Cover not available

Article published In: Pedagogical Linguistics
Vol. 5:1 (2024) ► pp.3155

References (47)
References
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Do Language Learners Recognize Pragmatic Violations? Pragmatic versus Grammatical Awareness in Instructed L2 Learning. TESOL Quarterly, 321, 233–262. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2020). Pedagogical linguistics. A view from L2 pragmatics. Pedagogical Linguistics, 1(1), 44–65. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bell, D. (1998). Cancellative discourse markers. Pragmatics, 8(4), 515–541.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (1995). Grammar and the spoken language. Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 141–158. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cherchi, L. (1985). On the role of ellipsis in discourse coherence. In R. Meyer Hermann & H. Rieser (Eds.), Ellipsen und fragmentarische Ausdrücke, Band 21 (pp. 224–249). Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2012). On affectivity and preference in responses to rejection. Text & Talk, 32(4), 453–476. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E., Fox, B. & Thompson, S. (2014). Forms of responsivity: Grammatical formats for responding to two types of requests in conversation. In S. Günthner, W. Imo & J. Bücker (Eds.), Grammar and dialogism: sequential, syntactic, and prosodic patterns between emergence and sedimentation (pp. 109–138). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (2018). Interactional linguistics. Studying language in interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cutrone, P. (2005). A case study examining backchannels between Japanese-British dyads. Multilingua, 241, 237–274. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deppermann, A. (2012). Über Sätze in Gesprächsbeiträgen – wann sie beginnen und wann man sie braucht. In C. Cortès (Ed.), Satzeröffnung. Formen, Funktionen, Strategien. Tübingen: Stauffenburg, 1–14.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Turn-design at turn-beginnings: Multimodal resources to deal with tasks of turn-construction in German. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 91–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dingemanse, M. (2020). Der Raum zwischen unseren Köpfen. Technology Review, 131, 10–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fox, B., & Thompson, S. (2010). Responses to wh-questions in English conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(2), 133–156. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. Jr. (2006). Ellipsis and discourse coherence. Linguistics and Philosophy, 291, 315–346. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fung, L., & Carter, R. (2007). Discourse markers and spoken English: Native and learner use in pedagogic settings. Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 410–439. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gengel, K. (2013). Pseudogapping and ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haselow, A. (2019). Discourse marker sequences: Insights into the serial order of communicative tasks in real-time turn production. Journal of Pragmatics, 1461, 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2021). The acquisition of pragmatic markers in the foreign language classroom: An experimental study on the effects of implicit and explicit learning. Journal of Pragmatics, 1861, 73–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hasselgreen, A. (2004). Testing the spoken English of young Norwegians: a study of test validity and the role of “smallwords” in contributing to pupils’ fluency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, J. (2013). Turn-initial position and some of its occupants. Journal of Pragmatics, 571, 331–337. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacoby, S. & Ochs, E. (1995). Co-construction: An introduction. Research on Language and Social Interaction 28(3), 171–183. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Knobloch, C. (2013). „Ein Teil, das fehlt, geht nie kaputt.“ – Ellipsen in Grammatik und Kommunikation. In M. Hennig (Ed.), Die Ellipse. Neue Perspektiven auf ein altes Problem (pp. 19–38). Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lerner, G. (1991). On the syntax of sentences-in-progress. Language in Society, 201, 441–458. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1992). Assisted storytelling: deploying shared knowledge as a practical matter. Qualitative Sociology, 151, 247–271. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). Collaborative turn sequences. In G. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis. Studies from the first generation (pp. 225–256). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S., & Torreira, F. (2015). Timing in turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language. In J. Holler, K. Kendrick, M. Casillas & S. Levinson (Eds.), Turn taking in human communicative interaction (pp. 10–26). Lausanne: Frontiers Media. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. (2008). Transfer appropriate processing in classroom second language acquisition. In Z. H. Han (Ed.), Understanding second language process (pp. 27–44). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McCarthy, M. (2003). Talking back: ‘Small’ interactional response tokens in everyday conversation. Research in Language and Social Interaction, 36(1), 33–63. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Spoken fluency revisited. English Profile Journal, 1(1), 1–15. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Merchant, J. (2001). The syntax of silence: Sluicing, islands and the theory of ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). Ellipsis: A survey of analytical approaches. In J. van Craenenbroeck & T. Temmerman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of ellipsis (pp. 19–45). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neary-Sundquist, C. (2013). The development of cohesion in a learner corpus. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 3(1), 109–130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pickering, M., & Garrod, S. (2007). Do people use language production to make predictions during comprehension? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(3), 105–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raymond, G. (2003). Grammar and social organization: yes/no type interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review, 681, 939–967. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roll, M., Gosselke, S., Lindgren, M., & Horne, M. (2013). Time-driven effects on processing grammatical agreement. Frontiers in Psychology, 41, 1004. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures on conversation, 21 vols. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 501, 696–735. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1996). Turn organization: One direction for inquiry into grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 52–133). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). “When ‘Others’ Initiate Repair”. Applied Linguistics, 211, 205–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G. & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 531, 361–382. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schremm, A., Horne, M., & Roll, M. (2015). Brain responses to syntax constrained by time- driven implicit prosodic phrases. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 351, 68–84. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Selting, M. (2001). Fragments of units as deviant cases of unit-production in conversational talk. In M. Selting & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Studies in interactional linguistics (pp. 229–258). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, S., Fox, B., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2015). Grammar in everyday talk: Building responsive actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Winkler, S. (2005). Ellipsis and focus in generative grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Fan, Sijiang
2025. Proceedings of the 2025 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Educational Systems,  pp. 104 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue