COMITATO ORGANIZZATORE LOCALE: Mazzon + Fodde, Michela Giordano + Olga Denti; Daniela Virdis; Geoffrey Grey ; Steve Buckledee;
TITOLO PROVVISORIO:
DIALOGIC FORMS IN ONE THOUSAND YEARS OF ENGLISH TEXTS – FROM OLD ENGLISH TO LATE MODERN ENGLISH
INVITED SPEAKERS
Jonathan Culpeper, University of Lancaster
Andreas Jucker, University of Zurich
Terttu Nevalainen, University of Helsinki
TEMARIO:
Diachronic studies or historical studies having to do with:
Politeness, Speech Acts, Dynamics of Dialogue, Address forms, Social Networks, Conversational Roles, Interactivity in different Text Types
More specific studies on:
Audience design, evaluative elements (e.g. commentary adverbs), the expression of phatic and conative functions, modality- and discourse-markers, persuasion and rhetoric, mimesis of dialogue (drama, fiction, instructive dialogues)
Selected References
Arnovick, Leslie Katherine. 2006. Written Reliquaries. The Resonance of Orality in Medieval English texts [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 153]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Asher, Nicholas, and Lascarides, Alex. 1998. “Questions in Dialogue.” Linguistics and Philosophy 21: 237-309.
Bax, Marcel. 1981. “Rules for ritual challenger: a speech convention among medieval knights.” Journal of Pragmatics 5: 423-444.
Bergner, Heinz. 1992. “The pragmatics of medieval texts.” In Cooperating with written texts. The Pragmatics and Comprehension of Written Texts [Studies in Anthropological Linguistics 5], Dieter Stein (ed.), 163-177. Berlin: Mouton.
Burton, Deirdre. 1980. Dialogue and Discourse. A Sociolinguistic Approach to Modern Drama Dialogue and Naturally Occurring Conversation. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Caffi, Claudia, and Janney, Richard W. 1994. “Toward a pragmatics of emotive communication.” Journal of Pragmatics 22: 325-373.
Culpeper, Jonathan and Archer, Dawn. 2008. “Requests and directness in early Modern English trial proceedings and play texts, 1640-1760.” In Andreas H. Jucker and Irma Taavitsainen (eds.), 45-84.
Culpeper, Jonathan, and Kytö, Merja. 1999. “Modifying Pragmatic Force. Hedges in Early Modern English Dialogues.” In Andreas H. Jucker, Gerd Fritz, and Franz Lebsanft (eds.), 293-312.
Culpeper, Jonathan, and Kytö, Merja. fc. Early Modern English Dialogues: Spoken Interaction as Writing, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Del Lungo Camiciotti, Gabriella. 2000. “Orality and written text: the representation of discourse in the Book of Margery Kempe.” In English Diachronic Pragmatics [Laboratorio 42]. Gabriella Di Martino and Maria Lima (eds.), 143-157. Napoli: CUEN
De Ventura, Paolo. 2007. Dramma e dialogo nella Commedia di Dante: il linguaggio della mimesi per un resoconto dall’aldilà [Letterature]. Napoli: Liguori.
Diamond, Julie. 1996. Status and Power in Verbal Interaction [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 40]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Diani, Giuliana. 2000. “The speech act of agreeing in 20th century dramatic dialogues.” In Gabriella Di Martino and Maria Lima (eds.), 353-379.
Fitzmaurice, Susan. 2004. “Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the historical construction of interlocutor stance: from stance markers to discourse markers.” Discourse Studies 6 (4): 427-448.
Fritz, Gerd. 1995. “Topics in the History of Dialogue Forms.” In Historical Pragmatics. Pragmatic Developments in the History of English [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 35]. Andreas H. Jucker (ed.), 469-493. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Gibbs, Raymond W. 2000. “Metarepresentations in Staged Communicative Acts.” In Metarepresentations: A Multidisciplinary Perspective [Vancouver Studies in Cognitive Science 10], Dan Sperber (ed.), 389-410. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gruber, Helmut. 2001. “Questions and strategic orientation in verbal conflict sequences.” Journal of Pragmatics 33: 1815-1857.
Herman, Vimala. 1991. “Dramatic dialogue and the systematics of turn-taking.” Semiotica 83 (1-2): 97-121.
Herman, Vimala. 1995. Dramatic discourse. Dialogue as interaction in plays. London: Routledge.
Itakura, Hiroko. 2001. “Describing conversational dominance.” Journal of Pragmatics 33: 1859-1880.
Jucker, Andreas H. 2000. “Slanders, slurs and insults on the road to Canterbury: Forms of verbal aggression in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales.” In Placing Middle English in Context [Topics in English Linguistics 35], Irma Taavitsainen et alii (eds.), 369-389. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Jucker, Andreas H. (ed.). 1995. Historical Pragmatics. Pragmatic Developments in the History of English [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 35]. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Jucker, Andreas H. and Taavitsainen, Irma (eds.) 2008. Speech Acts in the History of English [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 176]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jucker, Andreas H., Fritz, Gerd, and Lebsanft, Franz (eds.). 1999. Historical dialogue analysis [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 66]. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 2004. “Introducing polylogue.” Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1-24.
Koch, Peter and Oesterreicher, Wulf. 1985. “Sprache der Nähe, Sprache der Distanz: Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte”. Romanistisches Jahrbuch 36: 12-43.
Lebsanft, Franz. 1999. “A Late Medieval French Bargain Dialogue (Pathelin II) or: Further Remarks on the History of Dialogue Forms.” In Andreas H. Jucker, Gerd Fritz and Franz Lebsanft (eds.), 269-292.
Lumsden, David. 2008. Kinds of conversational cooperation. Journal of Pragmatics 40/11: 1896-1908.
Mao, LuMing R. 1992. “Fictional conversation and its pragmatic status.” In Cooperating with written texts. The Pragmatics and Comprehension of Written Texts [Studies in Anthropological Linguistics 5], Dieter Stein (ed.), 255-276. Berlin: Mouton.
Markovà, Ivana. 1990. “A three-step process as a unit of analysis in dialogue.” In The Dynamics of Dialogue, Ivana Markovà and Klaus Foppa (eds.), 129-146. Hemel Hampstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Moeschler, Jacques. 2002. “Speech act theory and the analysis of conversations. Sequencing and interpretation in pragmatic theory.” In Essays in Speech Act Theory [Pragmatics & Beyond new Series 77], Daniel Vanderverken and Susumu Kubo (eds.), 239-261. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Moore, Colette. 2003. “Reporting direct speech in Early Modern slander depositions.” In Studies in the History of the English Language. A Millennial Perspective [Topics in English Linguistics 39], Donka Minkova and Robert Stockwell (eds.), 399-416. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Muntigl, Peter, and Turnbull, William. 1998. “Conversational structure and facework in arguing.” Journal of Pragmatics 29: 225-256.
Piazza, Roberta. 1999. “Dramatic discourse approached from a conversational analysis perspective: Catherine Hayes’s Skirmishes and other contemporary plays.” Journal of Pragmatics 31: 1001-1023.
Roulet, Eddy. 1984. “Speech acts, discourse structure, and pragmatic connectives.” Journal of Pragmatics 8: 31-47.
Rozik, Eli. 2000. “Speech act metaphor in theatre.” Journal of Pragmatics 32: 203-218.
Shippey, Tom A. 1993. “Principles of Conversation in Beowulfian speech.” In Techniques of Description. Spoken and Written Discourse. A Festschrift for Malcolm Coulthard, John M. Sinclair, Michael Hoey and Gwyneth Fox (eds.), 109-126. London: Routledge.
Schober, Michael F., and Brennan, Susan E. 2003. “Processes of Interactive Spoken Discourse: The Role of the Partner.” In Handbook of Discourse Processes, Morton Ann Gernsbacher, Susan R. Goldman and Arthur C. Graesser (eds.), 123-64. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schrott, Angela. 1999. “Que fais, Adam? Questions and Seduction in the Jeu d’Adam.” In Andreas H. Jucker, Gerd Fritz, and Franz Lebsanft (eds.), 331-370.
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie, and Aijmer, Karin. 2007. The Semantic Field of Modal Certainty: A Corpus-Based Study of English Adverbs [Topics in English Linguistics 56]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Suhr, Carla. 2002. “Speaking to the masses: orality and literacy in six Early Modern texts on witchcraft.” Helsinki English Studies (Electronic Journal) 2, accessed 09/10/2006.
Tsui, Amy B.M. 1991. “Sequencing rules and coherence in discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 15: 111-129.
Wilson, Deirdre. 2005. “New directions for research on pragmatics and modularity.” Lingua 115: 1129-1146.