Task-Completing Assessments in Service Encounters

References

• Antaki, C. (2002). ‘Lovely’: Turn-initial high-grade assessments in telephone closings. Discourse Studies, 4(1), 5–24. doi:10.1177/14614456020040010101
   Google Scholar
• Antaki, C., Houtkoop-Steenstra, H., & Rapley, M. (2000). ‘Brilliant. Next question…’: High-grade assessment sequences in the completion of interactional units. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33(3), 235–262. doi:10.1207/S15327973RLSI3303_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beeching, K., Ghezzi, C., & Molinelli, P. (Eds.). (2018). Positioning the self and others: Linguistic perspectives (pp. 19–49). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Berry, J. W. (2015). Acculturation. In J. E. Grusec & P. Hastings (Eds.), Handbook of socialization: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 520–538). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Drew, P., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (Eds.). (2018). Requesting in social interaction. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Felix-Brasdefer, J. C. (Ed.). (2015). The language of service encounters. Cambridge, England: CUP.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, B. (2015). On the notion of pre-request. Discourse Studies, 17(1), 41–63. doi:10.1177/1461445614557762
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (1984). Story structure and organization of participation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 225–247). Cambridge, England: CUP.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (1986). Between and within: Alternative and sequential treatments of continuers and assessments. Human Studies, 9(2–3), 205–218. doi:10.1007/BF00148127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. H. (1987). Concurrent operations on talk: Notes on the interactive organization of assessments. Pragmatics, 1(1), 1–54.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. H. (1992a). Assessments and the construction of context. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 147–189). Cambridge, England: CUP.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. H. (1992b). Context, activity, and participation. In P. Auer & A. DiLuzio (Eds.), The contextualization of language (pp. 77–99). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Grahn, I.-L. (2017). Initierade tackhandlingar i sverigesvenska och finlandssvenska vårdsamtal – Sekvensorganisering och funktion [Initiating thanking actions in Sweden-Swedish and Finland-Swedish health-care conversations – Sequence organization and function]. Språk och interaktion, 4(4), 89–110.
   Google Scholar
• Halonen, M., & Koivisto, A. (in press). Moving money: Money as an interactional resource in kiosk encounters in Finland. In B. Fox, L. Mondada, & M.-L. Sorjonen (Eds.), Encounters at the counter: Language, embodiment and material objects in shops. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Henricson, S., & Nelson, M. (2017). Giving and receiving advice in higher education. Comparing Sweden-Swedish and Finland-Swedish supervision meetings. Journal of Pragmatics, 109, 105–120. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J., & Raymond, G. (2005). The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(1), 15–38. doi:10.1177/019027250506800103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J., & Sorjonen, M.-L. (1994). Constituting and maintaining activities across sequences: And-prefacing as a feature of question design. Language in Society, 23, 1–29. doi:10.1017/S0047404500017656
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoey, E. M. (2017). Sequence recompletion: A practice for managing lapses in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 109, 47–63. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keevallik, L. (2010). Pro-adverbs of manner as markers of activity transition. Studies in Language, 34(2), 350–381. doi:10.1075/sl.34.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeBaron, C., & Jones, S. E. (2002). Closing up closings: Showing the relevance of the social and material surround to the completion of interaction. Journal of Communication, 52(3), 542–565. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02561.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge, England: CUP.
   Google Scholar
• Levinson, S. C. (2013). Action formation and ascription. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), Handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 103–130). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Lindström, A. (2005). Language as social action: A study of how senior citizens request assistance with practical tasks in the Swedish home help service. In A. Hakulinen & M. Selting (Eds.), Syntax and lexis in conversation: Studies on the use of linguistic resources in tal-in-interaction (pp. 209–230). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Lindström, A., & Heinemann, T. (2009). Good enough: Low-grade assessments in caregiving situations. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42(4), 309–328. doi:10.1080/08351810903296465
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindström, A., & Mondada, L. (2009). Assessments in social interaction. Introduction to the special issue. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42(4), 299–308. doi:10.1080/08351810903296457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macbeth, D. (2003). Hugh Mehan’s “Learning Lessons” reconsidered: On the differences between the naturalistic and critical analysis of classroom discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 40(1), 239–280. doi:10.3102/00028312040001239
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2009). The embodied and negotiated production of assessments in instructed actions. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42(4), 329–361. doi:10.1080/08351810903296473
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2014). Pointing, talk, and the bodies. Reference and joint attention as embodied interactional achivements. In M. Seyfeddinipur & M. Gullberg (Eds.), From gesture in conversation to visible action as utterance (pp. 95–124). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Myers, G. (2000). Entitlement and sincerity in broadcast interviews about Princess Diana. Media, Culture & Society, 22(2), 167–185. doi:10.1177/016344300022002003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilsson, J., Norrthon, S., Lindström, J., & Wide, C. (2018). Greetings as social action in Finland-Swedish and Sweden-Swedish service encounters – A pluricentric perspective. Intercultural Pragmatics, 15(1), 57–88. doi:10.1515/ip-2017-0030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norrby, C., Wide, C., Nilsson, J., & Lindström, J. (2015). Interpersonal relationships in medical consultations. Comparing Sweden Swedish and Finland Swedish address practices. Journal of Pragmatics, 84, 121–138. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norrby, C., Wide, C., Nilsson, J., & Lindström, J. (2018). Positioning through address practice in Finland-Swedish and Sweden-Swedish service encounters. In K. Beeching, C. Ghezzi, & P. Molinelli (Eds.), Positioning the self and others: Linguistic perspectives (pp. 19–49). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Ogden, R. (2006). Phonetics and social action in agreements and disagreements. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1752–1775. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.04.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Persson, R. (2015). Registering and repair-initiating repeats in French talk-in-interaction. Discourse Studies, 17(5), 583–608. doi:10.1177/1461445615590721
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pomerantz, A. (1978). Compliment responses: Notes on the co-operation of multiple constraints. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp. 57–101). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge, England: CUP.
   Google Scholar
• Rhys, C. (2016). Grammar and epistemic positioning: When assessment rules. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49(3), 183–200. doi:10.1080/08351813.2016.1196546
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rossi, G. (2015). Responding to pre-requests: The organization of hai x ‘do you have x’ sequences in Italian. Journal of Pragmatics, 82, 5–22. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saari, M. (1995). Synpunkter på svenskt språkbruk i Sverige och Finland [Notes on the Swedish usage in Sweden and Finland]. Folkmålsstudier, 36, 75–108.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures on conversation ( Gail Jefferson, Ed.). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. A primer in conversation analysis (Vol. 1). Cambridge, England: CUP.
   Google Scholar
• Schuetz, A. (1953). Commonsense and scientific interpretation of human action. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 14(1), 1–38. doi:10.2307/2104013
   Google Scholar
• Sorjonen, M. L., & Raevaara, L. (2014). On the grammatical form of requests at the conveninece store: Requesting as embodied action. In P. Drew & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Requesting in social interaction (pp. 243–268). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Streeck, J. (2014). Mutual gaze and recognition. Revisiting Kendon’s “Gaze direction in two-person conversations”. In M. Seyfeddinipur & M. Gullberg (Eds.), From gesture in conversation to visible action as utterance (pp. 35–56). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, S. A., Fox, B. A., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2015). Grammar in everyday talk. Building responsive actions. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar