Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton March 29, 2024

Negotiating epistemic asymmetries during crisis management exercises: Pre-emptive and corrective practices

  • Iira Rautiainen

    Iira Rautiainen is a postdoctoral researcher at the Research Unit for Languages and Literature at the University of Oulu, Finland. She uses ethnomethodology, conversation analysis, and ethnography to study social interaction in multinational crisis management training. Currently, she examines collaborative and supportive practices in various crisis management exercises. She has published in academic books and journals, such as Journal of Pragmatics, and is a co-editor of the books Complexity of Interaction and EMCA in Motion.

    EMAIL logo
    and Tuire Oittinen

    Tuire Oittinen is a university teacher in English at the Department of Language and Communication Studies at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. She uses video-recorded data and multimodal conversation analysis to investigate social interaction in multilingual work and educational settings. Her current interests include teamwork practices in remote crisis management training. Her work has been published in academic books and journals, such as Journal of Pragmatics and Linguistics and Education.

From the journal Intercultural Pragmatics

Abstract

This study investigates interactional practices to negotiate epistemic asymmetries in multinational crisis management training in which English is used as a lingua franca (ELF). More specifically, we focus on exercises that include patrolling as well as other activities in which the trainees move by and interact in a vehicle. These exercises can be seen as “high stakes” environments that make orientation to urgency and safety issues relevant in the coordination of social conduct. Drawing on video recordings and ethnographic field notes from two United Nations military observer courses and using conversation analysis (CA), we examine moments in the exercises where the trainees orient to knowledge-related (i.e., epistemic) asymmetries in the upcoming or ongoing task. The analysis shows how these moments emerge and become solved in the moment-by-moment organization of interaction via utilization of verbal, linguistic and multimodal resources. We illustrate how some moments in the exercises allow the implementation of pre-emptive practices, whereas others call for corrective strategies and halting the ongoing task-related activity. The study sheds light on the situated practices the trainees use to establish mutual understanding and to advance goal-oriented activities in a mobile environment, and it promotes the temporal and sequential organization of social actions as key for collaborative work in crisis management training.


Corresponding author: Iira Rautiainen, Research Unit for Languages and Literature, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland, E-mail:

About the authors

Iira Rautiainen

Iira Rautiainen is a postdoctoral researcher at the Research Unit for Languages and Literature at the University of Oulu, Finland. She uses ethnomethodology, conversation analysis, and ethnography to study social interaction in multinational crisis management training. Currently, she examines collaborative and supportive practices in various crisis management exercises. She has published in academic books and journals, such as Journal of Pragmatics, and is a co-editor of the books Complexity of Interaction and EMCA in Motion.

Tuire Oittinen

Tuire Oittinen is a university teacher in English at the Department of Language and Communication Studies at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. She uses video-recorded data and multimodal conversation analysis to investigate social interaction in multilingual work and educational settings. Her current interests include teamwork practices in remote crisis management training. Her work has been published in academic books and journals, such as Journal of Pragmatics and Linguistics and Education.

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank all the course participants, especially the trainees and the instructors, for letting us get a glimpse of their important and valuable work. We also thank FINCENT and the Finnish National Defense University, Finnish Cultural Foundation, Research Council of Finland (project numbers 287219 and 322199), and Eudaimonia Institute at the University of Oulu for their help and support. We extend our special thanks to Antti Siipo from the LeaF infrastructure, who worked as our technician in the data collection process and has provided invaluable help with compiling and post-editing the data.

Appendix

Transcription conventions (Jefferson 2004; applied from Mondada 2018)

,

intonation is continuing

.

intonation is final

?

rising intonation

rising intonation/high pitch

falling intonation

=

latched utterances

[ ]

overlapping talk

tha-

a cut-off word

what

word emphasis

>what<

speech pace that is quicker than the surrounding talk

<what>

speech pace that is slower than the surrounding talk

°what°

speech that is quieter than the surrounding talk

WHAT

speech that is louder than the surrounding talk

£what£

smiley voice

wh(h)a(h)t

laughingly uttered word

(what)

uncertain hearings

( x )

unrecognizable or confidential item

(.)

