Turn-initial ki ‘because’-clauses as a rhetorical responsive practice in Hebrew Facebook comments

References

1. Antaki, Charles
   1994 Explaining and Arguing: The Social Organization of Accounts. London: Sage.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Antaki, Charles
   1996 “Explanation Slots as Resources in Interaction.” British Journal of Social Psychology (): –. 10.1111/j.2044‑8309.1996.tb01105.x
   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1996.tb01105.x [Google Scholar]
3. Auer, Peter
   2014 “Syntactic Structures and Their Symbiotic Guests. Notes on Analepsis from the Perspective of On-Line Syntax.” Pragmatics (): –.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Azar, Mosha
   1990 “Towards Understanding of Focalized Sentences’ Structure in Contemporary Hebrew.” Hebrew — A Living Language: –. (In Hebrew).
   [Google Scholar]
5. Ben-Moshe, Yotam M., and Yael Maschler
   2024 “Requests for Confirmation Sequences in Hebrew.” Open Linguistics (): . 10.1515/opli‑2024‑0028
   https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2024-0028 [Google Scholar]
6. Bliboim, Rivka
   2013 “Causal Constructions.” InEncyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics: Vol. 1, A–F, ed. byGeoffry Khan, –. Leiden: Brill.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
   1992 “The Metapragmatics of Politeness in Israeli Society.” InPoliteness in Language: Studies in its History, Theory and Practice, ed. byRichard J. Watts, Sachiko Ide, and Konrad Ehlich, –. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bolden, Galina B.
   2010 “‘Articulating the Unsaid’ via and-Prefaced Formulations of Others’ Talk.” Discourse Studies (): –. 10.1177/1461445609346770
   https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445609346770 [Google Scholar]
9. Bolden, Galina B., and Jeffrey D. Robinson
   2011 “Soliciting Accounts with Why-Interrogatives in Conversation.” Journal of Communication (): –. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2010.01528.x
   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01528.x [Google Scholar]
10. Bolden, Galina B., Alexa Hepburn, and Jonathan Potter
    2019 “Subversive Completions: Turn-Taking Resources for Commandeering the Recipient’s Action in Progress.” Research on Language and Social Interaction (): –. 10.1080/08351813.2019.1608096
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2019.1608096 [Google Scholar]
11. Berman, Ruth A.
    2022 “Developmental Pathways in Child and Adult Hebrew: The Case of the Subordinator še-.” InDeveloping Language and Literacy: Studies in Honor of Dorit Diskin Ravid, ed. byRonit Levie, Amalia Bar-On, Orit Ashkenazi, Elitzur Dattner, and Gilad Brandes, –. Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑99891‑2_1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99891-2_1 [Google Scholar]
12. Buttny, Richard, and G. H. Morris
    2001 “Accounting.” InThe New Handbook of Language and Social Psychology, ed. byW. Peter Robinson, and Howard Giles, –. New York: John Wiley.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Calabria, Virginia, and Elwys De Stefani
    2024 “E anche-Prefaced Other-Expansions in Multi-Person Interaction: On the Interrelationship of Syntax and Mutual Gaze.” InNew Perspectives in Interactional Linguistic Research, ed. byMargaret Selting, and Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, –. John Benjamins. 10.1075/slsi.36.06cal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.36.06cal [Google Scholar]
14. Cohen-Achdut, Miri, and Leon Shor
    2024 “‘Does Being Pretty Help?’ The Use of Negation in Debut Interviews with Female Israeli Politicians.” Journal of Language and Politics (): –. 10.1075/jlp.22093.coh
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.22093.coh [Google Scholar]
15. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
    1996 “Intonation and Clause Combining in Discourse: The Case of Because.” Pragmatics (): –.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
    2011 “When Turns Start with Because: An Exercise in Interactional Syntax.” InConnectives in Synchrony and Diachrony in European Languages, ed. byAnneli Meurman-Solin, and Ursula Lenker. Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English, Vol. 8. Varieng. https://varieng.helsinki.fi/series/volumes/08/couper-kuhlen/
    [Google Scholar]
17. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
    2012 “Exploring Affiliation in the Reception of Conversational Complaint Stories.” InEmotion in Interaction, ed. byAnsi Peräkylä, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen, –. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199730735.003.0006
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199730735.003.0006 [Google Scholar]
18. Diessel, Holger
    2004 The Acquisition of Complex Sentences. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486531
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486531 [Google Scholar]
19. Diessel, Holger
    2005 “Competing Motivations for the Ordering of Main and Adverbial Clauses.” Linguistics (): –. 10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.449
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.449 [Google Scholar]
20. Diessel, Holger, and Katja Hetterle
    2011 “Causal Clauses: A Cross-Linguistic Investigation of Their Structure, Meaning, and Use.” InLinguistic Universals and Language Variation, ed. byPeter Siemund, –. Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110238068.23
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110238068.23 [Google Scholar]
21. Etelämäki, Marja, Trine Heinemann, and Anna Vatanen
    2021 “On Affiliation and Alignment: Non-Cooperative Uses of Anticipatory Completions in the Context of Tellings.” Discourse Studies (): –. 10.1177/14614456211017407
    https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456211017407 [Google Scholar]
