The poetics of argumentation: the relevance of conversational repetition for two theories of emergent mathematical reasoning

References

• Bock, K. (1986). Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 355–387. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(86)90004-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Branigan, H., & Pickering, M. (2004). Syntactic priming in the lemma stratum. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 296–297.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cobb, P. (1998). Learning from distributed theories of intelligence. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5, 187–204. doi: 10.1207/s15327884mca0503_4
   Google Scholar
• Cobb, P., & Yackel, E. (1996). Constructivist, emergent, and sociocultural perspectives in the context of developmental research. Educational Psychologist, 31(3-4), 175–190. doi: 10.1080/00461520.1996.9653265
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2014). The one and the many: Transcripts and the art of interpretation. For the Learning of Mathematics, 34(2), 38–40.
   Google Scholar
• Hymes, D. (1981). Louis simpson’s “The deserted boy,”. In D. Hymes (Ed.), “In vain I tried to tell you:” essays in native American ethnopoetics (pp. 142–183). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
   Google Scholar
• Inglis, M., Mejia-Ramos, J., & Simpson, A. (2007). Modelling mathematical argumentation: The importance of qualification. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66, 3–21. doi: 10.1007/s10649-006-9059-8
   Google Scholar
• Jakobson, R. (1960). Closing statement: Linguistics and poetics. In T. Sebeok (Ed.), Style in language (pp. 350–377). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Knipping, C. (2008). A method for revealing structures of argumentations in classroom proving processes. ZDM, 40, 427–441. doi: 10.1007/s11858-008-0095-y
   Google Scholar
• Krummheuer, G. (1995). The ethnography of argumentation. In P. Cobb & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.), The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures (pp. 229–269). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Krummheuer, G. (2007). Argumentation and participation in the primary mathematics classroom. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26, 60–82. doi: 10.1016/j.jmathb.2007.02.001
   Google Scholar
• Levelt, W., & Kelter, S. (1982). Surface form and memory in question answering. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 78–106. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(82)90005-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, L., & Towers, J. (2009). Improvisational coactions and the growth of collective mathematical understanding. Research in Mathematics Education, 11(1), 1–19. doi: 10.1080/14794800902732191
   Google Scholar
• Martin, L., & Towers, J. (2015). Growing mathematical understanding through collective image making, collective image having, and collective property noticing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88(1), 3–18. doi: 10.1007/s10649-014-9552-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, L., Towers, J., & Pirie, S. (2006). Collective mathematical understanding as improvisation. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 8(2), 149–183. doi: 10.1207/s15327833mtl0802_3
   Google Scholar
• Nardi, E., Biza, I., & Zachariades, T. (2012). “Warrant” revisited: Integrating mathematics teachers’ pedagogical and epistemological considerations into toulmin’s model for argumentation. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, 157–173. doi: 10.1007/s10649-011-9345-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ochs, E. (1979). Transcription as theory. In E. Ochs & B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developmental pragmatics (pp. 43–72). New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oslund, J. (2012). Mathematics-for-teaching: What can be learned from the ethnopoetics of teachers’ stories? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, 293–309. doi: 10.1007/s10649-011-9348-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmer, F. (1979). Modality and the English modals. New York: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Pimm, D. (1987). Speaking mathematically: Communication in mathematics classrooms. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Pirie, S., & Kieren, T. (1994). Growth in mathematical understanding: How can we characterise it and how can we represent it? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 165–190. doi: 10.1007/BF01273662
   Google Scholar
• Rowland, T. (2000). The pragmatics of mathematics education: Vagueness in mathematical discourse. London: Falmer.
   Google Scholar
• Simpson, A. (2015). The anatomy of a mathematical proof: Implications for analyses with toulmin’s scheme. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 90, 1–17. doi: 10.1007/s10649-015-9616-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Staats, S. (2008). Poetic lines in mathematics discourse: A method from linguistic anthropology. For the Learning of Mathematics, 28(2), 26–32.
   Google Scholar
• Staats, S., & Batteen, C. (2010). Linguistic indexicality in algebra discussions. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 29(1), 41–56. doi: 10.1016/j.jmathb.2010.01.002
   Google Scholar
• Tannen, D. (1989). Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Towers, J., & Martin, L. (2014). Building mathematical understanding through collective property noticing. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 14(1), 58–75. doi: 10.1080/14926156.2014.874612
   Google Scholar
• Wortham, S. (2006). Learning identity: The joint emergence of social identification and academic learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar