话语的社会建构：常人方法论谈话分析的理论和方法研究
|
摘要
谈话是社会生活中的一项中心活动。它是社会成员从事社会活动、建立和维系直接的社会关系、确立或否定个体的社会身份并且传递、修正和更新个体文化符号的重要媒介和方式。社会成员通过互动谈话达到意义共享、相互理解和行为的一致性从而实现社会和谐。因此，人类学家、社会学家、语言学家和心理学家等社会科学工作者都把面对面交际的研究当作理解人类社会行为的重要战略场地。日常互动交际的组织模式、社会成员互动谈话中话语的组织模式、互动双方达成理解和共识的方法以及谈话对于建构更大范围社会结构的作用等等话题成为核心研究内容。诞生于上世纪六十年代、由萨克斯、谢格罗夫和杰弗逊三位社会学家所创立的谈话分析致力于发现有秩序的自然发生的互动谈话背后所蕴含的话语规则、程序和常规及其与更大的社会结构之间的共建关系。这种微观的研究视角代表了当今社会学研究“质的革命”的典型路径，在某种程度上开启了社会学思维方式的革命。
谈话分析在近半个世纪的发展时间内积累了大量的研究成果，其跨学科性对研究者解读其理论和方法内涵提出了很高要求。目前国内所开展的对谈话分析的介绍和评介多在语言学界展开，对其社会学根源和谈话与社会结构关系的探讨鲜见。本研究的目的就是对谈话分析的理论基础、基本理论建构、实践研究成果和研究方法进行学术梳理和规范性导读，避免误读从而为后续研究打下良好的学术基础。根据这一研究目标，本研究以文献资料法为基础，辅以逻辑论证和个案描述相结合的方法，系统分析谈话分析的发展轨迹，阐述其理论来源和理论要件，总结其研究方法并分析其实践应用成果。主要的研究手段包括内容分析和访谈咨询等。
首先，本研究试图从根本上理清谈话分析的学科缘起及其理论渊源。具体分析了谈话分析的哲学基础—建构主义认识论和日常语言哲学学派对谈话分析的启发和影响。重点阐述了谈话分析的社会学基础，主要涉及戈夫曼的互动秩序理论和加芬克尔的常人方法论与谈话分析的学科渊源。对于谈话分析的跨学科性以及民族志方法学、语言学、人类学等诸学派对谈话分析尤其是萨克斯本人的影响也逐一进行了阐述。系统分析了谈话分析的兴起和发展阶段及其代表人物和贡献，以期对谈话分析的总体研究态势和发展走向进行较为全面的概括。其次，对谈话分析作为一种社会学理论的理论背景和理论建构进行分析和阐述。谈话分析遵循以下的理论主旨：一，互动成分具有语境限制和语境更新功能；二，互动话语中的秩序是无处不在的；三，谈话分析遵循自下而上从语料出发的研究方法；四，谈话分析注重对偏常案例的分析。其具体研究成果体现在“纯粹谈话分析”和“应用谈话分析”两个领域。前者包括发现了互动谈话的微观结构特征，如相邻对、话轮转换结构、可取结构、修正结构等等，并对这些话语内部结构与相应社会行动的关系进行了研究。同时发现了互动谈话宏观结构特征，主要包括对电话谈话及其社会行动的研究以及故事讲述及其社会行动的研究等等。而后者主要是指谈话分析对机构性谈话及其社会行动进行了开创性研究，对正式的机构性谈话和非正式的机构性谈话的话语结构特征及其与机构性情境的关系进行了探索和阐释。同时，对于应用谈话领域其它相关的研究内容如人机对话、政治演讲以及语言教学等内容也有所提及和介绍。再次，对谈话分析的具体研究方法进行总结和概括。谈话分析学者偏爱录音、录像等技术手段以期真实再现日常生活实践并如实将其描述出来，从而“回到事情本身”。谈话分析的研究步骤主要包括以下四个过程：一，收集和录制语料；二，部分和全部地转写语料；三，分析选定片断；四，做出研究报告。这种研究视角和方法使社会研究成为一种自下而上而非“先验至上”的、可操作的、可信度强的并且可以重复检验的科学化过程。最后，对谈话分析的贡献、不足和未来走向进行分析和评述。常人方法论及其分支谈话分析作为一种质性研究方法，从某种意义上使社会学放弃了作为客体对立面的主体地位，超越了传统二元思维方式的矛盾与困境，从完全的经验一元论出发，将个人与社会、社会结构与人际交往、宏观理论与微观行动、社会学知识与常识推理等两极对立的概念结合起来，丰富了我们对社会的认识。实现了思维方式的创新。因此，尽管从其诞生之日起，常人方法论及其谈话分析屡遭诟病，就目前发展态势而言还未形成统一的理论标准，研究话题还比较有限，研究方法还有待进一步规范，但它可以说是当代社会学思维方式变革的真正开始，其理论的独特性、丰富性和深刻性为后现代社会学的精神革命开启了新的篇章，尤其是谈话分析在发展过程中所体现出的跨学科性更蕴含着其作为一种研究方法所具有的广泛的发展空间和潜力。
Conversation is a primordial activity in social life. It is the important medium andmeans through which social members indulge in social activities、establish and maintaindirect social relationships、affirm or deny individual’s social identities and transmit、renew and modify individual’s cultural symbols. Through interactive conversation,social members share meanings、reach mutual understanding and continuity of behaviorso as to realize social harmony. Therefore, social scientists including anthropologists、sociologists、linguists and psychologists all treat the study of face-to-face interaction asan important strategic field for the understanding of human being’s social behavior. Theissues like the organizational sequence in participants’ interactions、the methods the twosides employ to reach mutual understanding and the functions that interactions have forconstructing social structure on bigger scales have all become kernel research topics.Founded in the1960s by the three sociologists of Sacks、Schegloff and Jefferson,Conversation Analysis(CA) is dedicated to finding out the underlying rules、proceduresand conventions beneath orderly and naturally-occurring interactions and theinterrelationships in between interactions and bigger social structures. CA believes thatinteraction is not to reflect social reality passively, but to construct social reality activelyand language itself is kind of social reality which is directly involved in social affairsand social structure. This microscopic perspective represents the standard approach inthe “qualitative revolution” in modern sociological research and in a certain degreerevolutionizes sociological way of thinking.
CA has flourished in research achievement within half a century’s development. Itsmulti-disciplinary feature sets great standard for researchers to interpret theconnotations of its theorizing and methodology. At home, the introductions andcomment to CA are mainly carried out in the field of linguistics and few are thediscussions on the sociological foundations of CA and the interrelationship in betweenconversation and social structures. The present thesis is to do an academic summary andstandard introduction to the theoretical foundations、basic theoretical constructions、 applications and methodology of CA so as to avoid misinterpretation and set solid basisfor further academic work. According to this research target, the research adopts themethod of documentary interpretation supplemented by logic argumentation and casedescription so as to systematically analyze the development trend of CA、elaborate itstheoretical foundations and key findings、summarize its methodology and analyze itsapplications. The major research technologies include content analysis、interview、consultation and so on.
First and foremost, the present research attempts to elaborate on the origin of CA ondiscipline and theory, which includes the concrete analysis of the inspiration andinfluences from the philosophical foundation of CA—constructiontivism and ordinarylanguage philosophy、the elaboration of the sociological foundation of CA including theinteractive order theory of Goffman and the interrelationship in between Garfinkel’sethnomethodology and CA and the turn-by-turn illustration of the multi-disciplinaryinfluences on CA, especially on Sacks himself including those from ethnography、linguistics and so on. The origin and development of CA and the representatives andtheir contributions at each stage are systematically analyzed in order to summarize thecomprehensive research and development trend of CA. Besides, the theoreticalbackground and theoretical construction of CA as a system of sociological theory areanalyzed and elaborated. CA adheres to the following theoretical principles:1.interactive constituents are context-bound and context-renewed;2.order is everywherein interaction;3.CA adopts the bottom-up method;4.CA pays attention to the study ofdeviant cases. The concrete research achievement is manifested in the two fields of“pure CA” and “applied CA”. The former includes the findings of the microscopicfeatures of interaction like adjacency pair、turn-taking、preference structure、repairstructure, etc and the relationship between these internal features of interaction and thecorresponding social action. It also includes the macroscopic features of interactionrepresented by the research on telephone conversation、 story-telling and theircorresponding social action. The latter refers to the pioneering work of CA oninstitutional talk and their social action including the exploration on the interactivefeatures of both formal and informal institutional interactions and their relationship withthe corresponding institutional context. Besides, other applications of CA including human-machine interaction、political speech and language teaching are also mentionedand introduced. Furthermore, the concrete research methodology of CA is summarized.CA practitioners prefer the technological means of recordings and videos in the hope ofvisualizing ordinary life practice and truly depicting them, which is called “back tothings themselves.” The research procedures of CA include:1.recording and collectingdata;2. partially or fully transcribing the data;3. analyzing the chosen script;4.makingresearch report. This perspective and method allows the research to become a scientificprocedure of being bottom-up rather than being “transcendental”、 highlyoperational、reliable and worthy of being tested and retested. Last, the contributions、shortcomings and future trend of CA are analyzed and commented. As a qualitativemethod, EM—CA in a certain degree transcends the traditional dilemma of dualism insociology and from the perspective of empirio—monism, it combines the binaryconcepts of individual and society、social structure and human interaction、macroscopictheory and microscopic action and sociological knowledge and commonsense reasoning,which enriches our knowledge of society and realizes the innovation of thinking mode.Therefore, despite the the facts that EM—CA has met with countless criticism since itsfounding, the standard theorizing has not been formed, the research topics are stilllimited and the methodology still needs to be regulated, it begins the innovation ofthinking mode in modern sociology. The uniqueness、richness and deep—foundednessof its theory starts new chapters for the mental revolution of post—modern sociologyand the multi-disciplinary feature shown in EM—CA in its development embodies itspotentiality as a research methodology。
谈话分析在近半个世纪的发展时间内积累了大量的研究成果，其跨学科性对研究者解读其理论和方法内涵提出了很高要求。目前国内所开展的对谈话分析的介绍和评介多在语言学界展开，对其社会学根源和谈话与社会结构关系的探讨鲜见。本研究的目的就是对谈话分析的理论基础、基本理论建构、实践研究成果和研究方法进行学术梳理和规范性导读，避免误读从而为后续研究打下良好的学术基础。根据这一研究目标，本研究以文献资料法为基础，辅以逻辑论证和个案描述相结合的方法，系统分析谈话分析的发展轨迹，阐述其理论来源和理论要件，总结其研究方法并分析其实践应用成果。主要的研究手段包括内容分析和访谈咨询等。
首先，本研究试图从根本上理清谈话分析的学科缘起及其理论渊源。具体分析了谈话分析的哲学基础—建构主义认识论和日常语言哲学学派对谈话分析的启发和影响。重点阐述了谈话分析的社会学基础，主要涉及戈夫曼的互动秩序理论和加芬克尔的常人方法论与谈话分析的学科渊源。对于谈话分析的跨学科性以及民族志方法学、语言学、人类学等诸学派对谈话分析尤其是萨克斯本人的影响也逐一进行了阐述。系统分析了谈话分析的兴起和发展阶段及其代表人物和贡献，以期对谈话分析的总体研究态势和发展走向进行较为全面的概括。其次，对谈话分析作为一种社会学理论的理论背景和理论建构进行分析和阐述。谈话分析遵循以下的理论主旨：一，互动成分具有语境限制和语境更新功能；二，互动话语中的秩序是无处不在的；三，谈话分析遵循自下而上从语料出发的研究方法；四，谈话分析注重对偏常案例的分析。其具体研究成果体现在“纯粹谈话分析”和“应用谈话分析”两个领域。前者包括发现了互动谈话的微观结构特征，如相邻对、话轮转换结构、可取结构、修正结构等等，并对这些话语内部结构与相应社会行动的关系进行了研究。同时发现了互动谈话宏观结构特征，主要包括对电话谈话及其社会行动的研究以及故事讲述及其社会行动的研究等等。而后者主要是指谈话分析对机构性谈话及其社会行动进行了开创性研究，对正式的机构性谈话和非正式的机构性谈话的话语结构特征及其与机构性情境的关系进行了探索和阐释。同时，对于应用谈话领域其它相关的研究内容如人机对话、政治演讲以及语言教学等内容也有所提及和介绍。再次，对谈话分析的具体研究方法进行总结和概括。谈话分析学者偏爱录音、录像等技术手段以期真实再现日常生活实践并如实将其描述出来，从而“回到事情本身”。谈话分析的研究步骤主要包括以下四个过程：一，收集和录制语料；二，部分和全部地转写语料；三，分析选定片断；四，做出研究报告。这种研究视角和方法使社会研究成为一种自下而上而非“先验至上”的、可操作的、可信度强的并且可以重复检验的科学化过程。最后，对谈话分析的贡献、不足和未来走向进行分析和评述。常人方法论及其分支谈话分析作为一种质性研究方法，从某种意义上使社会学放弃了作为客体对立面的主体地位，超越了传统二元思维方式的矛盾与困境，从完全的经验一元论出发，将个人与社会、社会结构与人际交往、宏观理论与微观行动、社会学知识与常识推理等两极对立的概念结合起来，丰富了我们对社会的认识。实现了思维方式的创新。因此，尽管从其诞生之日起，常人方法论及其谈话分析屡遭诟病，就目前发展态势而言还未形成统一的理论标准，研究话题还比较有限，研究方法还有待进一步规范，但它可以说是当代社会学思维方式变革的真正开始，其理论的独特性、丰富性和深刻性为后现代社会学的精神革命开启了新的篇章，尤其是谈话分析在发展过程中所体现出的跨学科性更蕴含着其作为一种研究方法所具有的广泛的发展空间和潜力。
Conversation is a primordial activity in social life. It is the important medium andmeans through which social members indulge in social activities、establish and maintaindirect social relationships、affirm or deny individual’s social identities and transmit、renew and modify individual’s cultural symbols. Through interactive conversation,social members share meanings、reach mutual understanding and continuity of behaviorso as to realize social harmony. Therefore, social scientists including anthropologists、sociologists、linguists and psychologists all treat the study of face-to-face interaction asan important strategic field for the understanding of human being’s social behavior. Theissues like the organizational sequence in participants’ interactions、the methods the twosides employ to reach mutual understanding and the functions that interactions have forconstructing social structure on bigger scales have all become kernel research topics.Founded in the1960s by the three sociologists of Sacks、Schegloff and Jefferson,Conversation Analysis(CA) is dedicated to finding out the underlying rules、proceduresand conventions beneath orderly and naturally-occurring interactions and theinterrelationships in between interactions and bigger social structures. CA believes thatinteraction is not to reflect social reality passively, but to construct social reality activelyand language itself is kind of social reality which is directly involved in social affairsand social structure. This microscopic perspective represents the standard approach inthe “qualitative revolution” in modern sociological research and in a certain degreerevolutionizes sociological way of thinking.
CA has flourished in research achievement within half a century’s development. Itsmulti-disciplinary feature sets great standard for researchers to interpret theconnotations of its theorizing and methodology. At home, the introductions andcomment to CA are mainly carried out in the field of linguistics and few are thediscussions on the sociological foundations of CA and the interrelationship in betweenconversation and social structures. The present thesis is to do an academic summary andstandard introduction to the theoretical foundations、basic theoretical constructions、 applications and methodology of CA so as to avoid misinterpretation and set solid basisfor further academic work. According to this research target, the research adopts themethod of documentary interpretation supplemented by logic argumentation and casedescription so as to systematically analyze the development trend of CA、elaborate itstheoretical foundations and key findings、summarize its methodology and analyze itsapplications. The major research technologies include content analysis、interview、consultation and so on.
First and foremost, the present research attempts to elaborate on the origin of CA ondiscipline and theory, which includes the concrete analysis of the inspiration andinfluences from the philosophical foundation of CA—constructiontivism and ordinarylanguage philosophy、the elaboration of the sociological foundation of CA including theinteractive order theory of Goffman and the interrelationship in between Garfinkel’sethnomethodology and CA and the turn-by-turn illustration of the multi-disciplinaryinfluences on CA, especially on Sacks himself including those from ethnography、linguistics and so on. The origin and development of CA and the representatives andtheir contributions at each stage are systematically analyzed in order to summarize thecomprehensive research and development trend of CA. Besides, the theoreticalbackground and theoretical construction of CA as a system of sociological theory areanalyzed and elaborated. CA adheres to the following theoretical principles:1.interactive constituents are context-bound and context-renewed;2.order is everywherein interaction;3.CA adopts the bottom-up method;4.CA pays attention to the study ofdeviant cases. The concrete research achievement is manifested in the two fields of“pure CA” and “applied CA”. The former includes the findings of the microscopicfeatures of interaction like adjacency pair、turn-taking、preference structure、repairstructure, etc and the relationship between these internal features of interaction and thecorresponding social action. It also includes the macroscopic features of interactionrepresented by the research on telephone conversation、 story-telling and theircorresponding social action. The latter refers to the pioneering work of CA oninstitutional talk and their social action including the exploration on the interactivefeatures of both formal and informal institutional interactions and their relationship withthe corresponding institutional context. Besides, other applications of CA including human-machine interaction、political speech and language teaching are also mentionedand introduced. Furthermore, the concrete research methodology of CA is summarized.CA practitioners prefer the technological means of recordings and videos in the hope ofvisualizing ordinary life practice and truly depicting them, which is called “back tothings themselves.” The research procedures of CA include:1.recording and collectingdata;2. partially or fully transcribing the data;3. analyzing the chosen script;4.makingresearch report. This perspective and method allows the research to become a scientificprocedure of being bottom-up rather than being “transcendental”、 highlyoperational、reliable and worthy of being tested and retested. Last, the contributions、shortcomings and future trend of CA are analyzed and commented. As a qualitativemethod, EM—CA in a certain degree transcends the traditional dilemma of dualism insociology and from the perspective of empirio—monism, it combines the binaryconcepts of individual and society、social structure and human interaction、macroscopictheory and microscopic action and sociological knowledge and commonsense reasoning,which enriches our knowledge of society and realizes the innovation of thinking mode.Therefore, despite the the facts that EM—CA has met with countless criticism since itsfounding, the standard theorizing has not been formed, the research topics are stilllimited and the methodology still needs to be regulated, it begins the innovation ofthinking mode in modern sociology. The uniqueness、richness and deep—foundednessof its theory starts new chapters for the mental revolution of post—modern sociologyand the multi-disciplinary feature shown in EM—CA in its development embodies itspotentiality as a research methodology。
引文
①参见Gage,N.L, The paradigm wars and their aftermath: Ahistorical sketch of research on teaching since1989,Educational Research,1989(Oct):4-10.
①有关“常人方法论”译名的含义参见侯钧生主编，《西方社会学理论教程》，南开大学出版社，2006年：288.
②Eric Livingstone, Making sense of ethnomethodology, Routledge&Kegan Paul,1987:57.
①Phillips, N.&Hardy, C. Discourse Analysis: Investigating Processes of Social Construction. Thousand Oaks.California: Sage Publications,2002:2.
①萨克斯去世后这篇演讲被整理出来并命名为“谈话序列的规则”(Sacks,1992a:3-11)。
②Schegloff, E.A. Sequencing in conversational opening. American Anthropologist,1968（70）:1079.
①Hutchby, I.&Wooffitt R. Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity,1998:98.
①Schegloff, E.A, On talk and its institutional occasions.//Drew, P.&Heritage, J.(eds) Talk at work: interaction ininstitutional settings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992c:106.
②Drew, P.&Heritage, J, Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992:29-53.
③Hutchby, I.&Wooffitt R, Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity,1998:7.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. vol1. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992: xii.
②Psathas, G., Conversation analysis: the study of Talk-in-Interaction. Thousand Oaks:Sage,1995.
③Silverman, D., Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. Oxford:Policy Press,1998..
①Hutchby, I, Wooffitt,R, Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: Polity Press,1998.
②Have, Paul ten, Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide.London, etc.: Sage Publications,1999
③Have, Paul ten, Understanding qualitative research and ethnomethodology. London etc.Sage Publications,2004.
④Wooffitt, R, Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis: A Comparative and Critical Introduction. London,etc. Sage Publications,2005.
②参见徐赳赳.话语分析20年.外语教学与研究.1995年第1期；崔国鑫.语用视野下的会话分析.首都师范大学博士毕业论文.2009年.
③参见张荣建.会话分析与随意会话分析.四川外语学院学报.2002年第4期;会话分析与批判会话分析.四川外语学院学报.2005年第2期.
①具体参见刘运同.会话分析学派的研究方法及理论基础.同济大学学报(社科版).2002年第4期.
②主要的介绍出现在以下社会学教材中：侯钧生.西方社会学理论教程.天津:南开大学出版社,2006:287-316、刘少杰.国外社会学理论.北京:高等教育出版社.2006:.256-262杨善华.当代西方社会学理论.北京:北京大学出版社.1999:47-95.高宣扬.当代社会理论.北京:中国人民大学出版社:517-532等。
①有关这一区别可参见Paul ten Have(1999a:170-80,187-9)。
①Karl Raimund Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge.1935:25.
①导师提供的系统书目，一个是pdf文档，一个是word文档，二者的文献内容是一样的，只是编排方法不同。前者只是一个按作者姓氏排序的文献目录；而后者按年代分类（等于提供了一个发展线索），并且一开始提示了常人方法论的基础读物和提出争论问题的文献。
②Garfinkel, H, Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall,1967; Garfinkel, H,Ethnomethodology’s Program: Working Out Durkheim’s Aphorism. Edited and Introduced by Anne Rawls. Lanham,MD: Rowman&Littlefield,2002.
③Have, Paul ten, Understanding qualitative research and ethnomethodology. London etc. Sage Publications,2004.
④Boden, D.&Zimmerman, D.H.(eds), Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversationanalysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991.
①这两篇文章均是按照导师要求并且由导师开列提纲所完成的。
①Hutchby, I.&Wooffitt R, Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity,1998:
123.
①转引自温锁林，《语言学方法对当代哲学研究的影响》，《山西大学学报》（哲社版），2002年第4期:78。
②阿尔斯顿，语言哲学,北京:：北京三联书店，1988：25。
③Silverman David, Harvey Sacks—Social Science and Conversation Analysis, Cambridge:Polity press:28.
①参见高文：《建构主义研究的哲学与心理学基础》，《全球教育展望》，2001年第3期。
②参见纪海英：《历史地分析建构主义的哲学根源》，《赣南师范学院学报》，2003年第1期。
③参见高文：《教育中的若干建构主义范型》，《全球教育展望》，2005年第4期。
①Burr, Vivien, ed., Social construction (2ndedition), London, New York: Routledge.,2003:2-9.
②Burr, Vivien, ed., Social construction (2ndedition), London, New York: Routledge.,2003:9.
①参见涂纪亮：《维特根斯坦后期哲学思想研究—英美语言哲学概论》，武汉：武汉大学出版社，2007年：5。
①转引自朱红文，王鲭钧，《谈话分析与社会科学的方法轮转向》，《华中科技大学学报（社科版）》，2008年第一期：23。
②陈嘉映，哲学研究，上海：上海人民出版社，2001：446。
①Sacks Harvey., Lectures on conversation.(Vol.I).Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A.Schegloff, Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:5.
①Sacks, H,“On sociological description”. Berkeley Journal of Sociology1963(8):116.
②Sacks, H. An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for doing sociology.//Sudnow, D.(ed)Studies in social interaction.. New York: Free Press.1972a:31-74.
①Goffman,E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday Anchor:1959.
②Sacks, H., On the analyzability of stories by children'.//J.J. Gumperz,&D. Hymes, ed. Directions insociolinguistics: the ethnography of communication. New York: Rinehart&Winston,1972b:325-45
③Sacks, H. Lectures on conversation.2vols. edited by Gail Jefferson; with an introduction by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992：329.
④同上，580页。
⑤Goffman, E. Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
①同上，592页。
②Goffman, E. Forms of talk, Oxford: Blackwell:1981:48—50.
③Sacks, H. Everyone has to lie. Sanches,//M.&Blount, B.(eds) Sociocultural dimensions of language use. NewYork: Academic Press.1975:57-80.
④Goffman, E. Forms of talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press,1981.
⑤Schegloff, E.A. On a virtual servomechanism for guessing bad news: a single-case conjecture. Social Problems1988(b)(35):442-457.
①转译自David Silverman, Havey Saxks—Social Science and Conversation Analysis, Oxford: Policy Press.1998a:35.
①Heritage, J. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.1984a:203-205.
②转引自Silverman, D.Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. Oxford: Policy Press:1998a:36.
①有关这一点具体的讨论，可以参见Heritage, J. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.1984a:23-28.
②Sacks, H..“Notes on methodology”. In: Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies inConversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1984a:20.
①“索引性”一词源于日常语言哲学，加芬克尔在其社会学分析中扩大了这个词的含义，使其不仅包括语用学领域的指示性词（deictic words），还包括日常实践行动的索引性。
①限于篇幅，本文在此不再赘述，具体参见Suchman,1987; Edwards and Potter1992; Hutchby and Woffitt1998;
202-228; Goodwin1994;2000; Nevile2004; Arminen2005b.
①Goodenough, W. H. Componential Analysis and the Study of Meaning, Languages,1956(32):195—216.
①Sacks, H. Lectures on conversation. I. edited by Gail Jefferson; with an introduction by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992.:647.
②Chomsky, N, Aspects of the theory of Syntax, Cambridge MA: MIT Press,1965:125.
③同上，649页。
④同上，650页。
⑤同上，522页。
①Goffman, E. The Interaction Order, Social Review,1983(48):1—17.
②转引自刘运同，《会话分析概要》，学林出版社，2007年，第9页。
①Heritage, J. Conversation analysis and institutional talk: analysing data.//D. Silverman,(ed), Qualitative research:Theory, method and practice.London: Sage1997:162.
②Paul ten Have, Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practiced Guide. London: Sage Publication:8.
①Schegloff, Emanuel A., Harvey Sacks, Opening up closings, Semiotica,1973(8):289-327.
②Sacks, H., Schegloff.E,A, Jefferson. G, A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation’,
Language,1974(50):696-735.
③Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1984.
④Drew, P. and Heritage, J.1992Analyzing talk at work: an introduction.In P: Drew andJ.Heritage (ods). Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. pp29—53
①Heath, C.C.&Luff, P.K. Technology in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000; Luff, P.K.,Hindmarsh, J.&Heath C.C.(eds). Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing Systems Design.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000b.
①Atkinson, J. Maxwell Our masters’ voices: the language and body language of politics. London: Methuen,1984a; Atkinson, J. Maxwell Public speaking and audience responses: some techniques forinviting audienceapplause.//J. Maxwell Atkinson, John Heritage, eds. Structures of SocialAction: Studies in Conversation Analysis.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:370-407.
②Heritage, John, David Greatbatch, Generating applause: a study of rhetoric and response at party politicalconferences, American Journal of Sociology1986(92):110-57.
①Firth, Alan, Johannes Wagner, On discourse, communication and (some) fundamental concepts in second languageacquisition research, The Modern Language Journal,1997(81),3:285-300; Firth, Alan, Johannes Wagner, SLAproperty: no trespassing! A response,The Modern Language Journal1998:82.
②Markee, N. Conversation Analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.2000:165.
③Gardner.H, Social and cognitive conpetencies in learning:which is whichi?I//Hutchby and Moran.Ellis, Childrenand Social Competence: Arenas of Action. London: Falmer Press.1997:115-33.
①Wilkison,R., Aphasia:conwersation anolysis of a non-fluent aphasic.//Perkins and Honord, Case Studies in ClinicalLinguistics. London: Whurr,1995.
①Hutchby, I.,Wooffitt,R., Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: Polity Press
(UK and Europe), Blackwell Publishers Inc (USA),1998:14
①Heritage, John, A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, JohnHeritage, eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:299-345.
②在谈话分析内部，语境问题是最有争议的话题之一，理论与术语不一而足。我们在这里对语境采用了较为宽泛的理解。有兴趣的读者可以参阅Duranti and Goodwin (1992)以及Sarangi and Roberts (1999)。
③Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage,eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:
242.
④Schegloff, E. A., Between macro and micro: contexts and other connections’.//J. Alexander, et al. eds. Themicro-macro link. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,2000:221.
⑤Heritage, J., Conversation analysis and institutional talk: analysing data’.//David Silverman, ed. Qualitativeresearch: Theory, method and practice.London: Sage,1997:164.
①Hutchby, I.,&Wooffitt, R., Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: PolityPress,1998:34.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks,1992:34.
①Alasuutari, Researching culture: qualitative method and cultural studies. London: Sage,1995:637.
②有关他观（etic）与自观(emic)的区别可参见Cherles Goodwin，1984。
①Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage,eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press:241.
①Schegloff, E. A.,&Sacks H. Opening up closings’, Semiotica,1973(8):295-296.
②Heritage认为很多谈话行动都蕴含于这样的相邻对中，从相对“制度化”的“问候”和“告别”等互动谈话到相对复杂的成对行为如“问—答”、“要求—同意/拒绝”、“邀请—接受/拒绝”等等。萨克斯在1960年代中期创立了研究这些成对行为的一般研究方法。
③Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks,1992:673.
④Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks,1992:521.
⑤Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks,1992:191.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks,1992:555.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks，1992:49,102,264.
①Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement’.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, JohnHeritage, eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:256.
②Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A.&Jefferson, G. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking forconversation, Language1974(50):729.
①Heritage，（1984b:260）对这一点展开专门论述。
①Schegloff, E.A., Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for Conversation”. Language in Society,2000(29):1–6.
①Have, Paul ten, Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide.. London, etc.: Sage Publications,1999:112.
①Ford, Cecilia E., Sandra A. Thompson, Interactional units in conversation: syntactic, intonational, and pragmaticresources for the management of turns.//Ochs, E., Emanuel A. Schegloff, S.A. Thompson, eds., Interaction andGrammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1996:171.
②Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, JohnHeritage, eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:265.
①Grice, H.P. Logic and Conversation.//P. Cole and J. Morgan(eds),1975:35-45.
②Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage,eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:
269.
①Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage,eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:
270-273.
①谈话分析在话语修正领域的研究成果主要包括：Jefferson1972,1987; Schegloff1979a,1992c; Schegloff,Jefferson and Sacks,1977.
①Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G.&Sacks,H. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair inconversation’, Language,1977(53):363.
①Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G.,&Sacks, H., The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair inconversation, Language,1977(53):373.
②这一发现是基于美式英语，对其它文化或语言未必适用。
③Hutchby, I., Wooffitt, R., Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: Polity Press
(UK and Europe), Blackwell Publishers Inc (USA),1998:667.
①Luke, K, K,, Theodossia-Soula Pavlidou, eds.,(Telephone Calls: Unity and diversity in conversational structureacross languages and cultures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins:2002:5-6.
②Sacks, H,. Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A.Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:542.
①Sacks, H,. Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A.Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:161，546.
②Sacks, H,. Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A.Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:543.
①Hopper, R., Telephone conversation. Bloomington: Indiana University PressHopper,1992:56.
②Hopper, R., Speech in telephone openings: Emergent interaction vs. routines. Western Journal of SpeechCommunication,1989a(53,2),178-194; Hopper, R., Conversation analysis and social psychology asdescriptions of interpersonal communication'.//Roger, D., P. Bull, eds., Conversation: an interdisciplinaryperspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters,1989b:48-65.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992：159-160.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992：163，552.
②Schegloff, E. A., The routine as achievement’, Human Studies1986(9):132.
③Schegloff, E. A.&Sacks, H. Opening up closings, Semiotica,1973(8):291.
④同上：237.
①Clark, H.H., and French, J.W., Telephone goodbyes, Language in Society,1981(1),1-19.
②Button, G.., Moving out of closings.//Button, G.&Lee, J.R.E.(eds) Talk and social organisation,.Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.1987(b):101-51.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:256-7,263-5.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:18.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A.Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:228.
①分别参见LC1：717，LC1：372，LC2567–8和LC2：55.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:372.
③同上。
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:315.
①Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A.&Jefferson, G., A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for
conversation’, Language1974(50):699.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson withintroductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:200–1.
③Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:259
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:259.
②具体内容请参见Drew and Heritage,1992:19-53.
③Heritage, John, David Greatbatch, On the institutional character of institutional talk: the case of news interviews.//Deirdre Boden, Don H. Zimmerman, eds. Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversationanalysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:93-137.
④Atkinson, J.M.&Drew, P., Order in Court: The Organisation of Verbal Interaction in Judicial Settings. London:Macmillan,1979.
⑤Clayman, S.E., Displaying neutrality in television news interviews, Social Problems1988(35):474-92；Heritage,J.,Analyzing news interviews: aspects of the production of talk for an overhearing audience.//T.A. van Dijk,ed.Handbook of discourse analysis. London: Academic Press. Vol.3,1985b:95-117；Heritage, J.&Greatbatch, D.,Onthe institutional character of institutional talk: the case of news interviews.//Boden D.&Zimmerman, D.H.(eds) Talkand social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis, Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:93-137.
⑥Button, G.,Answers as interactional products: two sequential practices used in job interviews.//Drew, P.&Heritage, J.(eds) Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992:212-231.
⑦Frankel, R., Talking in interviews: a dispreference for patient-initiated questions in physician-patientencounters.//G. Psathas, ed. Interactional Competence. Washington: University Press of America,1990:231-62.
①Heritage, J.&Sefi, S., Dilemmas of advice: aspects of the delivery and reception of advice in interactions betweenHealth Visitors and firsttime mothers.//Drew, P., J. Heritage, eds. Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992:359-417.
②Boden, D., The business of talk: organizations in action. Cambridge: Polity Press,1994a.
③Per kyl, A., AIDS Counselling: Institutional Interaction and Clinical Practice. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1995.
④Hutchby, I., Confrontation talk: Arguments, Asymmetries, and power on talk radio. Mahwah, N.J.: LawrenceErlbaum,1996b.
⑤Wilson, T.P., Social structure and the sequential organization of interaction.//D. Boden&D.H. Zimmerman, eds.Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:22-43
⑥Zimmerman, D.H.&Boden, D., Structure-in-Action.//D. Boden&D.H. Zimmerman, eds. Talk and socialstructure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:3-21.
①具体内容请参见Pomerantz1988：9。
②Frankel, R., Talking in interviews: a dispreference for patient-initiated questions in physician-patientencounters.//George Psathas, ed. Interactional Competence. Washington:University Press of America,1990:231-62.Have, Paul ten, A doctor’s body work: an exploratory exercise.//A. Marcarino, ed.,Analisi della conversatione eprospettive di recerca inetnometodologia. Urbino: Editioni QuattroVenti,1997:207-18.
①Greatbatch, D., On the management of disagreement between news interviewers'.//Drew, P., J. Heritage, eds. Talkat work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992:268-301.
①Have, P. ten, The consultation as a genre.//IB. Torode, ed. Text and Talk as Social Practice. Dordrecht/Providence,R.I.: Foris Publications,1989:115-35.
②参见刘兴兵，医患门诊互动中目的与权势，《外语学刊》，2009年第4期:73-76。
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:26.
②Have, Paul ten, Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide.. London, etc.: Sage Publications,1999:48.
③Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:419.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:27.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:420.
③Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:622.
①Heritage, J.&Atkinson, J.M., Introduction.//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of Social Action:Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:1-15.
①参见Goodwin, C., Conversational organization: interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: AcademicPress,1981; Goodwin, C., Seeing in depth, Social Studies of Science1995(25):237-74; Heath, C.,Embarrassmentand interactional organization,//Paul Drew, Anthony Wootton, eds., Erving Goffman: exploring the interaction order.Cambridge: Polity Press,1988.136-60.
②Labov, W., Language in the inner city: studies in the Black English Vernacular, Philadelphia: University ofPennsylvania Press,1972.
③Button, G., Answers as interactional products: two sequential practices used ininterviews, Social PsychologyQuarterly,1987(50):174.
①Have, Paul ten, Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide--Second Edition., London etc. Sage,2007:67—68.
①参见Lofland,J,,&L.H.Lofland, Analyzing social setting: a guide to qualitative analysis.2ndedn,Belmont,CA:Wadsworth,1984:13—45; Schatzman,L.,&Strauss,A.,L., Field research: strategies for a naturalsociology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall,1973:18—33.
①Heritage, J.&Atkinson, J.M,“Introduction”.//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of Social Action:Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:1-15.
②Psathas, G.&Anderson, T. The 'practices' of transcription in conversation analysis. Semiotica,1990(78):75-99.
③Hopper, R, Conversation analysis and social psychology as descriptions of interpersonal communication.//Roger,D., P. Bull, eds., Conversation: an interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters,1989b:48-65.
④Heath, C.&Luff, P., Explicating face-to-face interaction,//Gilbert, N., ed.Researching social life. London: Sage,1993:309.
①Kendon,A.,The organization of behavior in face-to face interaction: observations on the development of amethodology,//Schere and Ekman, Handbook of methods in nonverbal behavior research. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1982:478.
②Ochs,E.Transcription as a theory.//Ochs and Schieffelin, Developmental pragmatics, New York:Academic Press,1979:44.
③Heritage, J. Atkinson, M. Introduction,//Atkinson, Heritage, eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies inConversation Analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1984:1-15.
①具体参见Davidson,J., Subsequent Versions of invitations,offers,requests,and proposals dealing with potential oractual rejection.//Atkiwson and Hentage, Structures of social action: studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press1984:102-28; Poerantz,A., Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some featuresof preferred disprefferred turn-shapes.//Atkinson and Heritage, Structures of social action: studies in conversationanalysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:79-112.
②Jefferson,G.1989.Notes on a possible metric which provides for a ‘standard maximum silence of one second mconversation,//Roger and Bull, Conversation: an interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon:Multilingual Matters,1989:
166-96.
①具体参见Jefferson,G, A Technique for inviting langhter and its subsequentacceptance/declination.//Psathas,1979:79-96; Jefferson,G. An exercise in the transcription and analysis of langhter,//Dijk1985:25-34; Jefferson,G, Sacks,H.and Schegloff,E.A.Notes on laughter in pursuit of intimacy,//Button and lee1987:152-205.
②具体参见Heritage;J,&J.M.Atkinson,.//J.M.Atkinson&J.Heritage,eds, Structures of Social action: theory,methodand practice, London:Sage,1984:161-82; Psathas,G,&T.Anderson, The‵Practice′of transcription in conversationanalysis, Semiotica,1990:78:75-99; Have,P.ten,&G.Psathas,eds, Situated order:studies in the social organization oftalk and embodied activities,Washington,D.C: University Press of America,1995:45-47.
①参见Schenkein, Studies in the organisation of conversational interaction,.New York:Academic press,1978:56.
①Sacks,1984a Notes on methodology,//Atkinson&Heritage, Structures of social action: studies in conversationanalysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:27.
②同上。
③Psathas,G., Conversation analysis:the study of talk-in-interation.Thousand Oaks,CA:sage,1995:45.
④Psathas,G, Interactional competence.Washington,DC:University press of America,1990a:24-5.
①Schegloff, Confirming allusions: towards an empirical account of action, American Journal of Sociology,1996b(104):172.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:115.
②具体参见Have, Paul ten, Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide.London etc.Sage,2007:111-123.
①Jefferson,G., On"trouble-premonitory"response to inquiry, Sociological Inquiry,1980(50):153-85.
②Heritage, A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement,//Atkinson and Heritage,1984:299.
①Sacks,“On doing being ordinary”//J.M.Atkinsor&J.Heritage,eds,Structures of social action:studies inconversation analysis.Cambridge:Cup,1984b:411.
①Glaser and Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory:strategies for qualitative research.Chicago,IL:Aldine,1967:45-77.
①同上第61页。
①Clayman, S,E., Maynard D. W. Ethnomethodology and conversation analysis’.//Paul ten Have, George Psathas,eds., Situated order: Studies in the social organization of talk and embodied activities. Washington, D.C.: UniversityPress of America,1995:7-9.
①Jefferson.G.and Lee,J.R.E., The rejection of advice: Managing the problematic convergence of a "troubles telling"and a"service encounter".Journal of Pragmatics,1981(5):399-422.
①Eric Livingstone, Making Sense of Ethnomethodology, Routledge&Kegan Paul,1987:57
②Poller,M, Left of ethnomethodology: the rise and decline of redical reflexivity, A.S.R.,1991,(56):370.
③Swingewood,A.,A short History of Sociogical Thought.Macmillian,1991:274.
①科尔曼，美国社会学评论（ASR).“俗民方法学研究”讨论会.1968年，第3卷，124-126页。
②同上。126-130页。
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:152.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:26-7.
②同上。
③Heath, C., Body Movement and Speech in Medical Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1986;Heath, C., The analysis of activities in face to face interaction using video.//David Silverman, ed. Qualitativeresearch: Theory, method and practice. London: Sage,1997:183-200; Heath, C.,&Luff, P. Media space andcommunicative asymmetries: preliminary observations of video mediated interaction’, Human-Computer Interaction1992(7):315-46.
④Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:26-7.
①Cicourel, Aaron V.,The role of cognitive-linguistic concepts in understanding everydaysocial interactions. Annual Review of Sociology1981(7):87-106.
②Schegloff, E A. Conversation Analysis and Socially Shared Cognition’.//L.Resnick, J. Levine, S. Teasley, eds.,Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. Washington,D.C.: American Psychological Association,1991:150-71;Schegloff, E. A. Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation,American Journal of Sociology,1992(98):1295-1345.
③Watson, Rod, Ethnomethodology and textual analysis’.//David Silverman, ed. Qualitative research: Theory,method and practice. London: Sage,1997:80-98.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:485.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:26-7:570.
③Moerman, M., Talking culture: ethnography and conversational analysis. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press,1988:x.
①转引自李猛，俗民方法学，杨善华主编，《当代西方社会学理论》，北京：北京大学出版社，1999：74。
②同上。
①Heritage, John C., Ethnomethodology.//A. Giddens, J.H. Turner, eds. Social theory today. Cambridge: PolityPress,1987:256.
①刘少杰,《社会学的语言学转向》，《社会学研究》，1999年第4期.
①转引自梁卿,史玉华，《论职业教育作为独立学科的标准》，《理论经纬》。在本文中，作者总结了不同学者对独立学科标准的认识。
①Chinoy,Ely, Sociological Perspective Random House,Inc,1968:34.
②卡尔·波普尔，客观知识：一个进化论的研究，上海：上海译文出版社.1987:47
①Silverman, David, Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. Oxford: Policy Press,1998:188.
②乔纳森.H.特纳，《社会学理论的结构》，杭州：浙江人民出版社1987:5
①Hutchby, I.&Wooffitt R. Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge:Polity,1998:145-257.
②Sacks, H. Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992: Xlix-I.
[1] Albert, E. Ethnomethodology: The audience that knows the speech discovers it.//McCormack,T.(ed) Culture, code and content analysis, Vol.2: Studies in Communications.Greenwich, CT:JAI Press.1982.
[2] Anderson, R.J. Representations and requirements: the value of ethnography in systems design.Human-Computer Interaction,1994,9(2),151-182.
[3] Anderson, R.J., Heath, C.C., Luff, P.K.&Moran, T. The Social and the Cognitive inHuman-Computer Interaction. International Journal of Man Machine Studies,1993(38):999-1016.
[4] Anderson, R.J.&Sharrock, W.W. Aspects of the distribution of work tasks in medicalencounters. Analytic Sociology,1981,2(4).
[5] Antaki, C. Assessing quality of life of persons with a learning disability: How setting lowerstandards may inflate well-being scores. Qualitative Health Research1999(9):437-454.
[6] Antaki, C.&Horowitz, A. Using Identity Ascription to Disqualify A Rival Version ofEvents as "Interested". Research on Language and Social Interaction,2000(33):155-177.
[7] Arminen, I. Conversation Analysis: A quest for Order in Social Interaction and Language Use.Acta Sociologica,1999(42):251-257.
[8] Arminen, I. On the context sensitivity of institutional interaction”. Discourse&Society,2000(11):435-458.
[9] Arminen, I., Institutional interaction: studies of talk at work. Aldershot: Ashgate,2005b.
[10] Atkinson, J.M. Ethnomethodological approaches to socio-legal studies”.//Podgorecki, A.&Whelan, C.J.(eds) Sociological approaches to law, London, UK: Croom Helm,1981:201-223.
[11] Atkinson, J.M. Public speaking and audience responses: some techniques for inviting audienceapplause.//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies inConversation Analysis.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:370-407.
[12] Atkinson, J.M. Refusing invited applause: preliminary observations from a case study ofcharismatic oratory.//van Dijk, T.A.(ed). Handbook of discourse analysis, Vol. III,. London:Academic Press,1985:161-181.
[13] Atkinson, J.M. Displaying neutrality: formal aspects of informal court proceedings.//Drew, P.&Heritage, J.(eds) Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings, Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.1992:.199-211.
[14] Atkinson, J.M.&Drew, P.Order in Court: The Organisation of Verbal Interaction in JudicialSettings. London: Macmillan,1979.
[15] Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds), Structures of Social Action: Studies in ConversationAnalysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984.
[16] Atkinson, P.A.Ethnomethodology: A critical review. Annual review of sociology,1988(14):441-465.
[17] Atkinson, P.A.&Heath, C.C.(eds), Medical work: Realities and routines. Farnborough, UK,Gower.[Review: Helm, D.(1983) Social Science and Medicine,17:51-52.,1981.
[18] Auer, P. Rhythm in telephone closings. Human Studies,1990(13):361-392.
[19] Austin, J,L How to do things with words. Oxford:Clarendon press.1962.
[20] Baccus, M.D. Sociological indication and the visibility criterion of real word theorizing”.//Garfinkel, H.(ed) Ethnomethodological studies of work, London, UK: Routledge and KeganPaul,1986a:1-19.
[21] Baker, C.D. Ethnomethodological Studies of Talk in Educational Settings,//Davies, B.&Corson, D.(eds) Oral Discourse and Education. Volume3, Encylopedia of Language andEducation, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic,1997a:43-52.
[22] Baker, C.D. Membership categorization and interview accounts,//Silverman D.,(ed) Qualitativeresearch: Theory, method and practice, London: Sage,1997b:130-143.
[23] Beach, W.A. Foreward: Sequential organization of conversational activities. Western Journal ofSpeech Communication,1989,53(2),85-90.
[24] Beach, W.A. Orienting to the phenomenon,//Anderson, J.A.(ed) Communication Yearbook13.Newbury Park: Sage.1990a:216-244.
[25] Beach, W.A. Language as and in technology: facilitating topic organization in a Videotex focusgroup meeting,//Medhurst, M.J., Gonzalez, A&Peterson, T.R (eds) Communication and theculture of technology. Pullman: Washington State University Press,1990b.
[26] Bergmann, J rg R. Veiled morality: notes on discretion in psychiatry,//Drew, Paul,JohnHeritage, eds. Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1992:137-62.
[27] Bergmann, J.R.Introduction: Morality in Discourse. Research on Language and SocialInteraction,1998(31).
[28] Bilmes, J. Questions, answers, and the organization of talk in the1992vice presidential debate:Fundamental considerations. Research in Language and Social Interaction,1999(32):213-242.
[29] Bjelic, D.I. An ethnomethodological clarification of Husserl's concepts of "Regressive Inquiry"and "Galilean Physics" by means of discovering praxioms”, Human Studies,1995(18):189-225.
[30] Boden, D. The world as it happens: ethnomethodology and conversation analysis,//Ritzer, G.(ed) Frontiers of social theory: the new synthesis, New York: Columbia UniversityPress,1990a.:185-213.
[31] Boden, D. The business of talk: organizations in action. Cambridge: Polity Press,1994a.
[32] Boden, D.&Zimmerman, D.H.(eds), Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodologyand conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press.1991.
[33] Bogen, D. The Allure of a "Truly General Theory of Knowledge and Science": A Comment onPels”. Sociological Theory,1996(14):187-192.
[34] Bogen, D. Order without rules: Critical theory and the logic of conversation. New York: SUNYPress,1999.
[35] Bogen, D.&Lynch, M. Taking account of the hostile native: plausible deniability and theproduction of conventional history in the Iran-contra Hearings”. Social Problems,1989,36(3),197-224.
[36] Bogen, D.&Lynch, M. Social critique and the logic of description: a response to McHoul.Journal of Pragmatics,1990,14(3),505-521.
[37] Button, G.&Sharrock, W.W. The mundane work of writing and reading computer programs,//Have, P. ten.&Psathas, G.(eds) Situated order: Studies in the social organization of talk andembodied activities, Washington, D.C.: University Press of America.1995b:231-258.
[38] Button, G.&Sharrock, W.W. On simulacrums of conversation: toward a clarification of therelevance of conversation analysis for human-computer interaction.//Thomas, P.(ed) TheSocial and Interactional Dimensions of Human-Computer Interfaces, Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.1995c:107-125.
[39] Button, G.&Sharrock, W.W. Project Work: The Organisation of Collaborative Design andDevelopment in Software Engineering. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW),1996(5):369-386.
[40] Button, G.&Sharrock, W.W. The organizational accountability of technological work. SocialStudies of Science,1998(28):73-102.
[41] Button, G.&Sharrock, W.W. Design by problem solving,//Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J.&Heath C.C.(eds)(2000). Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing Systems Design, pp.46-67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000.
[42] Clark, C., T. Pinch, The anatomy of a deception: fraud and finesse in the mock auction salescon, Qualitative Sociology,1992(15):151-75.
[43] Clark, C., Drew, P.&Pinch T, Managing customer 'objections' during reallife salesnegotiations. Discourse and Society,,1994(5):437-462.
[44] Clayman, S. Gatekeeping in action: editorial conferences and assessments of newsworthiness,American Sociological Review,1998,63(2):178-99.
[45] Clayman, S.E.&Maynard D.W. Ethnomethodology and conversation analysis,//P. ten Have,G. Psathas, eds., Situated order: Studies in the social organization of talk and embodiedactivities. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America,1995:1-30.
[46] Clayman, S.E.&Whalen J. When the medium becomes the message: the case of theRather-Bush encounter, Research on Language and Social Interaction,1988/89(22):241-72.
[47] Coulter, J. Recognition in Wittgenstein and contemporary thought,//Chapman, M.&Dixon, R.A.(eds) Meaning and the growth of understanding: Wittgenstein's significance for developmentalpsychology, Berlin, BRD: Springer-Verlag,1987.85-102.
[48] Coulter, J. Cognitive "penetrability" and the emotions.//Franks, D.&McCarthy, E.D.(eds) Thesociology of emotion, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.1989a:33-50.
[49] Coulter, J. Mind in action. Cambridge: Polity Press,1989b.
[50] Coulter,J.(ed) Ethnomethodological sociology. Aldershot: Elgar.[Includes bibliographycompiled by B. J. Fehr and Jeff Stetson with the assistance of Yoshifumi Mizukawa,1990a.
[51] Coulter, J. Discourse and Mind, Human Studies,1999,22(2-4), Oct,163-181.
[52] Davidson, Judy A. Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests, and proposals dealingwith potential or actual rejection.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage, eds.Structures ofSocial Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984):102-28.
[53] Dijk, T.A. van (ed.) Handbook of discourse analysis, Vol.3: Discourse and dialogue. London,UK: Academic Press.[See especially chapters by: Sacks, Jefferson, Heritage, Mehan, Drew,Cuff&Sharrock, and Atkinson.],1985.
[54] Drew, P. Analyzing the use of language in courtroom interaction.//van Dijk, T.A.(ed.),Handbook of discourse analysis, vol. III, London: Academic Press.1985:133-147.
[55] Drew, P."Open" class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles inconversation. Journal of Pragmatics,1997(28):69-101.
[56] Drew, P.&Heritage, J. Analyzing talk at work: an introduction,//Drew, P.&Heritage, J.(eds)Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1992:3-65.
[57] Drew, P.&Heritage, J.(eds) Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1992.
[58] Duranti, Alessandro, Charles Goodwin, eds. Rethinking context: language as an interactivephenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992.
[59] Edwards, D.&Potter, J. Discursive Psychology. London: Sage,1992.
[60] Filmer, P. On Garfinkel's ethnomethodology,//Filmer, M. Phillipson, D. Silverman, and D.Walsh (eds.) New directions in sociological theory, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,1972:203-234.
[61] Firth, A.(ed). The discourse of negotiation: studies of language in the workplace. Oxford:Pergamon,1995a.
[62] Firth, A. Ethnomethodology,//Vershueren, J., stman, Jan-Ola.&Blommaert, J.(eds),Handbook of Pragmatics, Amsterdam: Benjamins,1995,269-278.
[63] Firth, A.&Wagner, J. On discourse, communication and (some) fundamental concepts insecond language acquisition research. The Modern Language Journal,1997,81(3),285-300.
[64] Francis, D.W.&Hester, S. Analysing ‘institutional talk’: a reply to Watson. Text,2000a,20(3),373-375.
[65] Francis, D.W.&Hester, S. Ethnomethodology, conversation analysis and gender,//Quere, L.&Smoreda Z.(eds) Reseaux103: Le Sexe du Telephone, pp.215-251. Paris: Hermes Science,2000b.
[66] Francis, D.W.&Hester, S. Ethnomethodology, conversation analysis and ‘institutional talk’.Text,2000c,20(3),391-413.
[67] Garfinkel, H. Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc,1967a.
[68] Garfinkel, H. Evidence for locally produced, naturally accountable phenomena of order, logic,reason, meaning, method, etc. in and as of the essential quiddity of immortal ordinary society (Iof IV): an announcement of studies, Sociological Theory,1988(60:10-39.
[69] Garfinkel, H. An Overview of Ethnomethodology's Program, Social Psychology Quarterl,1996(59):5-21.
[70] Garfinkel, H., and Sacks, H. On formal structures of practical actions.//J.C. McKinney and E.A.Tiryakian (Eds.) Theoretical sociology: Perspectives and developments New York, NY:Appleton-Century-Crofts,1970:337-366.
[71] Goodwin, C. Conversational organization: interaction between speakers and hearers. NewYork: Academic Press,1981.
[72] Goodwin, Charles, Notes on story structure and the organization of participation,//Atkinson, J.Maxwell, John Heritage, eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:225-46.
[73] Goodwin, Charles, Recording human interaction in natural settings, Pragmatics,1994(3):181-209.
[74] Goodwin, CharlesAction and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal ofPragmatics,(2000(32),1489-1522.
[75] Greatbatch, D. Conversation analysis: neutralism in British news interviews',//A. Bell, P. Garrett,eds. Approaches to media discourse. Oxford: Blackwell,1998:163-85.
[76] Have, P. ten, Contrastive analyses of interview talk,//T. Hak, J. Haafkens, G. Nijhof, eds.Working papers on discourse and conversational analysis. Rotterdam: Instituut PreventieveSociale Psychiatrie EUR,1985a:151-63.
[77] Have, P. ten, Methodological issues in conversation analysis, Bulletin de MéthodologieSociologique,1990c:23-51.
[78] Have, P. ten, Talk and institution: a reconsideration of the 'asymmetry' of doctorpatientinteraction,//D. Boden&D.H. Zimmerman, eds. Talk and social structure: studies inethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991c:138-63.
[79] Have, P. ten, Medical ethnomethodology: An Overview, Human Studies,1995c:18:245-61.
[80] Have, P. ten, Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide. London, etc.: Sage Publications.1999a.
[81] Heath, C.C. Embarrassment and Interactional Organisation,//Giddens, A.(ed), Sociology:Introductory Readings. Oxford: Polity Press,1997a.
[82] Heath, C.C. The analysis of activities in face to face interaction using video,//Silverman, D.(ed.)Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice. London: Sage,1997b:183-200.
[83] Heath, C.C. Exploring work and interaction. Revue Champs Visuel,1997c（1）.
[84] Heath, C.C. Analysing work and interaction,//May, T. Qualitative Research. London: Sage:2000.
[85] Heath, C.C.&Hindmarsh, J. Configuring Action in Objects: From mutual spaces to mediaspaces. Mind, Culture and Activity,2000,7(1/2),81-104.
[86] Heath, C.C., Knoblauch, H.&Luff, P. Technology and Social Interaction: The emergence of'workplace studies. British Journal of Sociology,2000(51):299-320.
[87] Heath, C.C.&Luff, P.K. Technology in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000.
[88] Heritage, J. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.1984a:203-205.
[89] Heritage, J.C. Recent developments in conversation analysis, Sociolinguistics,1985a(15):118.
[90] Heritage, J.C. Ethnomethodology,//A. Giddens, J.H. Turner, eds. Social theory today.Cambridge: Polity Press,1987a,224-72.
[91] Heritage, J.C. Explanations as accounts: a conversation analytic perspective,//Charles Antaki,ed. Analyzing everyday explanation: a casebook of methods. London: Sage,1988:131.
[92] Heritage, J. Current developments in conversation analysis,//Roger, D., P. Bull, eds.,Conversation: an interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters,1989:21-47.
[93] Heritage, J. Conversation analysis: methodological aspects,//U.M. Quasthoff, ed., Aspects oforal communication. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter,1995:391-418.
[94] Heritage, J. Conversation analysis and institutional talk: analysing data,//D. Silverman,(ed),Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice.London: Sage,1997:161-82.
[95] Heritage, J. Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk: Analyzing Distinctive Turn-TakingSystems,//Cmejrková, S., Hoffmannová, J.,Müllerová, O.&Svetlá J.(eds) Dialoganalyse VI(Volume2) Proceedings of the6th International Congress of IADA-International Associationfor Dialog Analysis, Tubingen: Niemeyer.,1998a:3-17.
[96] Heritage, J.&Atkinson, J.M. Introduction,//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures ofSocial Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1984:1-15.
[97] Heritage, J., S. Clayman, D.H. Zimmerman, Discourse and message analysis: the microstructure of mass media messages,//R. Hawkins, J.M. Wieman, S. Pingree, eds. Advancingcommunication science: merging mass and interpersonal processes. Sage Annual Reviews ofCommunication Research, vol.16. London: Sage,1988:77-109.
[98] Heritage, J.&Greatbatch, D. On the institutional character of institutional talk: the case of newsinterviews,//Boden D.&Zimmerman, D.H.(eds) Talk and social structure: studies inethnomethodology and conversation analysis, Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:93-137.
[99] Hilbert, R.A. The classical roots of Ethnomethodology: Durkheim, Weber, and Garfinkel.Foreword by Randall Collins. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.,1992a.
[100] Hilbert, R. Ethnomethodological Recovery of Durkheim. Sociological Perspectives,1992b(34):337-57.
[101] Hindmarsh, J.&Heath, C.C Embodied Reference: A study of deixis in workplace interaction,Journal of Pragmatics,2000b,32,(12),1855-1878.
[102] Holmes, D. Explicit-implicit address. Journal of Pragmatics,1984.8,311-320.
[103] Hopper, R. Conversation analysis and social psychology as descriptions of interpersonalcommunication,//D. Roger and P. Bull (Eds.) Conversation: An interdisciplinary perspective.Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters,1988b:48-65.
[104] Hopper, R. Speech in telephone openings: Emergent interaction vs. routines. Western Journalof Speech Communication,1989a.53(2),178-194.
[105] Hopper, R. Hold the phone,//D. Boden&D.H. Zimmerman, eds. Talk and social structure:studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:217-31.
[106] Hopper, R. Telephone conversation. Bloomington: Indiana Press,1992.
[107] Hopper, R. Episode Trajectory in Conversational Play,//ten Have, G. Psathas, eds., Situatedorder: Studies in the social organization of talk and embodied activities. Washington, D.C.:University Press of America,1995:57-72.
[108] Hopper, R.(with K. Drummond) Language use and media: A micro-analytic perspective.Critical Studies in Mass Communication,1988(5),163-166.
[109] Hopper, R., Glenn, P. J. Repetition and play in conversation,//B. Johnstone, ed., Repetition indiscourse: Interdisciplinary perspectives, Vol. II. Norwood, NJ: Ablex,1994:29-40.
[110] Hopper, R., S. Koch, J. Mandelbaum Conversation analysis methods,//D.G. Ellis, W.A.Donahue, eds. Contemporary issues in language and discourse processes. Beverly Hills:Sage,1986:77-109.
[111] Housley,W. Category Work and Knowledgeability within Multidisciplinary Team Meetings,TEXT,2000(20):83-107.
[112] Housley,W. Story, Narrative and Teamwork, The Sociological Review,2000(48):425-43.
[113] Housley,W., R. Fitzgerald Conversation Analysis, Practitioner Based Research, Reflexivity andReflective Practice: Some Exploratory Remarks, Ethnographic Studies,2000（5）:27-44.
[114] Hutchby, I. Power in discourse: the case of arguments on a British talk radio show. Discourse&Society,1996a,7(4),481-498.
[115] Hutchby, I. Conversation and Technology: From the Telephone to the Internet. Cambridge:Polity,2001b.
[116] Hutchby, I.&Wooffitt R. Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications.Cambridge: Polity,1998.
[117] Hutchby, I.(with Drew, P.) Conversation analysis,//Ostman, J.-O., Verschueren, J.&Blommaert, J.(eds.) Handbook of Pragmatics, Antwerp: John Benjamins,1995:182-190.
[118] Graham, J.R.E. Lee, eds., Talk and social organisation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters,2000:86-100.
[119] Jefferson, Gail Side sequences,//David Sudnow, ed. Studies in social interaction. New York:Free Press,1972:294-338.
[120] Jefferson, G. On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles,//Atkinson, J.M., J. Heritage,eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1984b:346-69.
[121] Jefferson, G.'Notes on a systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens "Yeah" and"Mm hm', Papers in Linguistics,1984c(17):197-206.
[122] Jefferson, G. Notes on some orderlinesses of overlap onset.//V. D'Urso and P. Leonardi (Eds.)Discourse analysis and natural rhetoric Padua, Italy: Cleup Editore.,1984d:11-38.
[123] Jefferson, Gail On exposed and embedded correction in conversation,//Button, Graham, J.R.E.Lee, eds., Talk and social organisation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters,1987:86-100.
[124] Jefferson, G. On the sequential organization of troubles talk in ordinary conversation. SocialProblems,1988a(35):418-41.
[125] Jefferson, G. A case of transcriptional stereotyping, Journal of Pragmatics,1996(26):159-70.
[126] Levinson, S.C. Pragmatics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,1983:299.
[127] Livingston, E. Making sense of ethnomethodology. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul，1987.
[128] Luff, P.K. Computers and Interaction: The Social Organisation of a Human-ComputerInteraction in the Workplace. PhD. University of Surrey，1997.
[129] Luff, P.K., Gilbert,G.N.&Frohlich, D.M.(eds) Computers and conversation. London:Academic Press，1990.
[130] Luff, P.K.&Heath C.C. Towards the social organisation of human computer interaction,//Button, G.(ed.), Technology in working order: studies of work, interaction and technology,London: Routledge Kegan Paul.1993b:72-98.
[131] Luff, P.K.&Heath, C.C. Mobility in Collaboration,//Proceedings of CSCW'98, Seattle, WA,,1998, November14-18:305-314.
[132] Luff, P.K.&Heath, C.C. Surveying the scene: the monitoring practices of staff in controlrooms,//Noyes, J.&Bransby, M.(eds) People in Control. Proceedings of An InternationalConference on Human Interfaces in Control Rooms, Cockpits and Command Centres,1999:1-6.
[133] Luff, P.K., Hindmarsh, J. and Heath, C.C. Introduction,//Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J.&Heath, C.C.(eds) Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing System Design.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.2000a:1-26.
[134] Luff, P.K., Hindmarsh, J.&Heath C.C.(eds) Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practiceand Informing Systems Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000b.
[135] Lynch, M. The ethnomethodological foundations of conversation analysis. Text,2000c,20(4),517-32.
[136] Lynch, M&Collins, H.M.(Guest Eds.) Humans, Animals, and Machines. Special Issue ofScience, Technology&Human Values,1998,23(4),371-83.
[137] McHoul, A. The organization of repair in classroom talk. Language in Society,1990b(19):349-77.
[138] McHoul, A. Towards a critical ethnomethodology. Theory, Culture&Society,1994(11):105-26.
[139] McHoul, A.&Rapley, M. How To Analyse Talk in Institutional Settings: A casebook ofMethods. Dorset: Continuum,2001.
[140] Maynard, D.W.&Clayman, S.E. The diversity of ethnomethodology, Annual Review ofSociology,1991(17):385-418.
[141] Modaff, J.V.&Modaff, D. P. Technical notes on audio recording. Research on Language andSocial Interaction,2000,33(1),101-118.
[142] Moerman, M. Talking culture: Ethnography and conversation analysis. Philadelphia, PA:University of Pennsylvania Press,1988.
[143] Moerman, M.&Sacks, H. On "understanding" in the analysis of natural conversation,//Moerman, M. Talking culture: Ethnography and conversation analysis. Philadelphia, PA:University of Pennsylvania,1988:180-186.
[144] Moerman, M. Exploring talk and interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction,1990/1991(24):173-87.
[145] Nevile, MauriceIntegrity in the Airline Cockpit: Embodying Claims About Progress for theConduct of an Approach Briefing, Research on Language&Social Interaction,2004(37):447-81
[146] Phillips, N.&Hardy, Cynthia. Discourse Analysis: investigating processes of socialconstruction. Thousang Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,2002:2.
[147] Pollner, M. Left of ethnomethodology: the rise and decline of radical reflexivity. AmericanSociological Review,1991(56):370-380.
[148] Pollner, M.&Goode, D. Ethnomethodology and person-centered practices. Person CenteredReview,1990(5):203-220.
[149] Pomerantz, A. Pursuing a response,//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of SocialAction: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress,1984b:152-163.
[150] Pomerantz, A.M. Ethnomethodology, conversation analysis and the study of courtroombehavior,//Muller, D.J. et al.(eds.) Topics in psychology and law. New York, NY: Wiley,1984c.
[151] Pomerantz, A.M.&Atkinson, J.M. Ethnomethodology, conversation analysis and the study ofcourtroom interaction,//Muller, D.J., Blackman, D.E.&Chapman, A.J.(eds) Topics inpsychology and law, Chichester: Wiley.,1984:283-94.
[152] Pomerantz, Anita. Offering a candidate answer: An information seeking strategy,Communication Monographs,1988(55):9.
[153] Pomerantz, A.&Fehr, B. J. Conversation Analysis: An approach to the study of social actionas sense making practices,//Dijk, T. A. van (ed) Discourse Studies: A MultidisciplinaryIntroduction London: Sage,1997:.64-91.
[154] Pomerantz, A.M., Mastriano, B.P.&Halfond, M.M. Students clinicians' difficulties whileconducting the summary diagnostic interview, Text,1987(7):19-36.
[155] Psathas, G. Introduction: Methodological issues and recent developments in the study ofnaturally occurring interaction,//Psathas, G.(ed) Interactional Competence, Washington:University Press of America,1990:1-30.
[156] Psathas, G. The structure of direction-giving in interaction,//Boden, D.&Zimmerman, D.H.(eds) Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis,Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:195-216.
[157] Psathas, G. Conversation analysis: the study of Talk-in-Interaction. Thousand Oaks: Sage,1995.
[158] Psathas, G.,(ed) Ethnomethodology: discussions and contributions. Special Issue of HumanStudies,1995(18):107-336.
[159] Psathas, G. Talk and Social Structure and "Studies of Work". Human Studies,1995(18):139-55.
[160] Psathas, G. Studying the organization in action: Membership categorization and interactionanalysis” Human Studies,1999,22(2-4), Oct,139-162.
[161] Psathas, G.&Anderson, T. The 'practices' of transcription in conversation analysis. Semiotica,1990(78):75-99.
[162] Ragin, C.C. Constructing social research: the unity and diversity of method. ThousandOaks,CA: Pine Forge Press,1994.
[163] Roger, D.&Bull, P.(eds). Conversation: an interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon:Multilingual Matters,1989.
[164] Sacks, H. Everyone has to lie,//Sanches, M.&Blount, B.(eds) Sociocultural dimensions oflanguage use. New York: Academic Press.1975:.57-80.
[165] Sacks, H. Notes on methodology,//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of SocialAction: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress,1984a:.2-27.
[166] Sacks, H. On doing "being ordinary",//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of SocialAction: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1984b413-29.
[167] Sacks, H. Some considerations of a story told in ordinary conversation, Poetics,1986(15):127-138.
[168] Sacks, H. Lectures on conversation.2vols. edited by Gail Jefferson; with an introduction byEmanuel A. Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992.
[169] Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A.&Jefferson, G. A simplest systematics for the organization ofturn-taking in conversation. Language,1974,50(4),696-735.
[170] Sarangi, S.,&Roberts. C., Talk, work and institutional order: discourse in medical, medicationand management settingd, New York: Mouton de Gruyter,1999.
[171] Schegloff, E.A. Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist,1968,(70):1075-1095.
[172] Schegloff, Emanuel A. The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation’,//T. Givon,ed.Syntax and semantics12: Discourse and syntax. New York: Academic Press,1979a:261-86.
[173] Schegloff, E.A. On some questions and ambiguities in conversation,//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds).. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press,1984b:28-52.
[174] Schegloff, E.A. Goffman and the analysis of conversation,//Drew, P.&Wootton, A.(eds)Erving Goffman: exploring the interaction order, Cambridge: Polity Press,1988a:.89-135.
[175] Schegloff, Emanuel A. Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense ofintersubjectivity in conversation, American Journal of Sociology,1992c (98):1295-1345.
[176] Schegloff, E.A., and Sacks, H. Opening up closings. Semiotica,1973(7):289-327.
[177] Schegloff, Emanuel A., Gail Jefferson, Harvey SacksThe preference for self-correction in theorganization of repair in conversation, Language,1977(53):361-82.
[178] Schegloff, E.A., Ochs, S.&Thompson, S.A. Introduction,//Ochs, S.A., Schegloff, E.A.&Thompson, S.A.(eds) Interaction and Grammar, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1996:1-51.
[179] Silverman, D. Communication and medical practice: social relations in the clinic. London:Sage,1987.
[180] Silverman, D. The Machinery of Interaction: Sacks’ Lectures on Conversation. SociologicalReview,1993,41(4):731-752.
[181] Silverman, D. Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. Oxford: PolicyPress,1998a.
[182] Silverman, D. Analysing conversation,//Seale, C.(ed.), Researching society and culture,London: Sage,1998b:261-74.
[183] Silverman, D. Warriors or Collaborators: Reworking Methodological Controversies in theStudy of Institutional Interaction,//Sarangi, S.&Roberts, C.(eds) Talk, Work and InstitiutionalOrder: Discourse in Medical Mediation and Management Settings. Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter,1999.
[184] Silverman, D., Baker, C.D.&Keogh, J. The Case of the Silent Child: Advice-Giving andAdvice-Reception in Parent-Teacher Interviews,//Hutchby, I.&Moran-Ellis, J.(eds) Childrenand Social Competence: Arenas of Action, London, Falmer,1998:220-240.
[185] Silverman, D., Bor, R., Miller, R.&Goldman, E. Advice-Giving and Advice-Reception inAIDS Counselling,//Aggleton, P. et al.(eds) AIDS: Rights, Risks and Reason. FalmerPress.,1992.
[186] Silverman, D.&Miller, G. Troubles Talk and Counselling Discourse: A Comparative Study.Sociological Quarterly,1995,36(4),725-747.
[187] Suchman, L. Plans and situated action: the problem of human-machine communication.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1987.
[188] Suchman, L.'Working relations of technology production and use, Computer SupportedCooperative Work,1994b（2）:21-39.
[189] Suchman, L. Constitting shared workspaces,//Y. Engestr m, D. Middleton, eds. Cognition andcommunication at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1996a:35-60.
[190] Suchman, L. Supporting articulation work,//R. Kling, ed. Computerization and controversy:value conflicts and social choices.2nded. London: Academic Press,1996b:407-23.
[191] Suchman, L. Making a case:"Knowledge" and "Routine" work in document production',//Luff,P., J. Hindmarsh, C. Heath (eds.)(2000) Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice andInforming Systems Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000:29-45.
[192] Turner, R., ed. Ethnomethodology: selected readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin,1974.
[193] Wagner, J., ed. Conversation analysis of foreign language data. Special Issue of Journal ofPragmatics,1996,26(2),145-259.
[194] Wagner, J. Language aquisition through foreign language interaction-a critical review ofstudies in Second Language Aquisition. Journal of Pragmatics,1996,(26):215-35.
[195] Wagner, J., A. Firth Communication strategies at work,//E. Kellerman, G. Kasper, eds.Communication strategies: psycholinguistics and sociolinguistic perspectives. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1997:323-44.
[196] Wasson, C. Ethnography in the field of design. Human Organization,2000.,59(4),377-388.
[197] Watson, G., R.M. Seiler, eds. Text in Context: Contributions to ethnomethodology. London:Sage,1992.
[198] Watson, Rod Ethnomethodology and textual analysis,//David Silverman, ed. Qualitativeresearch: Theory, method and practice. London: Sage,1997:80-98.
[199] Watson, R. The Character of ‘Institutional Talk’: A Response to Hester and Francis. Text,2000,20(3),377.
[200] Wittgenstein, L. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.1968:129.
[201] Wooffitt, R. Telling tales of the unexpected: the organization of factual discourse. HemelHempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf,1992.
[202] Wooffitt, R. Reported speech and displays of mind, Special Issue of Communication andCognition on 'Accessing Aspects of Consciousness'(edited by M. Ball),2000a:141-158.
[203] Wooffitt, R. Some properties of the interactional organisation of displays of paranormalcognition in psychic-sitter interaction. Sociology,2000b,vol.43, no3,457-479.
[204] Young, T.R. The politics of sociology: Gouldner, Goffman, and Garfinkel. The AmericanSociologist,1971(6),276-281.
[205] Zimmerman, D.H.Studies in ethnomethodology: Twenty years later. The Discourse AnalysisResearch Group Newsletter,1987,3(2),20-25.
[206] Zimmerman, D.H.&Boden, D. Structure-in-Action.//D. Boden&D.H. Zimmerman, eds. Talkand social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge:Polity Press,1991:3-21.
[207] Zimmerman, D.H., and West, C.(Eds.) Special Issue: Language and social interaction.Sociological Inquiry,1980(50),(3/4).
[208] Zimmerman, D.H.&Weider, D.L. Ethnomethodology and the problem of order: Comment onDenzin,//Douglas, J.D.(ed) Understanding everyday life: Toward the reconstruction ofsociological knowledg,,Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Co,1970:285-298).
[209] Zimmerman, D.H., D.L. WiederYou can't help but get stoned: notes on the social organizationof marijuana smoking, Social Problems,1977(25):198-207.
[1]阿尔弗雷德·舒茨.社会世界的现象学.卢岚兰译,台北:桂冠图书有限公司,1997.
[2]布迪厄.实践与反思:反思社会学导引.华康德、李猛、李康译.北京:中央编译出版社,1998.
[3]布赖恩·特纳.身体与社会.马海良、赵国新译,北京:春风文艺出版社,2000.
[4]陈嘉映.语言哲学.北京:北京大学出版社.2006.
[5]程雨明.语言系统及其运作.上海:上海外语教育出版社.1997.
[6]代树兰.电视访谈话语研究.上海外国语大学博士论文.2007.
[7]戴维·贾里.社会学辞典.周业谦、周光淦译，香港：成邦出版集团，2000.
[8]丹尼尔·贝尔.后工业时代的来临.王宏周等译,北京:新华出版社,1997.
[9]迪尔凯姆.社会学方法的原则.狄玉明译,北京:商务出版社,1964.
[10]杜金榜.论语篇分析的理论与方法,外语学刊，2008年第1期.
[11]梵·迪克.话语分析—一门新的交叉学科,徐纠纠译,国外语言学,1990年第2期。
[12]梵·迪克.话语、心理与社会，施蓄等译，中华书局,1993.
[13]范宏雅.话语含义的认知模式探微.郑州大学学报,2007年第3期.
[14]福柯.知识考古学.谢强、马月译,北京:三联书店,1998.
[15]付习涛.言语行为理论研究综述.求索,2004年第6期.
[16]高宣扬.当代社会理论.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2005.
[17]高一虹.“咨询者中心”和“来话者中心”：两种电话心理咨询模式的语言特点.语言文字应用,1995年第3期.
[18]戈夫曼.日常生活中的自我呈现.黄爱华、冯钢译.杭州:浙江人民出版社.1989.
[19]戈夫曼.日重接触.北京:华夏出版社.1990.
[20]谷小娟,李艺.话语与身份建构,外语学刊,2007年第6期.
[21]郭贵春.语用分析方法的意义.哲学研究.1999年第5期.
[22]何自然,陈新仁.当代语用学.北京:外语教学研究出版社,2004.
[23]何安平.英语会话中的简短反馈语.现代外语.1998年第1期.
[24]侯钧生.西方社会学理论教程.天津:南开大学出版社,2006.
[25]胡春阳.话语分析:传播研究的新路径.上海:上海人民出版社,2007.
[26]胡瑞娜.当代反实在论的语用分析走向.山西大学学报(哲社版).2009年第4期.
[27]黄国文.语篇分析概要.长沙:湖南教育出版社,1988年.
[28]黄国文.英语广告标题的“提问”与“应答”分析.外语教学,1998年第1期.
[29]黄国文、徐珺.语篇分析与话语分析.外语与外语教学.2006年第10期.
[30]吉登斯.社会学方法的新规则.田佐中等译,北京:社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[31]贾春增.外国社会学史.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2000.
[32]姜望琪.当代语用学.北京:北京大学出版社,2005年.
[33]姜学林、曾孔生.医疗语言学.香港:世界医药出版社,2000年.
[34]科尔曼.社会理论的基础.邓方译,北京:社会科学文献出版社,1999.
[35]肯尼斯等.当代西方话语修辞学:演讲与话语批评.常昌富、顾宝桐译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1998年.
[36]莱文森.语用学论题之五:会话结构.沈家煊译.国外语言学,1987年第1期.
[37]李德顺.21世纪人类思维方式的变革趋势.社会科学辑刊,2003年第1期.
[38]]廖美珍.法庭互动话语与合作问题研究.当代语言学探索.北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2003年.
[39]李猛.常人方法学四十年:1954—1994.国外社会学,1997(2).
[40]李悦娥,范宏雅.话语分析.上海:上海外语教育出版社,2002.
[41]林聚任.从话语分析到反思性:科学知识社会学发展的一个新趋向.自然辩证法通讯.2007年第2期.
[42]林聚任.科学世界的话语建构:马尔凯话语分析研究纲领探析.自然辩证法研究.2010年第6期.
[43]刘虹.会话结构研究.北京:北京大学出版社.2004.
[44]刘立华.批评话语分析概览,外语学刊，年2008年第1期．
[45]刘少杰.后现代西方社会学理论.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[46]刘少杰.国外社会学理论.北京:高等教育出版社,2006.
[47]刘兴兵.医患门诊互动中的目的与权势.外语学刊.2009年第4期.
[48]刘玉安.西方社会学史.济南:山东大学出版社,1993.
[49]刘运同.试评会话分析学派.上海市语文学会编.语文论丛第6辑.上海:上海教育出版社,2000.
[50]刘运同.会话分析学派的研究方法及理论基础.同济大学学报(社科版).2001年第3期.
[51]刘运同.会话分析概要.上海:学林出版社.2007.
[52]罗伯特.重组话语频道:电视与当代批评.麦勇雄等译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2000年.
[53]马尔科姆·沃特斯.现代社会学理论.杨善华等译.北京:华夏出版社,2000.
[54]诺曼·费尔克拉夫.话语与社会变迁.殷晓蓉译,北京:华夏出版社,2003.
[55]乔纳森·特纳.社会学理论的结构.邱泽奇等译,北京:华夏出版社,2001.
[56]钱伟量.语言与实践:实践唯物主义的语言哲学导论.北京:北京科学文献出版社.2003年.
[57]宋林飞.西方社会学理论.南京:南京大学出版社,1997.
[58]桑新民.建构主义的历史、哲学、文化和教育解读.全球教育展望.2005年第4期.
[59]盛晓明.话语规则与知识基础:语用学维度.上海:学林出版社.2000年.
[60]索绪尔.普通语言学教程.张绍杰译,长沙:湖南教育出版社,2001.
[61]涂纪亮．维特根斯坦后期哲学思想研究――英美语言哲学概论．武汉：武汉大学出版社．2007.
[62]王淂杏.英语话语分析与跨文化交际.北京:北京语言文化大学出版社.1998年.
[63]王福祥.话语语言学论文集.北京:外语教育与研究出版社,1989.
[64]王晋军.医生和病人会话中的问句和权势关系.解放军外国语学院学报,2002年第5期.
[65]汪民安.身体、空间与后现代.南京:江苏人民出版社.2006年.
[66]王守元.英语文体学要略.济南:山东大学出版社.2000年.
[67]温锁林.语言学方法对当代哲学研究的影响.山西大学学报.2002年第4期.
[68]吴中宇、胡仕勇.戈夫曼与舒茨的社会情境中个人及个人行动理论分析—现代社会学思想流派中的主观主义倾向.华中科技大学学报(社科版),2001年第4期.
[69]辛斌.语言、权力和意识形态.现代外语.1996年第1期.
[70]辛斌．批评话语分析：批评与反思，外语学刊.2008年第6期．
[71]徐赳赳.话语分析20年.外语教学与研究.1995年第1期.
[72]徐赳赳.话语分析在中国.外语教学与研究.1997年第4期.
[73]严明.话语分析的基础:话语共同体.外语学刊.2009年第4期.
[74]杨善华主编.当代西方社会学理论.北京:北京大学出版社.1999.
[75]杨玉成.奥斯汀:语言现象学与哲学,北京:商务印书馆,2002.
[76]耶夫·维索尔伦.语用学诠释.钱冠连、霍永寿译，北京:清华大学出版社,2003.
[77]约翰·甘伯兹.会话策略.徐大明、高海洋译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2001.
[78]于国栋.机构性谈话的会话分析研究.科学技术哲学研究.2010年第2期.
[79]于国栋.会话分析.上海:上海外与教育出版社.2008.
[80]中国大百科全书出版社编辑部编.中国大百科全书(社会学卷).北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1991.
[81]张维鼎.意义与认知范畴化.成都:四川大学出版社,2007.
[82]朱慧敏.语言哲学视野中的言语行为理论发展述评.山东社会科学.2009年第3期.
[83]朱永生.话语分析五十年:回顾与展望.外国语.2003年第3期.
①有关“常人方法论”译名的含义参见侯钧生主编，《西方社会学理论教程》，南开大学出版社，2006年：288.
②Eric Livingstone, Making sense of ethnomethodology, Routledge&Kegan Paul,1987:57.
①Phillips, N.&Hardy, C. Discourse Analysis: Investigating Processes of Social Construction. Thousand Oaks.California: Sage Publications,2002:2.
①萨克斯去世后这篇演讲被整理出来并命名为“谈话序列的规则”(Sacks,1992a:3-11)。
②Schegloff, E.A. Sequencing in conversational opening. American Anthropologist,1968（70）:1079.
①Hutchby, I.&Wooffitt R. Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity,1998:98.
①Schegloff, E.A, On talk and its institutional occasions.//Drew, P.&Heritage, J.(eds) Talk at work: interaction ininstitutional settings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992c:106.
②Drew, P.&Heritage, J, Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992:29-53.
③Hutchby, I.&Wooffitt R, Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity,1998:7.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. vol1. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992: xii.
②Psathas, G., Conversation analysis: the study of Talk-in-Interaction. Thousand Oaks:Sage,1995.
③Silverman, D., Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. Oxford:Policy Press,1998..
①Hutchby, I, Wooffitt,R, Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: Polity Press,1998.
②Have, Paul ten, Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide.London, etc.: Sage Publications,1999
③Have, Paul ten, Understanding qualitative research and ethnomethodology. London etc.Sage Publications,2004.
④Wooffitt, R, Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis: A Comparative and Critical Introduction. London,etc. Sage Publications,2005.
②参见徐赳赳.话语分析20年.外语教学与研究.1995年第1期；崔国鑫.语用视野下的会话分析.首都师范大学博士毕业论文.2009年.
③参见张荣建.会话分析与随意会话分析.四川外语学院学报.2002年第4期;会话分析与批判会话分析.四川外语学院学报.2005年第2期.
①具体参见刘运同.会话分析学派的研究方法及理论基础.同济大学学报(社科版).2002年第4期.
②主要的介绍出现在以下社会学教材中：侯钧生.西方社会学理论教程.天津:南开大学出版社,2006:287-316、刘少杰.国外社会学理论.北京:高等教育出版社.2006:.256-262杨善华.当代西方社会学理论.北京:北京大学出版社.1999:47-95.高宣扬.当代社会理论.北京:中国人民大学出版社:517-532等。
①有关这一区别可参见Paul ten Have(1999a:170-80,187-9)。
①Karl Raimund Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge.1935:25.
①导师提供的系统书目，一个是pdf文档，一个是word文档，二者的文献内容是一样的，只是编排方法不同。前者只是一个按作者姓氏排序的文献目录；而后者按年代分类（等于提供了一个发展线索），并且一开始提示了常人方法论的基础读物和提出争论问题的文献。
②Garfinkel, H, Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall,1967; Garfinkel, H,Ethnomethodology’s Program: Working Out Durkheim’s Aphorism. Edited and Introduced by Anne Rawls. Lanham,MD: Rowman&Littlefield,2002.
③Have, Paul ten, Understanding qualitative research and ethnomethodology. London etc. Sage Publications,2004.
④Boden, D.&Zimmerman, D.H.(eds), Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversationanalysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991.
①这两篇文章均是按照导师要求并且由导师开列提纲所完成的。
①Hutchby, I.&Wooffitt R, Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity,1998:
123.
①转引自温锁林，《语言学方法对当代哲学研究的影响》，《山西大学学报》（哲社版），2002年第4期:78。
②阿尔斯顿，语言哲学,北京:：北京三联书店，1988：25。
③Silverman David, Harvey Sacks—Social Science and Conversation Analysis, Cambridge:Polity press:28.
①参见高文：《建构主义研究的哲学与心理学基础》，《全球教育展望》，2001年第3期。
②参见纪海英：《历史地分析建构主义的哲学根源》，《赣南师范学院学报》，2003年第1期。
③参见高文：《教育中的若干建构主义范型》，《全球教育展望》，2005年第4期。
①Burr, Vivien, ed., Social construction (2ndedition), London, New York: Routledge.,2003:2-9.
②Burr, Vivien, ed., Social construction (2ndedition), London, New York: Routledge.,2003:9.
①参见涂纪亮：《维特根斯坦后期哲学思想研究—英美语言哲学概论》，武汉：武汉大学出版社，2007年：5。
①转引自朱红文，王鲭钧，《谈话分析与社会科学的方法轮转向》，《华中科技大学学报（社科版）》，2008年第一期：23。
②陈嘉映，哲学研究，上海：上海人民出版社，2001：446。
①Sacks Harvey., Lectures on conversation.(Vol.I).Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A.Schegloff, Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:5.
①Sacks, H,“On sociological description”. Berkeley Journal of Sociology1963(8):116.
②Sacks, H. An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for doing sociology.//Sudnow, D.(ed)Studies in social interaction.. New York: Free Press.1972a:31-74.
①Goffman,E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday Anchor:1959.
②Sacks, H., On the analyzability of stories by children'.//J.J. Gumperz,&D. Hymes, ed. Directions insociolinguistics: the ethnography of communication. New York: Rinehart&Winston,1972b:325-45
③Sacks, H. Lectures on conversation.2vols. edited by Gail Jefferson; with an introduction by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992：329.
④同上，580页。
⑤Goffman, E. Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
①同上，592页。
②Goffman, E. Forms of talk, Oxford: Blackwell:1981:48—50.
③Sacks, H. Everyone has to lie. Sanches,//M.&Blount, B.(eds) Sociocultural dimensions of language use. NewYork: Academic Press.1975:57-80.
④Goffman, E. Forms of talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press,1981.
⑤Schegloff, E.A. On a virtual servomechanism for guessing bad news: a single-case conjecture. Social Problems1988(b)(35):442-457.
①转译自David Silverman, Havey Saxks—Social Science and Conversation Analysis, Oxford: Policy Press.1998a:35.
①Heritage, J. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.1984a:203-205.
②转引自Silverman, D.Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. Oxford: Policy Press:1998a:36.
①有关这一点具体的讨论，可以参见Heritage, J. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.1984a:23-28.
②Sacks, H..“Notes on methodology”. In: Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies inConversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1984a:20.
①“索引性”一词源于日常语言哲学，加芬克尔在其社会学分析中扩大了这个词的含义，使其不仅包括语用学领域的指示性词（deictic words），还包括日常实践行动的索引性。
①限于篇幅，本文在此不再赘述，具体参见Suchman,1987; Edwards and Potter1992; Hutchby and Woffitt1998;
202-228; Goodwin1994;2000; Nevile2004; Arminen2005b.
①Goodenough, W. H. Componential Analysis and the Study of Meaning, Languages,1956(32):195—216.
①Sacks, H. Lectures on conversation. I. edited by Gail Jefferson; with an introduction by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992.:647.
②Chomsky, N, Aspects of the theory of Syntax, Cambridge MA: MIT Press,1965:125.
③同上，649页。
④同上，650页。
⑤同上，522页。
①Goffman, E. The Interaction Order, Social Review,1983(48):1—17.
②转引自刘运同，《会话分析概要》，学林出版社，2007年，第9页。
①Heritage, J. Conversation analysis and institutional talk: analysing data.//D. Silverman,(ed), Qualitative research:Theory, method and practice.London: Sage1997:162.
②Paul ten Have, Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practiced Guide. London: Sage Publication:8.
①Schegloff, Emanuel A., Harvey Sacks, Opening up closings, Semiotica,1973(8):289-327.
②Sacks, H., Schegloff.E,A, Jefferson. G, A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation’,
Language,1974(50):696-735.
③Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1984.
④Drew, P. and Heritage, J.1992Analyzing talk at work: an introduction.In P: Drew andJ.Heritage (ods). Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. pp29—53
①Heath, C.C.&Luff, P.K. Technology in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000; Luff, P.K.,Hindmarsh, J.&Heath C.C.(eds). Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing Systems Design.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000b.
①Atkinson, J. Maxwell Our masters’ voices: the language and body language of politics. London: Methuen,1984a; Atkinson, J. Maxwell Public speaking and audience responses: some techniques forinviting audienceapplause.//J. Maxwell Atkinson, John Heritage, eds. Structures of SocialAction: Studies in Conversation Analysis.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:370-407.
②Heritage, John, David Greatbatch, Generating applause: a study of rhetoric and response at party politicalconferences, American Journal of Sociology1986(92):110-57.
①Firth, Alan, Johannes Wagner, On discourse, communication and (some) fundamental concepts in second languageacquisition research, The Modern Language Journal,1997(81),3:285-300; Firth, Alan, Johannes Wagner, SLAproperty: no trespassing! A response,The Modern Language Journal1998:82.
②Markee, N. Conversation Analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.2000:165.
③Gardner.H, Social and cognitive conpetencies in learning:which is whichi?I//Hutchby and Moran.Ellis, Childrenand Social Competence: Arenas of Action. London: Falmer Press.1997:115-33.
①Wilkison,R., Aphasia:conwersation anolysis of a non-fluent aphasic.//Perkins and Honord, Case Studies in ClinicalLinguistics. London: Whurr,1995.
①Hutchby, I.,Wooffitt,R., Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: Polity Press
(UK and Europe), Blackwell Publishers Inc (USA),1998:14
①Heritage, John, A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, JohnHeritage, eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:299-345.
②在谈话分析内部，语境问题是最有争议的话题之一，理论与术语不一而足。我们在这里对语境采用了较为宽泛的理解。有兴趣的读者可以参阅Duranti and Goodwin (1992)以及Sarangi and Roberts (1999)。
③Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage,eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:
242.
④Schegloff, E. A., Between macro and micro: contexts and other connections’.//J. Alexander, et al. eds. Themicro-macro link. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,2000:221.
⑤Heritage, J., Conversation analysis and institutional talk: analysing data’.//David Silverman, ed. Qualitativeresearch: Theory, method and practice.London: Sage,1997:164.
①Hutchby, I.,&Wooffitt, R., Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: PolityPress,1998:34.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks,1992:34.
①Alasuutari, Researching culture: qualitative method and cultural studies. London: Sage,1995:637.
②有关他观（etic）与自观(emic)的区别可参见Cherles Goodwin，1984。
①Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage,eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press:241.
①Schegloff, E. A.,&Sacks H. Opening up closings’, Semiotica,1973(8):295-296.
②Heritage认为很多谈话行动都蕴含于这样的相邻对中，从相对“制度化”的“问候”和“告别”等互动谈话到相对复杂的成对行为如“问—答”、“要求—同意/拒绝”、“邀请—接受/拒绝”等等。萨克斯在1960年代中期创立了研究这些成对行为的一般研究方法。
③Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks,1992:673.
④Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks,1992:521.
⑤Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks,1992:191.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks,1992:555.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil BlackwellSacks，1992:49,102,264.
①Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement’.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, JohnHeritage, eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:256.
②Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A.&Jefferson, G. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking forconversation, Language1974(50):729.
①Heritage，（1984b:260）对这一点展开专门论述。
①Schegloff, E.A., Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for Conversation”. Language in Society,2000(29):1–6.
①Have, Paul ten, Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide.. London, etc.: Sage Publications,1999:112.
①Ford, Cecilia E., Sandra A. Thompson, Interactional units in conversation: syntactic, intonational, and pragmaticresources for the management of turns.//Ochs, E., Emanuel A. Schegloff, S.A. Thompson, eds., Interaction andGrammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1996:171.
②Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, JohnHeritage, eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:265.
①Grice, H.P. Logic and Conversation.//P. Cole and J. Morgan(eds),1975:35-45.
②Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage,eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:
269.
①Heritage, J., A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage,eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:
270-273.
①谈话分析在话语修正领域的研究成果主要包括：Jefferson1972,1987; Schegloff1979a,1992c; Schegloff,Jefferson and Sacks,1977.
①Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G.&Sacks,H. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair inconversation’, Language,1977(53):363.
①Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G.,&Sacks, H., The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair inconversation, Language,1977(53):373.
②这一发现是基于美式英语，对其它文化或语言未必适用。
③Hutchby, I., Wooffitt, R., Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: Polity Press
(UK and Europe), Blackwell Publishers Inc (USA),1998:667.
①Luke, K, K,, Theodossia-Soula Pavlidou, eds.,(Telephone Calls: Unity and diversity in conversational structureacross languages and cultures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins:2002:5-6.
②Sacks, H,. Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A.Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:542.
①Sacks, H,. Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A.Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:161，546.
②Sacks, H,. Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A.Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:543.
①Hopper, R., Telephone conversation. Bloomington: Indiana University PressHopper,1992:56.
②Hopper, R., Speech in telephone openings: Emergent interaction vs. routines. Western Journal of SpeechCommunication,1989a(53,2),178-194; Hopper, R., Conversation analysis and social psychology asdescriptions of interpersonal communication'.//Roger, D., P. Bull, eds., Conversation: an interdisciplinaryperspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters,1989b:48-65.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992：159-160.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992：163，552.
②Schegloff, E. A., The routine as achievement’, Human Studies1986(9):132.
③Schegloff, E. A.&Sacks, H. Opening up closings, Semiotica,1973(8):291.
④同上：237.
①Clark, H.H., and French, J.W., Telephone goodbyes, Language in Society,1981(1),1-19.
②Button, G.., Moving out of closings.//Button, G.&Lee, J.R.E.(eds) Talk and social organisation,.Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.1987(b):101-51.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:256-7,263-5.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:18.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A.Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:228.
①分别参见LC1：717，LC1：372，LC2567–8和LC2：55.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:372.
③同上。
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:315.
①Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A.&Jefferson, G., A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for
conversation’, Language1974(50):699.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson withintroductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:200–1.
③Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:259
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:259.
②具体内容请参见Drew and Heritage,1992:19-53.
③Heritage, John, David Greatbatch, On the institutional character of institutional talk: the case of news interviews.//Deirdre Boden, Don H. Zimmerman, eds. Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversationanalysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:93-137.
④Atkinson, J.M.&Drew, P., Order in Court: The Organisation of Verbal Interaction in Judicial Settings. London:Macmillan,1979.
⑤Clayman, S.E., Displaying neutrality in television news interviews, Social Problems1988(35):474-92；Heritage,J.,Analyzing news interviews: aspects of the production of talk for an overhearing audience.//T.A. van Dijk,ed.Handbook of discourse analysis. London: Academic Press. Vol.3,1985b:95-117；Heritage, J.&Greatbatch, D.,Onthe institutional character of institutional talk: the case of news interviews.//Boden D.&Zimmerman, D.H.(eds) Talkand social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis, Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:93-137.
⑥Button, G.,Answers as interactional products: two sequential practices used in job interviews.//Drew, P.&Heritage, J.(eds) Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992:212-231.
⑦Frankel, R., Talking in interviews: a dispreference for patient-initiated questions in physician-patientencounters.//G. Psathas, ed. Interactional Competence. Washington: University Press of America,1990:231-62.
①Heritage, J.&Sefi, S., Dilemmas of advice: aspects of the delivery and reception of advice in interactions betweenHealth Visitors and firsttime mothers.//Drew, P., J. Heritage, eds. Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992:359-417.
②Boden, D., The business of talk: organizations in action. Cambridge: Polity Press,1994a.
③Per kyl, A., AIDS Counselling: Institutional Interaction and Clinical Practice. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1995.
④Hutchby, I., Confrontation talk: Arguments, Asymmetries, and power on talk radio. Mahwah, N.J.: LawrenceErlbaum,1996b.
⑤Wilson, T.P., Social structure and the sequential organization of interaction.//D. Boden&D.H. Zimmerman, eds.Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:22-43
⑥Zimmerman, D.H.&Boden, D., Structure-in-Action.//D. Boden&D.H. Zimmerman, eds. Talk and socialstructure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:3-21.
①具体内容请参见Pomerantz1988：9。
②Frankel, R., Talking in interviews: a dispreference for patient-initiated questions in physician-patientencounters.//George Psathas, ed. Interactional Competence. Washington:University Press of America,1990:231-62.Have, Paul ten, A doctor’s body work: an exploratory exercise.//A. Marcarino, ed.,Analisi della conversatione eprospettive di recerca inetnometodologia. Urbino: Editioni QuattroVenti,1997:207-18.
①Greatbatch, D., On the management of disagreement between news interviewers'.//Drew, P., J. Heritage, eds. Talkat work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992:268-301.
①Have, P. ten, The consultation as a genre.//IB. Torode, ed. Text and Talk as Social Practice. Dordrecht/Providence,R.I.: Foris Publications,1989:115-35.
②参见刘兴兵，医患门诊互动中目的与权势，《外语学刊》，2009年第4期:73-76。
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:26.
②Have, Paul ten, Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide.. London, etc.: Sage Publications,1999:48.
③Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:419.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:27.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:420.
③Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:622.
①Heritage, J.&Atkinson, J.M., Introduction.//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of Social Action:Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:1-15.
①参见Goodwin, C., Conversational organization: interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: AcademicPress,1981; Goodwin, C., Seeing in depth, Social Studies of Science1995(25):237-74; Heath, C.,Embarrassmentand interactional organization,//Paul Drew, Anthony Wootton, eds., Erving Goffman: exploring the interaction order.Cambridge: Polity Press,1988.136-60.
②Labov, W., Language in the inner city: studies in the Black English Vernacular, Philadelphia: University ofPennsylvania Press,1972.
③Button, G., Answers as interactional products: two sequential practices used ininterviews, Social PsychologyQuarterly,1987(50):174.
①Have, Paul ten, Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide--Second Edition., London etc. Sage,2007:67—68.
①参见Lofland,J,,&L.H.Lofland, Analyzing social setting: a guide to qualitative analysis.2ndedn,Belmont,CA:Wadsworth,1984:13—45; Schatzman,L.,&Strauss,A.,L., Field research: strategies for a naturalsociology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall,1973:18—33.
①Heritage, J.&Atkinson, J.M,“Introduction”.//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of Social Action:Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:1-15.
②Psathas, G.&Anderson, T. The 'practices' of transcription in conversation analysis. Semiotica,1990(78):75-99.
③Hopper, R, Conversation analysis and social psychology as descriptions of interpersonal communication.//Roger,D., P. Bull, eds., Conversation: an interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters,1989b:48-65.
④Heath, C.&Luff, P., Explicating face-to-face interaction,//Gilbert, N., ed.Researching social life. London: Sage,1993:309.
①Kendon,A.,The organization of behavior in face-to face interaction: observations on the development of amethodology,//Schere and Ekman, Handbook of methods in nonverbal behavior research. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1982:478.
②Ochs,E.Transcription as a theory.//Ochs and Schieffelin, Developmental pragmatics, New York:Academic Press,1979:44.
③Heritage, J. Atkinson, M. Introduction,//Atkinson, Heritage, eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies inConversation Analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1984:1-15.
①具体参见Davidson,J., Subsequent Versions of invitations,offers,requests,and proposals dealing with potential oractual rejection.//Atkiwson and Hentage, Structures of social action: studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press1984:102-28; Poerantz,A., Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some featuresof preferred disprefferred turn-shapes.//Atkinson and Heritage, Structures of social action: studies in conversationanalysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:79-112.
②Jefferson,G.1989.Notes on a possible metric which provides for a ