German compliment responses

By Andrea Golato. 2002

187 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/817549f1aeacc56466c85c0044972d4df08151b1

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

Marking understanding versus receipting information in talk: Achso. and ach in German interaction (2010, background): “…2009) and to those works that specifically contrast German and English interaction (Auer and Uhmann, 1982; Egbert, 1996, 2009; Egbert et al., 2009; Golato, 2000, 2002, 2005; Golato and Betz, 2008; Golato and Fagyal, 2008; Harren and Raitaniemi, 2006; Selting, 1987, 2002, 2007; Streeck, 2002;…”
Comparing Single and Double Sayings of the German Response Token ja and the Role of Prosody: A Conversation Analytic Perspective (2008, background): “(Jefferson, 1980), which is said to express agreement (Burkhardt, 1982; Golato, 2002).”
A preference for progressivity in interaction (2006, background): “…certain responses as “preferred” in a structural (not a psychological) sense, and other responses as “dispreferred” (Sacks 1973a, 1987a; Schegloff, Jefferson, & Sacks 1977; Pomerantz 1978, 1984a; Atkinson & Heritage 1984; Heritage 1984, 1988; Clayman 1993, 2002; Golato 2002; Raymond 2003).”
The Achievement of Intersubjectivity through Embodied Completions: A Study of Interactions Between First and Second Language Speakers (2006, background): “…studies appear to operate across different languages and cultures (e.g. Sorjonen 1996, 2001; Hakulinen 2001; on Finnish; Egbert 1996, 1997a, 1997b; Golato 2000, 2002; on German; Mori 1999; Tanaka 1999; Hayashi 2003; on Japanese; Kim 1999, 2001; Park 1999, 2002; on Korean; Wu 2004 on Mandarin; to…”
How can insights from conversation analysis be directly applied to teaching L2 pragmatics? (2006, background): “However, if speakers belong to two different cultures pragmatic interference may occur due to differing conceptions of the social activity in which the speakers are engaged (Gumperz, 1982; Taleghani-Nikazm, 1999; 2002a; Golato, 2002).”
Toward a Learning Behavior Tracking Methodology for CA-for-SLA (2007, background): “Theoretical work on interactional competence has been undertaken primarily within a sociocultural perspective (see Hall 1993, 1995, 1999) and systemicfunctional grammar allied with situated learning theory (see Young 2002; Young and Miller 2004). Here, I treat interactional competence as a conversat”