micro pause, less than 0.2 seconds

(0.5)

silences timed in tenths of a second

((gazes))

transcriber’s comments

#

location of the figure in relation to talk and non-verbal action

*---->

gesture or action described continue across subsequent lines

◌---->*

gesture or action described continue until the same symbol is reached

*---->>

gesture or action described continue until and after excerpt’s end

l.9

gesture or action described continue until the line mentioned

References

Ahern, Aoife, José Amenós-Pons & Pedro Guijarro-Fuentes. 2023. Relevance theory and the study of linguistic interfaces in second language acquisition. Intercultural Pragmatics 20(4). 429–453. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2023-4004.Search in Google Scholar

Arminen, Ilkka & Petra Auvinen. 2013. Environmentally coupled repairs and remedies in the airline cockpit: Repair practices of talk and action in interaction. Discourse Studies 15(1). 19–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445612466463.Search in Google Scholar

Arminen, Ilkka, Inka Koskela & Hannele Palukka. 2014. Multimodal production of second pair parts in air traffic control training. Journal of Pragmatics 65. 46–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.01.004.Search in Google Scholar

Au-Yeung, Terry & Richard Fitzgerald. 2023. Time structures in ethnomethodological and conversation analysis studies of practical activity. The Sociological Review 71(1). 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261221103018.Search in Google Scholar

Birlik, Seval & Jagdish Kaur. 2020. BELF expert users: Making understanding visible in internal BELF meetings through the use of nonverbal communication strategies. English for Specific Purposes 58. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2019.10.002.Search in Google Scholar

Björkman, Beyza. 2013. English as an academic lingua franca. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110279542Search in Google Scholar

Black, Steven D., James A. Levin, Hugh Mehan & Clark N. Quinn. 1983. Real and non-real time interaction: Unraveling multiple threads of discourse. Discourse Processes 6(1). 59–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538309544554.Search in Google Scholar

Butler, Cary W., Jonathan Potter, Susan Danby, Michael Emmison & Alexa Hepburn. 2010. Advice-implicative interrogatives: Building “client-centered” support in a children’s helpline. Social Psychology Quarterly 73(3). 265–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272510379838.Search in Google Scholar

Button, Graham. 1990. On member’s time. Réseaux. Communication - Technologie - Société 8(1). 161–182. https://doi.org/10.3406/RESO.1990.3537.Search in Google Scholar

Carroll, Donald. 2000. Precision timing in novice-to-novice L2 conversations. Issues in Applied Linguistics 11(1). 67–110. https://doi.org/10.5070/l4111005025.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, Fenghua & Xueyu Wang. 2023. “Oops! I can’t express this in English!”: Managing epistemic challenges by Chinese EFL peer tutors in writing tutorials. Text & Talk 43(1). 1–20 https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2020-0139.Search in Google Scholar

Deppermann, Arnulf & Jürgen Streeck. 2018. The body in interaction: Its multiple modalities and temporalities. In Arnulf Deppermann & Jürgen Streeck (eds.), Time in embodied interaction: Synchronicity and sequentiality of multimodal resources, 1–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.293.introSearch in Google Scholar

Drew, Paul. 1991. Asymmetries of knowledge in conversational interactions. In Ivana Marková & Klaus Foppa (eds.), Asymmetries in dialogue, 29–48. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf Savage.Search in Google Scholar

Ekberg, Katie & Amanda LeCouteur. 2015. Clients’ resistance to therapists’ proposals: Managing epistemic and deontic status. Journal of Pragmatics 90. 12–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.10.004.Search in Google Scholar

Firth, Alan. 1996. The discursive accomplishment of normality: On ‘lingua franca’ English and conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics 26(2). 237–259, https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(96)00014-8.Search in Google Scholar

Firth, Alan. 2009. Doing not being a foreign language learner: English as a lingua franca in the workplace and (some) implications for SLA. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 47(1). 127–156. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.006.Search in Google Scholar

Firth, Alan & Johannes Wagner. 1997. On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal 81. 286–300. https://doi.org/10.2307/329302.Search in Google Scholar

Firth, Alan & Johannes Wagner. 2007. Second/foreign language learning as a social accomplishment: Elaborations on a reconceptualized SLA. The Modern Language Journal 91. 800–819. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0026-7902.2007.00670.x.Search in Google Scholar

Goodwin, Charles. 2002. Time in action. Current Anthropology 43(S4). S19–S35. https://doi.org/10.1086/339566.Search in Google Scholar

Goodwin, Charles & Marjorie H. Goodwin. 1986. Gesture and coparticipation in the activity of searching for a word. Semiotica 62(1/2). 51–75.10.1515/semi.1986.62.1-2.51Search in Google Scholar

Hayashi, Makoto. 2003. Joint utterance construction in Japanese conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sidag.12Search in Google Scholar

Helisten, Marika. 2019. Disjunctively positioned problem-noticings in managing multiactivity. Research on Language & Social Interaction 52(4). 318–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2019.1657274.Search in Google Scholar

Heritage, John. 1984. A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. Maxwell Atkinson (ed.), Structures of social action (Studies in Emotion and Social Interaction), 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511665868.020Search in Google Scholar

Heritage, John. 2012. Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language & Social Interaction 45(1). 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646684.Search in Google Scholar

Hosoda, Yuri. 2006. Repair and relevance of differential language expertise in second language conversations. Applied Linguistics 27(1). 25–50. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami022.Search in Google Scholar

Haddington, Pentti & Tiina Keisanen. 2009. Location, mobility and the body as resources in selecting a route. Journal of Pragmatics 41(10). 1938–1961. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PRAGMA.2008.09.018.Search in Google Scholar

Haddington, Pentti & Elizabeth Stokoe. 2023. Social interaction in high stakes crisis communication. Journal of Pragmatics 208. 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.02.014.Search in Google Scholar

Hazel, Spencer & Jan Svennevig. 2018. Multilingual workplaces e interactional dynamics of the contemporary international workforce. Journal of Pragmatics 126. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.11.005.Search in Google Scholar

Heritage, John & Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 68. 15–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250506800103.Search in Google Scholar

Haddington, Pentti, Antti Kamunen, Iira Rautiainen & Vera Vikström. 2020. Studying language and talk to support action: Interaction at the core of efficient teamwork in UNMEM 2019. Helsinki: FINCENT Publication Series 1/2020.Search in Google Scholar

Haddington, Pentti, Antti Kamunen & Antti Siipo. 2021. Keskustelunanalyysi ja monikansallinen kriisinhallintakoulutus [Conversation analysis and multinational crisis management training]. In Riikka Nissi, Mika Simonen & Esa Lehtinen (eds.), Kohtaamisia kentällä. Soveltava keskusteluntutkimus ammatillisissa ympäristöissä, 223–262. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Search in Google Scholar

Haddington, Pentti, Antti Kamunen & Iira Rautiainen. 2022. Noticing, monitoring and observing: Interactional grounds for joint and emergent seeing in UN military observer training. Journal of Pragmatics 200. 119–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.06.005.Search in Google Scholar

Haddington, Pentti, Maurice Nevile & Tiina Keisanen. (2012). Meaning in motion: Sharing the car, sharing the drive. Semiotica 191. 101–116.10.1515/sem-2012-0057Search in Google Scholar

Hazel, Spencer, Kristian Mortensen & Gitte Rasmussen. 2014. Introduction: A body of resources – CA studies of social conduct. Journal of Pragmatics 65. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.10.007.Search in Google Scholar

Hindmarsh, Jon, Lewis Hyland & Awijit Banerjee. 2014. Work to make simulation work: ‘Realism’, instructional correction and the body in training. Discourse Studies 16(2). 247–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445613514670.Search in Google Scholar

Jakonen, Teppo & Tom Morton. 2015. Epistemic search sequences in peer interaction in a content-based language classroom. Applied Linguistics 36(1). 73–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt031.Search in Google Scholar

Jefferson, Gail. 2004. Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Gene H. Lerner (ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation, 13–23. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.125.02jefSearch in Google Scholar

Jenvald, Johan & Magnus Morin. 2004. Simulation-supported live training for emergency response in hazardous environments. Simulation & Gaming 35(3). 363–377. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878104266223.Search in Google Scholar

Kamunen, Antti, Pentti Haddington & Iira Rautiainen. 2022. “It seems to be some kind of an accident”: Perception and team decision-making in time critical situations. Journal of Pragmatics 195. 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.04.001.Search in Google Scholar

Kasper, Gabriele. 2004. Participant orientations in German conversation-for-learning. The Modern Language Journal 88(4). 551–567. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.t01-18-.x.Search in Google Scholar

Kaur, Jagdish. 2009. Pre-empting problems of understanding. In Anna Mauranen & Elina Ranta (eds.), English as a lingua franca: Studies and findings, 107–123. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Kaur, Jagdish. 2016. Conversation analysis and ELF. In Marie Luise Pitzl & Ruth Osimk-Teasdale (eds.), English as a Lingua Franca: Perspectives and Prospects: Contributions in honour of Barbara Seidlhofer, 161–168. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781501503177-023Search in Google Scholar

Keevallik, Leelo. 2011. The terms of not knowing. In Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig (eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, 184–206. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511921674.009Search in Google Scholar

Keisanen, Tiina. 2012. “Uh-oh, we were going there”: Environmentally occasioned noticings of trouble in in-car interaction. Semiotica 191(1/4). 197–222. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2012-0061.Search in Google Scholar

Keisanen, Tiina, Mirka Rauniomaa & Pentti Haddington. 2014. Suspending action: From simultaenous to consecutive ordering of multiple courses of action. In Pentti Haddington, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada & Maurice Nevile (eds.), Multiactivity in social interaction: Beyond multitasking, 109–133. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.187.04keiSearch in Google Scholar

Kevoe-Feldman, Heidi & Clara Iversen. 2022. Approaching institutional boundaries: Comparative conversation analysis of practices for assisting suicidal callers in emergency and suicide helpline calls. Journal of Pragmatics 191. 83–97.10.1016/j.pragma.2022.01.004Search in Google Scholar

Kidwell, Mardi. 2000. Common ground in cross-cultural communication: Sequential and institutional contexts in front desk service encounters. Issues in Applied Linguistics 11(1). https://doi.org/10.5070/L4111005024.Search in Google Scholar

Koole, Tom. 2012. The epistemics of student problems: Explaining mathematics in a multi-lingual class. Journal of Pragmatics 44(13). 1902–1916. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PRAGMA.2012.08.006.Search in Google Scholar

Koshik, Irene & Mi-Suk Seo. 2012. Word (and other) search sequences initiated by language learners. Text & Talk 32(2). 167–189. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0009.Search in Google Scholar

Koskela, Inka & Hannele Palukka. 2011. Trainer interventions as instructional strategies in air traffic control training. Journal of Workplace Learning 23(5). 293–314. https://doi.org/10.1108/13665621111141902.Search in Google Scholar

Koskela, Inka, Ilkka Arminen & Hannele Palukka. 2013. Centres of coordination as a nexus of aviation. In Pentti Haddington, Lorenza Mondada & Maurice Nevile (eds.), Interaction and mobility: Language and the body in motion. 245–76. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110291278.245Search in Google Scholar

Kurhila, Salla. 2006. Second language interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.145Search in Google Scholar

Kurhila, Salla, Lari Kotilainen & Inkeri Lehtimaja. 2023. Orienting to the language learner role in multilingual workplace meetings. Applied Linguistics Review 14(4). 697–721. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2021-0053.Search in Google Scholar

Lerner, Gene H. 2004. Collaborative turn sequences. In Gene Lerner (ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation, 225–256. Amesterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.125.12lerSearch in Google Scholar

Laurier, Eric, Hayden Lorimer, Barry Brown, Owain Jones, Oskar Juhlin, Allyson Noble, Mark Perry, Daniele Pica, Philippe Sormani, Ignaz Strebel, Laurel Swan, Alex S. Taylor, Laura Watts & Alexandra Weilenmann. 2008. Driving and “passengering”: Notes on the ordinary organization of car travel. Mobilities 3(1). 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450100701797273.Search in Google Scholar

Markee, Numa & Gabriele Kasper. 2004. Classroom talks: An introduction. The Modern Language Journal 88(4). 491–500. https://doi.org/0.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.t01-14-.x.10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.t01-14-.xSearch in Google Scholar

Mežek, Špela. 2018. Laughter and humour in high-stakes academic ELF interactions: An analysis of laughter episodes in PhD defences/vivas. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 7(2). 261–284. https://doi.org/10.1515/jelf-2018-0014.Search in Google Scholar

Mondada, Lorenza. 2013. Displaying, contesting and negotiating epistemic authority in social interaction: Descriptions and questions in guided visits. Discourse Studies 15(5). 597–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445613501577.Search in Google Scholar

Mondada, Lorenza. 2018. Multiple temporalities of language and body in interaction: Challenges for transcribing multimodality. Research on Language & Social Interaction 51(1). 85–106.https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1413878.Search in Google Scholar

Mondada, Lorenza. 2021. How early can embodied responses be? Issues in time and sequentiality. Discourse Processes 58(4). 397–418. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853x.2020.1871561.Search in Google Scholar

Nevile, Maurice & Pentti Haddington. 2010. In-car distractions and their impact on driving activities. Canberra: Commonwealth Department Transport and Infrastructure. RSGR 2010-001. https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/migrated/roads/safety/publications/2010/pdf/rsgr_2014001.pdf (accessed 23 March 2023).Search in Google Scholar

Oittinen, Tuire. 2022. Multimodal and collaborative practices in the organization of word searches in lingua franca military meetings. Journal of Pragmatics 192. 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.02.005.Search in Google Scholar

Pietikäinen, Kaisa S. 2018. Misunderstandings and ensuring understanding in private ELF talk. Applied Linguistics 39(2). 188–212. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw005.Search in Google Scholar

Pietikäinen, Kaisa S. 2020. On second language/nonnative speakerism in conversation analysis: A study of emic orientations to language in multilingual/lingua franca couple interactions. Journal of Pragmatics 169. 136–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.05.017.Search in Google Scholar

Pietikäinen, Kaisa. 2021. Introduction: Conversation analytic insights from English as a lingua franca. Journal of Pragmatics 171. 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.10.002.Search in Google Scholar

Pekarek Doehler, Simona & Evelyne Berger. 2019. On the reflexive relation between developing L2 interactional competence and evolving social relationships: A longitudinal study of word-searches in the ‘wild’. In John Hellermann, Søren Eskildsen, Simona Pekarek Doehler & Arja Piirainen-Marsh (eds.), Conversation analytic research on learning-in-action: The complex ecology of second language interaction ‘in the wild’, 51–75. Cham: Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-22165-2_3Search in Google Scholar

Räisänen, Tiina. 2020. The use of multimodal resources by technical managers and their peers in meetings using English as the business lingua franca. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 63(2). 172–187. https://doi.org/10.1109/tpc.2020.2988759.Search in Google Scholar

Rautiainen, Iira. 2021. Talk and action as discourse in UN military observer course: Routines and practices of navigation. In Innocent Chiluwa (ed.), Discourse and conflict: Analysing text and talk of conflict, hate and peace-building, 381–412. Cham: Palgrave MacMillan.10.1007/978-3-030-76485-2_14Search in Google Scholar

Rautiainen, Iira. 2022. Practices of promoting and progressing multinational collaborative work: Interaction in UN military observer training. University of Oulu Doctoral Dissertation. http://urn.fi/urn:isbn:9789526235035.Search in Google Scholar

Raymond, Chase Wesley & Anne Elizabeth Clark White. 2017. Time reference in the service of social action. Social Psychology Quarterly 80(2). 109–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272516689468.Search in Google Scholar

Raymond, Chase Wesley & Anne Elizabeth Clark White. 2022. On the recognitionality of references to time in social interaction. Language & Communication 83. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANGCOM.2021.11.001.Search in Google Scholar

Rautiainen, Iira, Pentti Haddington & Antti Kamunen. 2022. Local participation framework as a resource among military observer trainees: Interactional episodes between repair initiation and repair solution in critical radio communication. Journal of Pragmatics 196. 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.05.006.Search in Google Scholar

Rautiainen, Iira, Pentti Haddington & Antti Kamunen. 2023. Nudging questions as devices for prompting courses of action and negotiating deontic (a)symmetry in UN military observer training. In Tiina Eilittä, Pentti Haddington, Antti Kamunen, Laura Kohonen-Aho, Iira Rautiainen & Anna Vatanen (eds.), Complexity of social interaction: Studies in multimodal conversation analysis, 217–252. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-3-031-30727-0_7Search in Google Scholar

Rautiainen, Iira, Pentti Haddington, Antti Kamunen & Tuire Oittinen. 2021. PeaceTalk video corpus pt. 2 (military observer course). University of Oulu. Available at: http://urn.fi/urn:nbn:fi:att:5b7d670d-4680-4831-b72d-a70bae7c1488.Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1987. Between macro and micro: Contexts and other connections. In Jeffrey C. Alexander, Bernhard Giesen, Richard Munch & Neil J. Smelser (eds.), The micro-macro link, 207–234. Berkeley: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel A., Gail Jefferson & Harvey Sacks. 1977. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Linguistic Society of America 53(2). 361–382, https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041.Search in Google Scholar

Seedhouse, Paul. 2004. The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Language Learning 54. x–xiii. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00266.x.Search in Google Scholar

Seedhouse, Paul. 2005. Conversation analysis as research methodology. In Keith Richards & Paul Seedhouse (eds.), Applying conversation analysis, 251–266. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230287853_15Search in Google Scholar

Sert, Olcay & Christine M. Jacknick. 2015. Student smiles and the negotiation of epistemics in L2 classrooms. Journal of Pragmatics 77. 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PRAGMA.2015.01.001.Search in Google Scholar

Sert, Olcay. 2013. ‘Epistemic status check’ as an interactional phenomenon in instructed learning settings. Journal of Pragmatics 45(1). 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PRAGMA.2012.10.005.Search in Google Scholar

Sikveland, Rein Ove, Heidi Kevoe-Feldman & Elizabeth Stokoe. 2020. Overcoming suicidal persons’ resistance using productive communicative challenges during police crisis negotiations. Applied Linguistics 41(4). 533–551. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy065.Search in Google Scholar

Stivers, Tanya, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig. 2011. Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig (eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, 3–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511921674.002Search in Google Scholar

Stivers, Tanya. 2004. “No no no” and other types of multiple sayings in social Interaction. Human Communication Research 30(2). 260–293. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2004.tb00733.x.Search in Google Scholar

Stevanovic, Melisa & Anssi Peräkylä. 2012. Deontic authority in interaction: The right to announce, propose, and decide. Research on Language & Social Interaction 45(3). 297–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.699260.Search in Google Scholar

Stokoe, Elizabeth, Rein Ove Sikveland & Magnus Hamann. 2022. Preparing to talk: Behind-the-scenes planning between negotiators for subsequent communication with persons in crisis. Journal of Pragmatics 191. 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.01.018.Search in Google Scholar

Su, Hang & Xiaofei Lu. 2023. Local grammars and intercultural speech act studies: A study of apologies in four English varieties. Intercultural Pragmatics 20(4). 377–404. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2023-4002.Search in Google Scholar

Svennevig, Jan. 2018. “What is it called in Norwegian?” Acquiring L2 vocabulary items in the workplace. Journal of Pragmatics 126. 68–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.017.Search in Google Scholar

Tranekjær, Louise. 2018. The interactional management of ‘language difficulties’ at work–L2 strategies for responding to explicit inquiries about understanding. Journal of Pragmatics 126. 78–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.003.Search in Google Scholar

Vatanen, Anna. 2018. Responding in early overlap: Recognitional onsets in assertion sequences. Research on Language & Social Interaction 51(2). 107–126, https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1413894.Search in Google Scholar

Vettorel, Paola. 2018. ELF and communication strategies: Are they taken into account in ELT materials? RELC Journal 49(1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688217746204.Search in Google Scholar

Wagner, Johannes. 2018. Multilingual and multimodal interactions. Applied Linguistics 39(1). 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amx058.Search in Google Scholar

Wagner, Johannes & Rod Gardner. 2004. Introduction. In Rod Gardner & Johannes Wagner (eds.), Second language conversations, 1–17. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2022-10-10
Accepted: 2023-01-02
Published Online: 2024-03-29
Published in Print: 2024-04-25

© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 1.5.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/ip-2024-2002/html
Scroll to top button