22. Ford, Cecilia E.
    1993 Grammar in Interaction: Adverbial Clauses in American English Conversations. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511554278
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511554278 [Google Scholar]
23. Gawne, Lauren, and Gretchen McCulloch
    2019 “Emoji as Digital Gestures.” Language@Internet (). https://web.archive.org/web/20240127230708/https://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2019/gawne
    [Google Scholar]
24. Grice, H. Paul
    1975 “Logic and Conversation.” InSyntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, ed. byPeter Cole, and Jerry L. Morgan, –. New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004368811_003
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_003 [Google Scholar]
25. Günthner, Susanne
    1996 “The Prosodic Contextualization of Moral Work: An Analysis of Reproaches in ‘Why’-Formats.” InProsody in Conversation, ed. byElizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, and Margaret Selting, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511597862.009
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597862.009 [Google Scholar]
26. Haugh, Michael, and Yasuko Obana
    2015 “Transformative Continuations, (Dis)affiliation, and Accountability in Japanese Interaction.” Text and Talk (): –. 10.1515/text‑2015‑0015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2015-0015 [Google Scholar]
27. Haverkate, Henk
    1990 “A Speech Act Analysis of Irony.” Journal of Pragmatics (): –. 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90065‑L
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90065-L [Google Scholar]
28. Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa
    2004 “Shared Syntax: The Grammar of Co-constructions.” Journal of Pragmatics (): –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.05.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.05.007 [Google Scholar]
29. Hilpert, Martin
    2015 “Kollaborative Insubordination in gesprochenem Englisch: Konstruktion oder Umgang mit Konstruktionen.” InKonstruktionsgrammatik IV. Konstruktionen als soziale Konventionen und kognitive Routinen, ed. byAlexander Ziem, and Alexander Lasch, –. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Hirsch, Galia
    2017 “Who Is the Victim? When the Addresser of the Echoed Utterance and the Target of the Irony Differ.” Text and Talk (): –. 10.1515/text‑2017‑0003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2017-0003 [Google Scholar]
31. Inbar, Anna, and Yael Maschler
    2023 “Shared Knowledge as an Account for Disaffiliative Moves: Hebrew ki ‘Because’-Clauses Accompanied by the Palm Up Open Hand Gesture.” Research on Language and Social Interaction (): –. 10.1080/08351813.2023.2205302
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2023.2205302 [Google Scholar]
32. Inbar, Anna, and Yael Maschler
    2025 “Teasing via the [lo, ki ‘No, Because’ + Ironic Utterance] Structure in Hebrew Talk-in-Interaction.” Discourse Studies (): –. 10.1177/14614456241281723
    https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456241281723 [Google Scholar]
33. Johnson, Thomas J., and David D. Perlmutter
    2010 “Introduction: The Facebook Election.” Mass Communication and Society (): –. 10.1080/15205436.2010.517490
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2010.517490 [Google Scholar]
34. Katriel, Tamar
    1986 Talking Straight: Dugri Speech in Israeli Sabra Culture. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Katriel, Tamar
    1993 “Lefargen: A Study in Israeli Semantics of Social Relations.” Research on Language and Social Interaction (): –. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2601_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2601_2 [Google Scholar]
36. Katriel, Tamar
    1999 Keywords: Patterns of Culture and Communication in Israel. Haifa University and Zmora Bitan.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Katriel, Tamar
    2004 Dialogic Moments: From Soul Talks to Talk Radio in Israeli Culture. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Kohn, Ayelet, and Motti Neiger
    2007 “To Talk and to Talkback: Analyzing the Rhetoric of Talkbacks in Online Journalism.” InJournalism Dot Com: Online Newspapers in Israel, ed. byDan Kaspi, and Tehilla Schwartz-Altshuler, –. Jerusalem: Israel Democracy Institute. (In Hebrew).
