Confirming and Denying in Co-Construction Processes: A Case Study of an Adult with Cerebral Palsy and two Familiar Partners

References

• Anderson, K., & Balandin, S. (2011). The storybook method: Research feedback with young participants. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 27, 279–291.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balandin, S., & Goldbart, J. (2011). Qualitative research and AAC: Strong methods and new topics. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 27, 227–228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauer, A., & Auer, P. (2009). Aphasie im alltag. Stuttgart: Thieme.
   Google Scholar
• Bloch, S. (2005). Co-constructing meaning in acquired speech disorders: Word and letter repetition in the construction of turns. In K. Richards & P. Seedhouse (Eds.), Applying conversation analysis (pp. 38–55). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Bloch, S., & Beeke, S. (2008). Co-constructed talk in the conversation of people with dysarthria and aphasia. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 22, 974–990.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brekke, K. M., & von Tetzchner, S. (2003). Co-construction in graphic language development. In S. von Tetzchner, & N. Grove (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: Developmental issues (pp. 176–210). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, M., & Kirton, A. (2003). Patterns of interaction between children with physical disabilities using augmentative and alternative communication systems and their peers. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 19, 135–151.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, S., & Markova, I. (1999). Interaction between impaired and unimpaired speakers: Inter-subjectivity and the interplay of culturally shared and situation specific knowledge. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 339–368.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (1995). Co-Constructing meaning in conversation with an aphasic man. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 28, 233–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (2000). Gesture, aphasia and interaction. In D. McNeill (Ed.), Language and gesture (pp. 85–95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (2003). Conversational frameworks for the accomplishment of meaning in aphasia. In C. Goodwin (Ed.), Conversation and brain damage (pp. 90–116). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gülich, E., & Mondada, L. (2008). Konversationsanalyse. Eine Einführung am Beispiel des Französischen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
   Google Scholar
• Heeschen, C., & Schegloff, E. A. (1999). Agrammatism, adaptation theory, conversation analysis: On the role of so-called telegraphic style in talk-in-interaction. Aphasiology, 13, 365–405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (1998). Conversation analysis. Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laakso, M., & Klippi, A. (1999). A closer look at the “hint and guess” sequences in aphasic conversation. Aphasiology, 13, 345–363.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Light, J., Collier, B., & Parnes, P. (1985). Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers. Part III – modes of communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 98–107.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H. (1984). Notes on methodology. In J. M. Atkinson, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action. Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 21–27). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation. Oxord, Cambridge: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematic for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Analyzing discourse: Text and talk. Georgetown University roundtable on languages and linguistics (pp. 71–93). Washington, DC: GUP.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Selting, M., Auer, P., Barth-Weingarten, D., Bergmann, J., Bergmann, P., Birkner, K. . . Uhmann, S. (2009). Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT 2). Gesprächsforschung - Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion, 10, 353–402. Retrieved from http://www.gespraechsforschung-ozs.de/heft2009/px-gat2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M. M. (2003). Environmental influences on aided language development: The role of partner adaptation. In S. von Tetzchner & N. Grove (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: Developmental issues (pp. 155–175). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Solomon-Rice, P., & Soto, G. (2011). Co-construction as a facilitative factor in supporting the personal narratives of children who use augmentative and alternative communication. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 32, 70–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Tetzchner, S., & Basil, C. (2011). Terminology and notation in written representations of conversations with Augmentative and Alternative Communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 27, 141–149.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Tetzchner, S., & Jensen, M. H. (1996). Augmentative and Alternative Communication: European perspectives. London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, R., Beeke, S., & Maxim, J. (2003). Adapting to conversation: On the use of linguistic resources by speakers with fluent aphasia in the construction of turns at talk. In C. Goodwin (Ed.), Conversation and brain damage (pp. 59–89). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar