Difference between revisions of "Laury2021"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=INCOLLECTION |Author(s)=Ritva Laury; |Title=Definitely indefinite: Negotiating intersubjective common ground in everyday interaction in Finnish |Editor(s)=...")
 
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Ritva Laury;
 
|Author(s)=Ritva Laury;
 
|Title=Definitely indefinite: Negotiating intersubjective common ground in everyday interaction in Finnish
 
|Title=Definitely indefinite: Negotiating intersubjective common ground in everyday interaction in Finnish
|Editor(s)=Jan Lindström; Ritva Laury; Anss
+
|Editor(s)=Jan Lindström; Ritva Laury; Anssi Peräkylä; Marja-Leena Sorjonen;
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Intersubjetivity; Conversation analysis
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Intersubjetivity; Conversation analysis
 
|Key=Laury2021
 
|Key=Laury2021

Latest revision as of 03:58, 6 December 2021

Laury2021
BibType INCOLLECTION
Key Laury2021
Author(s) Ritva Laury
Title Definitely indefinite: Negotiating intersubjective common ground in everyday interaction in Finnish
Editor(s) Jan Lindström, Ritva Laury, Anssi Peräkylä, Marja-Leena Sorjonen
Tag(s) EMCA, Intersubjetivity, Conversation analysis
Publisher John Benjamins
Year 2021
Language English
City Amsterdam
Month
Journal
Volume
Number
Pages 41-60
URL Link
DOI
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title Intersubjectivity in Action: Studies in language and social interaction
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This chapter concerns expressions which seem internally contradictory because they consist of both a recognitional and a non-recognitional element. They contain both the Finnish demonstrative se ‘that, the’, a recognitional, as in se ihminen ‘that/the person’, and one of the indefinite determiners yksi ‘one’, semmonen ‘such’, and joku ‘some’, all of which are non-recognitionals, resulting in expressions such as se joku ihminen ‘that/the some person’. The chapter shows that each of these expressions has its own home environment and expresses a distinct epistemic stance. The main findings are that these expressions constitute a fine-grained resource for the negotiation of relative epistemic status and are tools for building intersubjective common ground in interaction.

Notes