Rhythm and blues – Amalie's 152nd session: From psychoanalysis to conversation and metaphor analysis – and back again

References

• Ahrens K (2012). Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities. In: Cameron L, Maslen R, editors. Metaphor and Symbol, 27(3):259–61.
   Google Scholar
• Akhtar S (2007). Diversity without fanfare: Some reflections on contemporary psychoanalytic technique. Psychoanal Inq 27:690–704.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen JG, Fonagy P, editors. (2006). Handbook of mentalization‐based treatment. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Antaki C (2008). Formulations in psychotherapy. In: Peräkylä A, Antaki C, Vehviläinen S, Leudar I, editors. Conversation analysis and psychotherapy, 26–43. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Aragno A (2009). Meaning's vessel: A metapsychological understanding of metaphor. Psychoanal Inq 29:30–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balint M (1950). Changing therapeutical aims and techniques in psycho‐analysis. Int J Psychoanal 31:117–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bollas C (1979). The transformational object. Int J Psychoanal 60:97–108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bologensi M, Bichisecchi R (2014). Metaphors in dreams: Where cognitive linguistics meets psychoanalysis. Language and Psychoanalysis 3(1):4–22.
   Google Scholar
• Borbely AF (2008). Metaphor and psychoanalysis. In: Gibbs RW, Jr. editor. The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 412–24. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Braten S (2009). The intersubjective mirror in infant learning and evolution of speech. Advances in consciousness research: v. 76. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Buchholtz MB (2003). Metaphern der ‘Kur’. Qualitative Studien zum therapeutischen Prozeß [Metaphor of cure. Qualitative studies of the therapeutic process], 2nd edition. Giessen: Psychosozial‐Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Buchholtz MB, Lamott F, Moertel K (2008). Tat‐Sachen. Narrative von Sexualstraftätern. Giessen: Psychosozial‐Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Buchholtz MB, Kächele H (2013). Conversation analysis – A powerful tool for psychoanalytic practice and psychotherapy research. Language and Psychoanalysis 2:4–30.
   Google Scholar
• Buchholtz MB, Reich U (2015). Dancing insight. How a psychotherapist uses change of positioning in order to complement split‐off areas of experience. Chaos and Complexity Letters 8:S.121–146.
   Google Scholar
• Cameron L, Maslen R, editors. (2010). Metaphor analysis. Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities. Oakville, CT: Equinox.
   Google Scholar
• Capps L, Ochs E (1995). Constructing panic – The discourse of agoraphobia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.
   Google Scholar
• Conte E, Khrennikov AY, Todarello O, De robertis R, Federici A, Zbilut JP (2009). On the possibility that we think in a quantum mechanical manner: An experimental verification of existing quantum interference effects in cognitive anomaly of conjunction fallacy. Chaos and Complexity Letters 4:S.123–136.
   Google Scholar
• Dausendschön‐gay U, Krafft U (2002). Text und Körpergesten. Beobachtungen zur holistischen Organisation der Kommunikation. Psychother Soz 4:30–60.
   Google Scholar
• Erikson EH (1954). The dream specimen of psychoanalysis. J Am Psychoanal Assoc 2:5–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiumara GC (1995). The metaphoric process: Connections between language and life. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Franke E (2008). Raum – Bewegung – Rhythmus. Zu den Grundlagen einer Erkenntnis durch den Körper. In Bockrath F, Boschert B, Franke F, editors. Körperliche Erkenntnis. Formen reflexiver Erkenntnis, 15–40. Bielefeld: transcript.
   Google Scholar
• Freud S (1900). The interpretation of dreams. SE 4–5.
   Google Scholar
• Freud S (1905). Fragment of an analysis of a case of hysteria. SE 7:7–122.
   Google Scholar
• Freud, S (1916). Introductory lectures on psycho‐analysis. SE 15/16.
   Google Scholar
• Ginzburg J (2012). The interactive stance: Meaning for conversation. Oxford: Oxford UP.
   Google Scholar
• Glucksberg S (2008). How metaphors create categories – quickly. In: Gibbs RW, Jr. editor. The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 67–83. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin C (2000). Gesture, aphasia and interaction. In: Mcneill D, editor. Language and gesture. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin C, editor. (2003). Conversation and brain damage. Oxford: Oxford UP.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C, (2011). Contextures of action. In: Streeck J, Goodwin C, Lebaron CD, editors. Learning in doing: social, cognitive and computational perspectives. Embodied interaction. Language and body in the material world, 182–93. New York: Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Hepburn A, Bolden GB (2013). The conversation analytic approach to transcription. In: Sidnell J, Stivers T, editors. The handbook of conversation analysis, 57–77. Chichester: Wiley‐Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Hepworth J (1999). The social construction of anorexia nervosa. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Heritage JC (1984). A change‐of‐state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In Atkinson JM, Heritage JC, editors. Structures of social action, 299–346. New York: Cambridge UP (1992 edn).
   Google Scholar
• Heritage JC, Robinson JD (2011). “Some” versus “any”. Medical issues: Encouraging patients to reveal their unmet concerns. In: Antaki C, editor. Applied conversational analysis: Intervention and change in institutional talk, 15–32. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchins E, Nomura S (2011). Collaborative construction of multimodal utterances. In: Streeck J, Goodwin C, Lebaron CD, editors. Learning in doing: social, cognitive and computational perspectives. Embodied interaction. Language and body in the material world, 29–43. New York: Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Jefferson G (1996). On the poetics of ordinary talk. Text and Performance Quarterly 16:1–61.
   Google Scholar
• Jones EE (2000). Therapeutic action: A guide to psychoanalytic therapy. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
   Google Scholar
• Kächele H, Albani C, Buchheim A, Hölzer M, Hohage R, Mergenthaler E, et al. (2006). The German specimen case Amalia X: Empirical studies. Int J Psychoanal 87:809–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korobov N, Bamberg M (2007). Strip poker! They don't show nothing!: Positioning identities in adolescent male talk about a television game show. In: Bamberg MGW, de Fina A, Schiffrin D, editors. Selves and identities in narrative and discourse, 253–72. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Krejci E (2009). Immersion in the surface. Int J Psychoanal 90:827–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lakoff G (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lakoff G, Johnson M (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lepper G (2000). Categories in text and talk. A practical introduction to categorization analysis. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Lepper G (2009). The pragmatics of therapeutic interaction: An empirical study. Int J Psychoanal 90:1075–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levin F, editor. (2009). Emotion and the psychodynamics of the cerebellum: A neuro‐psychoanalytical analysis and synthesis. London: Karnac.
   Google Scholar
• Levinson SC (2006). On the human “Interaction Engine”. In: Levinson SC, Enfield NJ, editors. Wenner‐Gren Center International symposium series. Roots of human sociality. Culture, cognition and interaction, 39–69. Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Levy R, Ablon J, Thomä H, Kächele H, Ackerman J, Erhardt I, Seybert C (2012). A session of psychoanalysis as analyzed by the Psychotherapy Process Q‐set: Amalia X, session 152. In: Levy RA, Ablon JS, Kächele H, editors. Psychodynamic psychotherapy research, 509–28. New York: Humana.
   Google Scholar
• Levy ST, Inderbitzin LB (1990). The analytic surface and the theory of technique. J Am Psychoanal Assoc 38:371–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luborsky L, Spence DP (1971). Quantitative research on psychoanalytic therapy. In: Bergin AE, Garfield SL, editors. Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change: An empirical analysis, S.408–438. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Mazokopaki K, Kugiumutzakis G (2010). Infant rhythms: Expressions of musical companionship. In: Malloch S, Trevarthen C, editors. Communicative musicality. Exploring the basis of human companionship, 185–208. Oxford: Oxford UP.
   Google Scholar
• Meltzoff AN, Gopnik A, Repacholi BM (1999). Toddlers’ understanding of intentions, desires and emotions: Explorations of the Dark Ages. In: Zelazo PD, Astington JW, Olson DR, editors. Developing theories of intention. Social understanding and self‐control, 17–42. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada L (2013). The conversation analytic approach to data collection. In: Sidnell J, Stivers T, editors. The handbook of conversation analysis, 32–57. Chichester: Wiley‐Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Muntigl P, Horvath AO (2014). The therapeutic relationship in action: How therapists and clients co‐manage relational disaffiliation. Psychother Res 24(3):327–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muntigl P, Knight N, Watkins A, Horvath AO, Angus LE (2013). Active retreating: Person‐centered practices to repair disaffiliation in therapy. Journal of Pragmatics 53:1–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'dell ML, Nieminen T, Lennes M (2012). Modeling turn‐taking rhythms with oscillators. Linguistica Uralica 48(3):218–27.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne N (2010). Towards a chronobiology of musical rhythms. In: Malloch S, Trevarthen C, editors. Communicative musicality: Exploring the basis of human companionship, 545–65. Oxford: Oxford UP.
