1887
Language as Action
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139
Preview this article:
Zoom in
Zoomout

Language as action, Page 1 of 1

| /docserver/preview/fulltext/aral.30.3.01nev-1.gif

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.2104/aral0730
2007-01-01
2019-10-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ardington, A. M.
    2003 ‘Alliance building in girls’ talk: A conversational accomplishment of playful negotiation’. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics26 (1): 38–54.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Arminen, I.
    2005Institutional Interaction: Studies of Talk at Work. Aldershot: Ashgate.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Astbury, V.
    1994 ‘The use of turn-taking resources in a Khmer-Australian English conversation’.InSpoken Interaction Studies in Australia, edited by Gardner, R. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics SeriesS11: 173–184. Melbourne: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Atkinson, J. M. ; Heritage. J.
    editors 1984Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Austin, J. L.
    1962How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Barraja-Rohan, A. M.
    1994 ‘A very delayed acceptance to an invitation in a French conversation’.InSpoken Interaction Studies in Australia, edited by Gardner, R. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics SeriesS11: 153–172. Melbourne: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 1997 ‘Teaching conversation and sociocultural norms with conversation analysis’. InTeaching Language Teaching Culture, edited by Liddicoat, A.J. and Crozet, C. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics SeriesS14. Melbourne: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Brumfit, C.
    1997 ‘Theoretical practice: Applied linguistics as pure and practical science’. InApplied Linguistics Across Disciplines, edited by Mauranen, A. and Sajavaara, K. AILA Review121995/6: 18–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2004 ‘Applied linguistics in 2004. Unity in diversity?’ InWorld Applied Linguistics. A Celebration of 40 Years of AILA, edited by Gass, S. M. and Makoni, S. AILA Review17: 133–136.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Canale, M.
    1983 ‘From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy’. InLanguage and Communication, edited by Richards, J.C. and Schmidt, R. W. New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Canale, M. ; Swain, M.
    1980 ‘Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing’. Applied Linguistics1: 1–47. doi: 10.1093/applin/1.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/1.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  12. Coupland, N. ; Sarangi, S. ; Candlin, C.N.
    editors 2001Sociolinguistics and Social Theory. London: Pearson.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Davies, A. ; Elder, C.
    editors 2004The Handbook of Applied Linguistics. Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. doi: 10.1002/9780470757000
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757000 [Google Scholar]
  14. Döpke, S. ; >Brown, A. ; Liddicoat, A. ; Love, K.
    1994 ‘Closings in talkback radio: Institutional effects on conversational routines’. InSpoken Interaction Studies in Australia, edited by Gardner, R. 21–46. Melbourne: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Drew, P.
    2005 ‘Conversation analysis’. InHandbook of Language and Social Interaction, edited by Fitch, K. L. and Sanders, R. E. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Drew, P. ; Heritage, J.
    editors 1992Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. editors 2006Conversation Analysis. Four Volumes. London: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781446261156
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446261156 [Google Scholar]
  18. Drew, P. ; Raymond, G. ; Weinberg, D.
    editors 2006Talk and Interaction in Social Research Methods. London: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781849209991
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209991 [Google Scholar]
  19. Emmison, M.
    1993 ‘On the analyzability of conversational fabrication: A conceptual inquiry and single case example’. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics16 (1): 83–108.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Filipi, A.
    1994 ‘Interaction in an Italian oral test: The role of some expansion sequences’. InSpoken Interaction Studies in Australia, edited by Gardner, R. 119–136. Melbourne: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 1998 ‘Interaction or interrogation? A study of talk occurring in a sample of the 1992 VCE Italian oral common assessment talk (Cat 2)’. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics21 (2): 123–137.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Firth, A. ; Wagner, J.
    1997 ‘On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in second language acquisition research’. Modern Language Journal81 (3): 285–300. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.1997.tb05480.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1997.tb05480.x [Google Scholar]
  23. 1998 ‘SLA property: No trespassing! A reply’. Modern Language Journal82 (1): 91–94. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.1998.tb02598.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb02598.x [Google Scholar]
  24. Francis, D. ; Hester, S.
    2004An Invitation to Ethnomethodology: Language, Society and Social Interaction. London: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781849208567
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208567 [Google Scholar]
  25. In press. Orders of Ordinary Action: Respecifying Sociological Knowledge.Aldershot: Ashgate.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Gardner, R.
    editor 1994Spoken Interaction Studies in Australia. Australian Review of Applied LinguisticsSeries S11. Melbourne: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 2000 ‘Resources for delicate manoeuvres: Learning to disagree’. InDiscourse Analysis and Language Teaching, edited by Soler, E.A. and Guzman, J.R. Australian Review of Applied LinguisticsSeries S16. Melbourne: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 2001When Listeners Talk: Response Tokens and Listener Stance. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.92
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.92 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2004 ‘Conversation analysis’. InThe Handbook of Applied Linguistics, edited by Davies, A. and Elder, C. Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. doi: 10.1002/9780470757000.ch10
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757000.ch10 [Google Scholar]
  30. Gardner, R. ; Wagner, J.
    editors 2004Second Language Conversations. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Goodwin, C. ; Heritage, J.
    1990 ‘Conversation analysis’. Annual Review of Anthropology19: 283–307. doi: 10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.001435
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.001435 [Google Scholar]
  32. Grabe, W.
    2004 ‘Perspectives in applied linguistics: A North American view’. InWorld Applied Linguistics. A Celebration of 40 Years of AILA, edited by Gass, S.M. and Makoni, S. 105–132. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Have, P.
    , ten 1999Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. , ten 2004Understanding Qualitative Research and Ethnomethodology. London: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9780857020192
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857020192 [Google Scholar]
  35. Heath, C. ; Luff, P.
    2000Technology in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511489839
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489839 [Google Scholar]
  36. Heritage, J.
    2005 ‘Conversation analysis and institutional talk’. InHandbook of Language and Social Interaction, edited by Fitch, K.L. ; Sanders, R.E. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Heritage, J. ; Maynard, D.
    2006Communication in Medical Care: Interaction Between Primary Care Physicians and Patients. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511607172
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607172 [Google Scholar]
  38. Hutchby, I. ; Wooffitt, R.
    1998Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Larsen-Freeman, D.
    1997 ‘Impressions of AILA 1996’. InApplied Linguistics Across Disciplines, edited by Mauranen, A. ; Sajavaara, K. 87–92. Milton Keynes: AILA.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Lerner, G. H.
    editor 2004Conversation Analysis: Studies From the First Generation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.125
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125 [Google Scholar]
  41. Liddicoat, A. ; Döpke, S.
    1998 ‘The structure of callers’ contributions in talkback radio’. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics21 (2): 79–104.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Markee, N.
    2000Conversation Analysis. Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. McHoul, A. ; Rapley, M.
    editors 2001How to Analyse Talk in Institutional Settings. London: Continuum International.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Nevile, M.
    2002 ‘Coordinating talk and non-talk activity in the airline cockpit’. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics25 (1): 131–146.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 2004Beyond the Black Box: Talk-in-Interaction in the Airline Cockpit. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. 2005 ‘Checklist complete. Or is it? Closing a task in the airline cockpit’. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics28 (2): 60–76.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Pomerantz, A. ; Fehr, B.J.
    1997 ‘Conversation analysis: An approach to the study of social action as sense making practices’. InDiscourse as Social Interaction. Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. Vol Two, edited by van Dijk, T.A. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Psathas, G.
    1995Conversation Analysis: The Study of Talk-in-Interaction. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781412983792
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412983792 [Google Scholar]
  49. Rendle-Short, J.
    1999 ‘When “okay” is okay in computer science seminar talk’. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics22 (2): 19–33.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 2003 ‘So what does that show us?: Analysis of the discourse marker “so” in the academic monologue’. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics26 (3): 46–62.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. 2006The Academic Presentation: Situated Talk in Action. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Richards, K. ; Seedhouse, P.
    editors 2005Applying Conversation Analysis. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230287853
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230287853 [Google Scholar]
  53. Sacks, H.
    1992Lectures on Conversation. Two volumes. Edited by Gail Jefferson . Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Sacks, H ; Schegloff, E. A. ; Jefferson, G.
    1974 ‘A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation’. Language50 (4): 696–735. doi: 10.1353/lan.1974.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
  55. Schegloff, E. A.
    1996 ‘Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction’. InInteraction and Grammar, edited by Ochs, E. , Schegloff, E.A. ; Thompson, S.A. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620874.002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.002 [Google Scholar]
  56. 2006 ‘Interaction: The infrastructure for social institutions, the natural ecological niche for language, and the arena in which culture is enacted’. InRoots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition and Interaction, edited by Enfield, N.J. ; Levinson, S.C. Oxford: Berg.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Vol1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  58. Schegloff, E. A. ; Koshik, I. ; Jacoby, S. ; Olsher, D.
    2002 ‘Conversation analysis and applied linguistics’. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics22: 3–31. doi: 10.1017/S0267190502000016
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190502000016 [Google Scholar]
  59. Schegloff, E. A. ; Sacks, H.
    1973 ‘Opening up closings’. Semiotica8: 289–327. doi: 10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289
    https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289 [Google Scholar]
  60. Seedhouse, P.
    2004The Interactional Architecture of the Language Classroom: A Conversation Analysis Perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Silverman, D.
    1998Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Smith, C. D.
    1996 ‘Competing constraints in alternative dispute resolution: The interactional achievement of formality and informality in mediation’. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics19 (2): 79–114.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. So’o, A. ; Liddicoat, A.
    2000 ‘Telephone openings in Samoan’. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics23 (1): 95–107.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Taylor, E.
    1994 ‘Preference organization in teacher-supervisor talk’. InSpoken Interaction Studies in Australia, edited by Gardner, R. 137–152. Melbourne: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Wagner, J.
    1996 ‘Foreign language acquisition through interaction’. Journal of Pragmatics26: 215–235. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(96)00013‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(96)00013-6 [Google Scholar]
  66. Wooffitt, R.
    2005Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis: A Comparative and Critical Introduction. London: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781849208765
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208765 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.2104/aral0730
Loading
  • Article Type: Other
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error