oa Ethnomethodology, culture, and implicature

References

1. Atkinson, J. M. , & P. Drew
   (1979) Order in court. London: Macmillan.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bilmes, J
   (1985) “Why that now?”: Two kinds of conversational meaning. Discourse Processes8: 319-355. doi: 10.1080/01638538509544620
   https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538509544620 [Google Scholar]
3. Bilmes, J
   (1986) Discourse and behavior. New York: Plenum. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4899‑2040‑9
   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2040-9 [Google Scholar]
4. Bilmes, J
   (1988) The concept of preference in conversation analysis. Language in Society17: 161-181. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500012744
   https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500012744 [Google Scholar]
5. Bilmes, J
   (1993) Dividing the rice: A microanalysis of the mediator’s role in a Northern Thai negotiation. Language in Society21: 569-602. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500015736
   https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500015736 [Google Scholar]
6. Bilmes, J
   (1994) Constituting silence: Life in the world of total meaning. Semiotica98: 73-87. doi: 10.1515/semi.1994.98.1‑2.73
   https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1994.98.1-2.73 [Google Scholar]
7. Bilmes, J
   . (in press) Negotiation and compromise: A microanalysis of a discussion in the Federal Trade Commission. In A. Firth (ed.) The discourse of negotiation: Studies of language in the workplace. Oxford: Pergamon.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Birdwhistell, R. L
   (1970) Kinesics and context: Essays on body motion communication. New York: Ballantine.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Button, G. , P. Drew , & J. Heritage
   (1986) Transcription notation. Human Studies9: 109-10. doi: 10.1007/BF00148122
   https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148122 [Google Scholar]
10. Fillmore, C.J. , P. Kay , & M.C. O’Connor
    (1988) Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language64: 501-538. doi: 10.2307/414531
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414531 [Google Scholar]
11. Garfinkel, H
    (1967) Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Garfinkel, H. , & D.L. Wieder
    (1992) Two incommensurable, asymmetrically alternative technologies of social analysis. In G. Watson & R. M. Seiler (eds.), Text in context: Contributions to ethnomethodology. Newbury Park, California: Sage, pp.175-206.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Geoghegan, W.H
    (1973) Natural information processing rules: Formal theory and applications to ethnography. Monographs of the Language-Behavior Research Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Grice, H.P
    (1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic, pp.41-58.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Horn, L.R
    (1984) Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. In D. Schiffrin (ed.), Meaning form, and use in context: Linguistic applications. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, pp.11-42.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Lee, J.R.E
    (1992) Language and culture: The linguistic analysis of culture. In G. Button (ed.), Ethnomethodology and the human sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.196-226.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Levinson, S.C
    (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Mehan, H
    (1991) The school’s work of sorting students. In D. Boden and D.H. Zimmerman (eds.), Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp.71-90.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Moerman, M
    (1988) Talking culture: Ethnography and conversation analysis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. doi: 10.9783/9780812200355
    https://doi.org/10.9783/9780812200355 [Google Scholar]
20. Sacks, H
    (1972) On the analyzability of stories by children. In J.J. Gumperz & D.H. Hymes (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp.325-45.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Sacks, H
    (1984) Notes on methodology. In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.21-27.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Sacks, H. , E. Schegloff , & G. Jefferson
    (1974) A simplest systematic« for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language50: 696-735. doi: 10.2307/412243
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412243 [Google Scholar]
23. Schegloff, E.A
    (1991) Reflections on talk and social structure. In D. Boden and D.H. Zimmerman (eds.), Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp.44-70.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Schegloff, E.A
    (1984) On some questions and ambiguities in conversation. In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.28-52.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Schegloff, E.A
    (1968) Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist70: 1075-95 doi: 10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030 [Google Scholar]
26. Schiffrin, D
    (1987) Toward an empirical base in pragmatics (review article). Language in Society16: 381-96. doi: 10.1017/S004740450001246X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450001246X [Google Scholar]
27. Wilson, T.P
    (1991) Social structure and the sequential organization of interaction. In D. Boden and D.H. Zimmerman (eds.), Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp.22-43.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Zimmerman, D.H
    (1993) Acknowledgment tokens and speakership incipiency revisited. Research on Language and Social Interaction26: 179-194. doi: 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2602_4
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2602_4 [Google Scholar]
29. Zimmerman, D.H. , & D.L. Wieder
    (1970) Ethnomethodology and the problem of order: Comment on Denzin. In J.D. Douglas (ed.), Understanding everyday life: Toward the reconstruction of sociological knowledge. Chicago: Aldine, pp.285-295.
    [Google Scholar]