Google Scholar]
50. Mondada, Lorenza
    2018 “Multiple Temporalities of Language and Body in Interaction: Challenges for Transcribing Multimodality.” InResearch on Language and Social Interaction51 (1): 85–106. 10.1080/08351813.2018.1413878
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1413878 [Google Scholar]
51. Mortensen, Kristian
    2009 “Establishing Recipiency in Pre-beginning Position in the Second Language Classroom.” Discourse Processes46 (5): 491–515. 10.1080/01638530902959463
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530902959463 [Google Scholar]
52. Oh, Sun-Young
    2007 “Overt Reference to Speaker and Recipient in Korean.” Discourse Studies9 (4): 462–492. 10.1177/1461445607079163
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607079163 [Google Scholar]
53. Raymond, Geoffrey
    2003 “Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding.” American Sociological Review68 (6): 939–967. 10.2307/1519752
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1519752 [Google Scholar]
54. Raymond, Chase
    2016 “Linguistic Reference in the Negotiation of Identity and Action: Revisiting the T/V Distinction.” Language92 (3): 636–670. 10.1353/lan.2016.0053
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2016.0053 [Google Scholar]
55. Rendle-Short, Johanna
    2007 “‘Catherine, you’re Wasting your Time’: Address Terms within the Australian Political Interview.” Journal of Pragmatics39: 1503–1525. 10.1016/j.pragma.2007.02.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.02.006 [Google Scholar]
56. Rendle-Short, Johanna
    2011 “Address Terms in the Australian Political News Interview.” InTalking Politics in Broadcast Media. Cross-cultural Perspectives on Political Interviewing, Journalism and Accountability, ed. byMats Ekström, and Marianna Patrona, 93–111. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.42.09ren
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.42.09ren [Google Scholar]
57. Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
    1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language50 (4): 696–735. 10.1353/lan.1974.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
58. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1996 “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” InInteraction and Grammar, ed. byElinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620874.002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.002 [Google Scholar]
59. Schütz, Alfred, and Thomas Luckmann
    1973 The Structures of the Life-World. London: Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Schwitalla, Johannes
    1995 “Namen in Gesprächen. [Names in conversations.]” InNamenforschung. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Onomastik [Onomastics. An international handbook on onomastics], ed. byErnst Eichler, Gerold Hilty, Heinrich Löffler, Hugo Steger, and Ladislav Zgusta, 498–504. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Schwitalla, Johannes
    2010 “Kommunikative Funktionen von Sprecher- und Adressatennamen in Gesprächen. [Communicative functions of names of speakers and addressees in conversations.]” InEigennamen in der gesprochenen Sprache [Proper names in spoken language], ed. byNicolas Pepin, and Elwys De Stefani, 197–199. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
62. Selting, Margret
    2011 “A System for Transcribing Talk-in-interaction: GAT 2. Translated and adapted for English by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen and Dagmar Barth-Weingarten.” Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion12: 1–51.
    [Google Scholar]
63. Simon, Horst
    2003 “From Pragmatics to Grammar: Tracing the Development of ‘Respect’ in the History of the German Pronouns of Address.” InDiachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems, ed. byIrma Taavitsainen, and Andreas H. Jucker, 85–123. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.107.06sim
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107.06sim [Google Scholar]
64. Stivers, Tanya
    2008 “Stance, Alignment, and Affiliation during Storytelling: When Nodding is a Token of Affiliation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction41 (1): 31–57. 10.1080/08351810701691123
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810701691123 [Google Scholar]
65. Stivers, Tanya, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig
    2011 “Knowledge, Morality and Affiliation in Social Interaction.” InThe Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, ed. byTanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig, 3–26. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511921674.002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921674.002 [Google Scholar]
66. Stivers, Tanya, and Federico Rossano
    2010 “Mobilizing Response.” Research on Language and Social Interaction43 (1): 3–31. 10.1080/08351810903471258
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810903471258 [Google Scholar]
67. Wootton, Anthony J.
    1981 “Children’s Use of Address Terms.” InAdult–Child Conversations, ed. byPeter French, and Margaret Maclure, 142–158. London: Croom Helm.
    [Google Scholar]
68. Zifonun, Gisela, Ludger Hoffmann, and Bruno Strecker
    1997 Grammatik der deutschen Sprache. [Grammar of German language.] Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]