    [Google Scholar]
39. Kopytowska, Monika
    2013 “Blogging as the Mediatization of Politics and a New Form of Social Interaction.” InAnalyzing Genres in Political Communication, ed. byPiotr Cap, and Urszula Okulska, –. John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.50.15kop
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.50.15kop [Google Scholar]
40. Koshik, Irene
    2005 Beyond Rhetorical Questions. John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.16
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.16 [Google Scholar]
41. Kruikemeier, Sanne
    2014 “How Political Candidates Use Twitter and the Impact on Votes.” Computers in Human Behavior: –. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.025
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.025 [Google Scholar]
42. Lehti, Lotta
    2011 “Blogging Politics in Various Ways: A Typology of French Politicians’ Blogs.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.11.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.11.017 [Google Scholar]
43. Lerner, Gene H.
    1991 “On the Syntax of Sentences-in-Progress.” Language in Society: –. 10.1017/S0047404500016572
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500016572 [Google Scholar]
44. Li, Xiaoting
    2016 “Some Discourse-Interactional Uses of yinwei ‘Because’ and Its Multimodal Production in Mandarin Conversation.” Language Sciences: –. 10.1016/j.langsci.2016.04.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2016.04.005 [Google Scholar]
45. Li, Xiaoting, and Jingyang Luo
    2019 “Some Interactional Functions of yinwei-Clauses in Mandarin Chinese Conversation.” InCurrent Studies in Chinese Language and Discourse: Global Context and Diverse Perspectives, ed. byYun Xiao, and Linda Tsung, –. Springer. 10.1075/scld.10.05li
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scld.10.05li [Google Scholar]
46. Livnat, Zohar
    2004 “On Verbal Irony, Meta-Linguistic Knowledge and Echoic Interpretation.” Pragmatics and Cognition (): –. 10.1075/pc.12.1.05liv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.12.1.05liv [Google Scholar]
47. Livnat, Zohar
    2022 Not so Funny: Verbal Irony as a Discourse Practice. Tel Aviv: Resling Publishing. (In Hebrew).
    [Google Scholar]
48. Livnat, Zohar, and Il-Il Yatziv
    2002 “Ki as a Causal Connective in Spoken and Written Modern Hebrew.” Balshanut Ivrit: –. (In Hebrew).
    [Google Scholar]
49. Livnat, Zohar, and Il-Il Yatziv
    2003 “Causality and Justification: The Causal Marker ki in Spoken Hebrew.” Revue de Semantique et Pragmatique: –.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Livnat, Zohar, and Pninah Shukrun-Nagar
    2025 “Compliments in Concessive Structure: A Corpus-Based Study of Comments to Politicians’ Facebook Posts.” Hebrew — A Living Language: –. (In Hebrew).
    [Google Scholar]
51. Manning, Nathan, Ruth Penfold-Mounce, Brian D. Loader, Ariadne Vromen, and Michael Xenos
    2017 “Politicians, Celebrities and Social Media: A Case of Informalisation?” Journal of Youth Studies (): –. 10.1080/13676261.2016.1206867
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2016.1206867 [Google Scholar]
52. Marmorstein, Michal, and Jennifer Sclafani
    2019 “The Talkback Genre: Practice and the Cultural Construal of Online Commenting in Israel.” Discourse, Context and Media: . 10.1016/j.dcm.2019.100321
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2019.100321 [Google Scholar]
53. Maschler, Yael
    2018 “The On-Line Emergence of Hebrew Insubordinate she- (‘That/Which/Who’) Clauses: A Usage-Based Perspective on So-Called ‘Subordination’.” Studies in Language (): –. 10.1075/sl.17065.mas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.17065.mas [Google Scholar]
54. Mehan, Hugh
    1979 “‘What Time Is It, Denise?’: Asking Known Information Questions in Classroom Discourse.” Theory into Practice: –. 10.1080/00405847909542846
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00405847909542846 [Google Scholar]
55. Nilsson, Bo
    2012 “Politicians’ Blogs: Strategic Self-Presentations and Identities.” Identity (): –. 10.1080/15283488.2012.691252
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15283488.2012.691252 [Google Scholar]
56. Ono, Tsuyoshi, and Sandra A. Thompson
    1996 “Interaction and Syntax in the Structure of Conversational Discourse: Collaboration, Overlap, and Syntactic Dissociation.” InComputational and Conversational Discourse: Burning Issues — An Interdisciplinary Account, ed. byEduard H. Hovy, and Donia R. Scott, –. Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑662‑03293‑0_3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-03293-0_3 [Google Scholar]
