Japanese turn-final tteyuu as a formulation device

References

1. Antaki, Charles, Rebecca Barnes, and Ivan Leudar
   2005 “Diagnostic Formulations in Psychotherapy.” Discourse Studies7 (6): 627–647. 10.1177/1461445605055420
   https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605055420 [Google Scholar]
2. Bilmes, Jack
   2011 “Occasioned Semantics: A Systematic Approach to Meaning in Talk.” Human Studies34: 129–153. 10.1007/s10746‑011‑9183‑z
   https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-011-9183-z [Google Scholar]
3. Bolden, Galina
   2010 “‘Articulating the Unsaid’ via And-prefaced Formulations of Others’ Talk.” Discourse Studies12 (1): 5–32. 10.1177/1461445609346770
   https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445609346770 [Google Scholar]
4. Depperman, Arnulf
   2011 “The Study of Formulations as a Key to an Interactional Semantics.” Human Studies34: 115–128. 10.1007/s10746‑011‑9187‑8
   https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-011-9187-8 [Google Scholar]
5. Drew, Paul
   2003 “Comparative Analysis of Talk-in-Interaction in Different Institutional Settings: A Sketch.” InStudies in Language and Social Interaction: In Honor of Robert Hopper, ed. byPhillip. J. Glenn, Curtis. D. LeBaron, and Jennifer Mandelbaum, 293–308. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Drew, Paul, and John Heritage
   1992 “Introduction: Analysing Talk at Work.” InTalk at Work, ed. byPaul Drew, and John Heritage, 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Duranti, Alessandro
   2009 “The Relevance of Husserl’s Theory to Language Socialization.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology19 (2): 205–226. 10.1111/j.1548‑1395.2009.01031.x
   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1395.2009.01031.x [Google Scholar]
8. Ford, Cecilia E., and Sandra A. Thompson
   1996 “Interactional Units in Conversation: Syntactic, Intonational and Pragmatic Resources for the Management of Turns.” InInteraction and Grammar, ed. byElinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson, 134–184. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620874.003
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.003 [Google Scholar]
9. Garfinkel, Harold, and Harvey Sacks
   1970 “On Formal Structures of Practical Actions.” InTheoretical Sociology, ed. byJohn D. McKinney, and Edward. A. Tiryakian, 337–366. New York: Appleton-Century Crofts.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Hauser, Eric
    2011 “Generalization: A Practice of Situated Categorization in Talk.” Human Studies34 (2): 183–198. 10.1007/s10746‑011‑9184‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-011-9184-y [Google Scholar]
11. Hayano, Kaoru
    2011 “Claiming Epistemic Primacy in Japanese: Yo-marked Assessments in Japanese.” InThe Molarity of Knowledge in Conversation, ed. byTanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig, 58–81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511921674.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921674.004 [Google Scholar]
12. Hayano, Kaoru
    2013 “Territories of Knowledge in Japanese Conversation.” PhD diss.Radboud UniversityNijmegen.
13. Hayano, Kaoru
    2018 “When (Not) to Claim Epistemic Independence: The Use of Ne and Yone in Japanese Conversation.” East Asian Pragmatics2 (2): 163–193. 10.1558/eap.34740
    https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.34740 [Google Scholar]
14. Hayashi, Makoto
    2009 “Marking a ‘Noticing of Departure’ in Talk: Eh-prefaced Turns in Japanese Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics41 (10): 2100–2129. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.12.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.12.008 [Google Scholar]
15. Hayashi, Makoto
    2010 “An Overview of the Question-Response System in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics42: 2685–702. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.006 [Google Scholar]
16. Hayashi, Makoto, Yuri Hosoda, and Ikuyo Morimoto
    2019 “Tte yuu ka as a Repair Preface in Japanese.” Research on Language and Social Interaction52 (2): 104–123. 10.1080/08351813.2019.1608093
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2019.1608093 [Google Scholar]
17. Heritage, John
    1984 Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge/New York: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Heritage, John
    1985 “Analyzing News Interviews.” InHandbook of Discourse Analysis. Vol. 3, ed. byTeun. A. van Dijk, 95–117. London: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Heritage, John
    2007 “Intersubjectivity and Progressivity in Person (and Place) Reference.” InPerson Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, ed. byTanya Stivers, and N. J. Enfield, 255–280. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486746.012
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486746.012 [Google Scholar]
20. Heritage, John, and Rod D. Watson
    1979 “Formulations as Conversational Objects.” InEveryday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. byGeorge Psathas, 123–162. New York: Irvington.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Hutchby, Ian
    2005 “‘Active Listening’: Formulations and the Elicitation of Feelings Talk in Child Counselling.” Research on Language and Social Interaction38 (3): 303–329. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3803_4
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3803_4 [Google Scholar]
22. Iwasaki, Shoichi
    1993 Subjectivity in Grammar and Discourse: Theoretical Considerations and a Case Study of Japanese Spoken Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.2 [Google Scholar]
23. Jefferson, Gail
    1983 “Two Explorations of the Organizations of Overlapping Talk in Conversation: (a) Notes on Some Orderliness of Overlap Onset and (b) On a Failed Hypothesis: ‘Conjunctionals’ as Overlap-vulnerable.” Tilburg Papers in Language and Literature28: 1–33.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Jefferson, Gail
    1984 “On Stepwise Transition from Talk about a Trouble to Inappropriately Next-positioned Matters.” InStructures of Social Action, ed. byJ. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 191–221. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Jefferson, Gail
    1987 “On Exposed and Embedded Correction in Conversation.” InTalk and Social Organization, ed. byGraham Button, and John. R. E. Lee, 86–100. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Jefferson, Gail
    1993 “Caveat Speaker: Preliminary Notes on Recipient Topic-shift Implicature.” Research on Language and Social Interaction26: 1–30. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2601_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2601_1 [Google Scholar]
27. Jefferson, Gail, and John R. E. Lee
    1992 “The Rejection of Advice: Managing the Problematic Convergence of a ‘Troubles-telling’ and a ‘Service Encounter’.” InTalk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. byPaul Drew, and John Heritage, 521–48. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Kato, Yoko
    2010 Hanashi-kotoba ni okeru Inyoo-hyoogen [Quotative Expressions in Spoken Language]. Tokyo: Kurosio Syuppan.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Kim, Joungmin
    2014 “Kankokugo no inyoo-shuushokusetsu no shusetsu-ka: Nihongo tono taihi o tsuujite. [Main clause phenomena of quotatitve clauses in Korean: Contrast with Japanese].” InNihongo fukubun-koobun no kenkyuu [Form and meaning in Japanese complex sentence constructions], ed. byTakashi Masuoka, Motoo Oshima, Osamu Hashimoto, Kaoru Horie, Naoko Maeda, and Takehiko Maruyama, 695–717. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Koda, Naomi
    2015 “Using Reported Thought and Speech to Enhance a Story.” The Japanese Journal of Language in Society17 (2): 24–39.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Kushida, Shuya
    2011 “Confirming Understanding and Acknowledging Assistance: Managing Trouble Responsibility in Response to Understanding Check in Japanese Talk-in-interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics43 (11): 2716–2739. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.011 [Google Scholar]
32. Labov, William, and David Fanshel
    1977 Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Lerner, Gene H.
    2004 “On the Place of Linguistic Resources in the Organization of Talk-in-Interaction: Grammar as Action in Prompting a Speaker to Elaborate.” Research on Language and Social Interaction37 (2): 154–184. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3702_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3702_3 [Google Scholar]
34. Levinson, Stephen C.
    1987 “Pragmatics and the Grammar of Anaphora.” Journal of Linguistics23: 379–434. 10.1017/S0022226700011324
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700011324 [Google Scholar]
35. Matsumoto, Yoshiko
    2018 “The Form and Meaning of the Dangling Mitaina Construction in a Network of Constructions.” InPragmatics of Japanese: Perspectives on Grammar, Interaction and Culture, ed. byMutsuko E. Hudson, Yoshiko Matsumoto, and Junko Mori, 75–98. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.285.03mat
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.285.03mat [Google Scholar]
36. Maynard, Douglas. W.
    2003 Bad News, Good News: Conversational Order in Everyday Talk and Clinical Settings. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Mori, Junko
    2006 “The Workings of the Japanese Token Hee in Informing Sequences: An Analysis of Sequential Content, Turn Shape, and Prosody.” Journal of Pragmatics38: 1175–1205. 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.05.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.05.004 [Google Scholar]
38. Ohori, Toshio
    1995 “Remarks on Suspended Clauses: A Contribution to Japanese Phraseology.” InEssays in Semantics and Pragmatics: In Honor of Charles J. Fillmore, ed. byMasayoshi Shibatani, and Sandra A. Thompson, 201–218. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.32.11oho
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.32.11oho [Google Scholar]
39. Ohori, Toshio
    1997 “Framing Effects in Japanese Non-final Clauses: Toward an Optimal Grammar-Pragmatics Interface.” Proceedings of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: General Session and Parasession on Pragmatics and Grammatical Structure: 471–480. 10.3765/bls.v23i1.1270
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v23i1.1270 [Google Scholar]
40. Ono, Toshio
    1987 “TE, I, and RU Clauses in Japanese Recipes: A Quantitative Study.” Studies in Language14: 73–92. 10.1075/sl.14.1.04ono
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.14.1.04ono [Google Scholar]
41. Ono, Tsuyoshi, Sandra. A. Thompson, and Yumi Sasaki
    2012 “Japanese Negotiation through Emerging Final Particles in Everyday Talk.” Discourse Processes49 (3–4): 243–272. 10.1080/0163853X.2012.664759
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2012.664759 [Google Scholar]
42. Raymond, Geoffrey
    2004 “Prompting Action: The Stand-alone ‘So’ in Ordinary Conversation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction37 (2): 185–218. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3702_4
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3702_4 [Google Scholar]
43. Raymond, Geoffrey
    2009 “Grammar and Social Relations: Alternative Forms of Yes/No-type Initiating Actions in Health Visitor Interactions.” InWhy Do You Ask?: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. byAlice F. Freed, and Susan Ehrlich, 87–107. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195306897.003.0005
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195306897.003.0005 [Google Scholar]
44. Sacks, Harvey
    1992 Lectures on Conversation. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Sacks, Harvey
    1995 Lectures on Conversation. Vol. 2. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444328301
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444328301 [Google Scholar]
46. Sacks, Harvey, Emmanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
    1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-taking for Conversation.” Language50: 696–735. 10.1353/lan.1974.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
47. Schegloff, Emmanuel. A.
    1982 “Discourse as an Interactional Achievement: Some Uses of ‘Uh huh’ and Other Things That Come between Sentences.” InGeorgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics: Analyzing Discourse: Text and Talk, ed. byDeborah Tannen, 71–93. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Schegloff, Emmanuel A.
    1996a “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” InInteraction and Grammar, ed. byElinor Ochs, Emmanuel 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]
49. Schegloff, Emmanuel A.
    1996b “Confirming Allusions: Toward an Empirical Account of Action.” American Journal of Sociology104 (1): 161–216. 10.1086/230911
    https://doi.org/10.1086/230911 [Google Scholar]
50. Schegloff, Emmanuel A.
    2004 “On Dispensability.” Research on Language and Social Interaction37 (2): 95–149. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3702_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3702_2 [Google Scholar]
51. Schegloff, Emmanuel A.
    2007 Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
52. Sidnell, Jack
    2010 Conversation Analysis: An Introduction. Malden, Massachusetts: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Steensig, Jakob, and Tine Larsen
    2008 “Affiliative and Disaffiliative Uses of You Say X Questions.” Discourse Studies10 (1): 113–33. 10.1177/1461445607085593
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607085593 [Google Scholar]
54. 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]
55. Tanaka, Hiroko
    1999 Turn-taking in Japanese Conversation: A Study in Grammar and Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.56
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.56 [Google Scholar]
56. Uemura, Takashi
    2014 “On Functions of Japanese -Toiu in So-called Suspended-sentence: An Investigation on Usage as a Sentence-final Particle.” Papers in linguistic science20: 31–48.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Usami, Mayumi
    ed 2021 BTSJ-Japanese Natural Conversation Corpus with Transcripts and Recordings (March, 2021), NINJAL Institute-based Projects: Multiple Approaches to Analyzing the Communication of Japanese Language Learners.
    [Google Scholar]