Language and Interaction: An Advanced Resource Book

By R. Young. 2008

110 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Using conversation analysis in the second language classroom to teach interactional competence (2011, background): “5 The notion of competence is not discussed in this article; for an in-depth definition refer to Young (2008).”
Validity argument for assessing L2 pragmatics in interaction using mixed methods (2015, background): “CA-based research on measuring interactional competence has grown, attesting its contributions to conceptualizing and operationalizing interactional competence (e.g., Brown, 2003; Kasper & Ross, 2007; Lazaraton, 2002; May, 2009, 2011; Galaczi, 2008; Gan, 2010; Young, 2008; Young & He, 1998).”
The Routledge handbook of English language teaching (2018, background): “Languages such as English or Spanish, as well as any other symbolic system (such as mathematics and music), are symbolic cultural artefacts; they are both content and tools for thinking processes in human beings.”
What counts as “responding”? Contingency on previous speaker contribution as a feature of interactional competence (2018, background): “…a more radical, “strong” view that IC is “not the knowledge or the possession of an individual person, but it is co-constructed by all participants in a discursive practice” (Young, 2008, p. 101), and that “we cannot say that an individual is interactionally competent” (He & Young, 1998, p. 7).”