57. Robinson, Jeffrey G.
    2016 “Accountability in Social Interaction.” InAccountability in Social Interaction, ed. byJeffrey G. Robinson, –. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210557.003.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210557.003.0001 [Google Scholar]
58. Rönnqvist, Sara
    2024 “Securing Sufficient Uptake and Sequence Progression — För att (‘Because’)-Prefaced Self-Continuations and Gesture in Swedish Talk-in-Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2024.06.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2024.06.012 [Google Scholar]
59. Sbisà, Marina
    2024 “Is Commenting an Expositive Illocutionary Act?” Pragmatics and Cognition (): –. 10.1075/pc.24015.sbi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.24015.sbi [Google Scholar]
60. Shor, Leon, Zohar Livnat, and Pnina Shukrun-Nagar
    . Submitted. “The Ironic Functions of the Turn-Initial [lo ki ‘No Because’ X] Construction in Hebrew Facebook Comments.”
    [Google Scholar]
61. Shukrun-Nagar, Pnina
    2013 “The Construction of Paradoxes in News Discourse: The Coverage of the Israeli ‘Haredi’ Community as a Case in Point.” Discourse Studies (): –. 10.1177/1461445613482432
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445613482432 [Google Scholar]
62. Shukrun-Nagar, Pnina
    2019 “‘Well, Yair? When Will You Be Prime Minister?’: Different Readings of Ordinariness in a Politician’s Facebook Post as a Case in Point.” InThe Construction of Ordinariness Across Media Genres, ed. byAnita Fetzer, and Elda Weizman, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.307.05shu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.307.05shu [Google Scholar]
63. Shukrun-Nagar, Pnina
    2020a “‘Hero, Genius, King, and Messiah’: Ironic Echoing in Pro-Ethos and Anti-Ethos Readers’ Comments on Facebook Posts.” InThe Discourse of Indirectness: Cues, Voices and Functions, ed. byZohar Livnat, Pnina Shukrun-Nagar, and Galia Hirsch, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.316.03shu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.316.03shu [Google Scholar]
64. Shukrun-Nagar, Pnina
    2020b “The Right to Speak and the Request to Remain Silent: Who Owns Politicians’ Facebook Pages?” Israel Affairs (): –. 10.1080/13537121.2020.1697483
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13537121.2020.1697483 [Google Scholar]
65. Shukrun-Nagar, Pnina, and Zohar Livnat
    2024 “Specified Compliments in Comments to Politicians’ Facebook Posts: Champion, Loser, or Both?” Pragmatics and Cognition (): –. 10.1075/pc.24008.shu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.24008.shu [Google Scholar]
66. Sidnell, Jack
    2012 “Turn-Continuation by Self and by Other.” Discourse Processes (): –. 10.1080/0163853X.2012.654760
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2012.654760 [Google Scholar]
67. Song, Zuoyan, and Hongyin Tao
    2009 “A Unified Account of Causal Clause Sequences in Mandarin Chinese and Its Implications.” Studies in Language (): –. 10.1075/sl.33.1.04son
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.33.1.04son [Google Scholar]
68. Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
    1981 “Irony and the Use-Mention Distinction.” InRadical Pragmatics, ed. byPeter Cole, –. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
69. Tao, Hongyin, and Michael J. McCarthy
    2001 “Understanding Non-Restrictive Which-Clauses in Spoken English, Which Is Not an Easy Thing.” Language Sciences: –. 10.1016/S0388‑0001(00)00026‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0388-0001(00)00026-7 [Google Scholar]
70. Trammell, Kaye D., Andrzej Tarkowski, Jakub Hofmokl, and Alexander M. Sapp
    2006 “Rzeczpospolita blogów [Republic of Blog]: Examining Polish Bloggers Through Content Analysis.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (): –. 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2006.00032.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00032.x [Google Scholar]
71. Weizman, Elda
    2000 “News Interviews on Israeli Television: Normative Expectations and Discourse Norms.” Dialogue Analysis 200, ed. byMarina Bondi, and Sorin Stati, –. De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
72. Wilson, Deidre, and Dan Sperber
    1992 “On Verbal Irony.” Lingua: –. 10.1016/0024‑3841(92)90025‑E
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(92)90025-E [Google Scholar]