Imperative Actions in Boxing Sparring Sessions

References

• Akatsuka, N. (1985). Conditionals and the epistemic scale. Language, 61(3), 625–639. doi:10.2307/414388
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antaki, C., & Kent, A. (2012). Telling people what to do (and, sometimes, why): Contingency, entitlement and explanation in staff requests to adults with intellectual impairments. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 876–889. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2012.03.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coates, S. (1999). Analysing the physical: An ethnomethodological study of boxing. Ethnographic Studies, 4, 14–26.
   Google Scholar
• Craven, A., & Potter, J. (2010). Directives: Entitlement and contingency in action. Discourse Studies, 12, 419–442. doi:10.1177/1461445610370126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curl, T. S., & Drew, P. (2008). Contingency and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41, 129–153. doi:10.1080/08351810802028613
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drew, P., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2014). Requesting—From speech act to recruitment. In P. Drew & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Requesting in social interaction (pp. 1–34). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Eijiro on the web pro. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://eowp.alc.co.jp
   Google Scholar
• Ford, C. E., Fox, B. A., & Thompson, S. A. (2002). Constituency and the grammar of turn increments. In C. E. Ford, B. A. Fox, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), The language of turn and sequence (pp. 14–38). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Garfinkel, H. (2002). Ethnomethodology’s program: Working out Durkheim’s aphorism. New York, NY: Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Garfinkel, H. (2006). Seeing sociologically: The routine grounds of social action. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, M. H. (1980). Processes of mutual monitoring implicated in the production of description sequences. Sociological Inquiry, 50, 303–317. doi:10.1111/soin.1980.50.issue-3-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, M. H. (1990). He-said-she-said: Talk as social organization among Black children. Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, M. H., & Cekaite, A. (2014). Orchestrating directive trajectories in communicative projects in family interaction. In P. Drew & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Requesting in social interaction (pp. 185–214). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Hasunuma, A. (1993). Nihon-go no danwa-maakaa “daroo” and “janaika” no kinoo: Kyootuu-ninshiki kanki no yoohoo o chuushin ni [The function of the Japanese discourse markers daroo and janaika as an evocation of shared knowledge]. Japanese Language Teaching Association in honor of Professor Fumiko Koide, No. 01, 39–57.
   Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hindmarsh, J., Reynolds, P., & Dunne, S. (2011). Exhibiting understanding: The body in apprenticeship. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 489–503. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobsen, W. M. (1999). Aspects of hypothetical meaning in Japanese conditionals. In A. Kamio & K. Takami (Eds.), Function and structure, in honor of Susumu Kuno (pp. 83–122). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Kent, A., & Kendrick, K. H. (2016). Imperative directives: Orientations to accountability. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49(3), 272–288. doi:10.1080/08351813.2016.1201737
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindwall, O., & Ekström, A. (2012). Instruction-in-interaction: The teaching and learning of a manual skill. Human Studies, 35, 27–49. doi:10.1007/s10746-012-9213-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2014a). Instructions in the operating room: How the surgeon directs their assistant’s hands. Discourse Studies, 16, 131–161. doi:10.1177/1461445613515325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2014b). Requesting immediate action in the surgical operating room: Time, embodied resources and praxeological embeddedness. In P. Drew & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Requesting in social interaction (pp. 269–302). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2014c). Conventions for multimodal transcription. Retrieved from http://franz.unibas.ch/fileadmin/franz/user_upload/redaktion/Mondada_conv_multimodality.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2015). Social interaction. In K. Jungbluth & F. Da Milano (Eds.), Manual of deixis in Romance languages (pp. 661–683). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Okada, M. (2008). When the coach is a woman: The situational meanings of so-called masculine directives in a Japanese boxing gym. In J. Mori & A. Snyder Ohta (Eds.), Japanese applied linguistics: Discourse and social perspectives (pp. 160–187). London, England: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Okada, M. (2017). “Onna-no-ko panchi” ni miru gender-category no soogo-kooi-teki-imi [Some interactional meanings of the gender-category “girl’s punch”]. In T. Yanagimachi & M. Okada (Eds.), Interaction and learning (pp. 43–76). Tokyo, Japan: Hituzi Syobo Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Okada, M., & Yanagimachi, T. (2008). How do coparticipants organize instructions?: Analyses based on multimodality and joint attention. The Japanese Journal of Language in Society, 11(1), 139–150.
   Google Scholar
• Rawls, A. W. (2005). Garfinkel’s conception of time. Time & Society, 14(2/3), 163–190. doi:10.1177/0961463X05055132
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis (Vol. 1). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Searle, J. R. (1991). Indirect speech acts. In M. Davis (Ed.), Pragmatics: A reader (pp. 265–277). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. (Original work published in 1975)
   Google Scholar
• Sorjonen, M., Raevaara, L., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (Eds.). (2017). Imperative turns at talk: The design of directives in action. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Streeck, J., Goodwin, C., & LeBaron, C. (2011). Embodied interaction in the material world: An introduction. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, & C. LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world (pp. 1–26). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, T. (2014). Form≠function: The independence of prosody and action. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 47(1), 1–16. doi:10.1080/08351813.2014.871792
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zemel, A., & Koschmann, T. (2014). “Put your fingers right in here”: Learnability and instructed experience. Discourse Studies, 16(2), 163–183. doi:10.1177/1461445613515359
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zemel, A., & Koschmann, T. (2015). A stitch in time: Instructing temporality in the operating room. Communication & Medicine, 12, 85–98. doi:10.1558/cam.v12i1.25988
   Google Scholar