   Google Scholar
• Peräkylä A (2004). Making links in psychoanalytic interpretations: A conversation analytical perspective. Psychother Res 14:289–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peräkylä A (2010). Shifting the perspective after the patient's response to an interpretation. Int J Psychoanal 91:1363–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peräkylä A (2011). A psychoanalyst's reflection on conversation analysis's contribution to his own therapeutic talk. In: Antaki C, editor. Applied conversational analysis: Intervention and change in institutional talk, 222–43. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Peräkylä A, Antaki C, Vehviläinen S, Leudar I (2008). Analysing psychotherapy in practice. In: Peräkylä A, Antaki C, Vehviläinen S, Leudar I, editors. Conversation analysis and psychotherapy, 5–26. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Peräkylä A, Sorjonen M‐L, editors. (2012). Emotion in interaction. New York: Oxford UP.
   Google Scholar
• Reich U, Rohrmeier M (2014). Batidas latinas – On rhythm and meter in Spanish and Portuguese and other types of music. In: Szczepaniak R, Reina JC, editors. Phonological typology of syllable and word languages in theory and practice. Berlin: de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Rycroft CS (1956). The nature and function of the analyst's communication to the patient. Int J Psychoanal 37:469–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sachs D (2005). Reflection on Freud's Dora case after 48 years. Psychoanal Inq 25:45–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sacks H, Schegloff EA (2007). Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In: Enfield NJ, Stivers T, editors. Person reference in interaction: Linguistic, cultural, and social perspectives, 23–29. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Safran JD, Muran JC (2000). Negotiating the therapeutic alliance: A relational treatment guide. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Salgado J, Cunha C, Bento T (2013). Positioning microanalysis: Studying the self through the exploration of dialogical processes. Integr Psych Behav 47:143–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff EA (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Sidnell J, Stivers T, editors. (2013). The handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Wiley‐Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Siegelman E (1990). Metaphor and meaning in psychotherapy. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spence DP, Mayes LC, Dahl H (1994). Monitoring the analytic surface. J Am Psychoanal Assoc 42:43–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stein LI (1967). The doctor‐nurse‐game. Arch Gen Psychiatry 16:699–703.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stivers T, Enfield NJ, Brown P, Englert C, Hayashi M, Heinemann T, et al. (2009). Universals and cultural variation in turn‐taking in conversation. PNAS 106:10587–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolorow RD, Atwood GE (1999). Three realms of the unconscious (1992). In: Mitchell SA, Aron L, editors. Relational psychoanalysis: The emergence of a tradition (vol. I), Vol. 14:365–78. London: The Analytic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tateo L (2014). The dialogical dance: Self, identity, construction, positioning and embodiment in Tango dancers. Integr Psych Behav 48(1):1–23.
   Google Scholar
• Tomasello M (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.
   Google Scholar
• Tomasello M (2003). Constructing a language: A usage‐based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.
   Google Scholar
• Tomasello M (2006). Why don't apes point? In: Levinson SC, Enfield JN, editors. Wenner‐Gren Center International symposium series. Roots of human sociality. Culture, cognition and interaction, 506–24. Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Tomasello M (2008). Origins of human communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Uhmann S (1996). On rhythm in everday German conversation: Beat clashes in assessment utterances. In: Couper‐kuhlen E, Selting M, editors. Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies, 303–65. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Vuust P, Wallentin M, Mouridsen K, Ostergard L, Roepstorff A (2011). Tapping polyrhythms in music activates language areas. Neuroscience Letters 494:211–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waal F de (2007). The “Russian Doll” model of empathy and imitation. In: Braten S, editor. Advances in consciousness research: vol. 68. On being moved. From mirror neurons to empathy, 49–73. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Weiste E, Peräkylä A (2014). Prosody and empathic communication in psychotherapy interaction. Psychotherapy Research, in press.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson A (2004). Multiple approaches to a single case: Conclusions. Int J Psychoanal 85:1269–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wootton AJ (1997). Interaction and the development of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wootton A J (2012). Distress in adult‐child interaction. In: Peräkylä A, Sorjonen ML, editors. Emotion in interaction, 42–63. New York: Oxford UP.
   Google Scholar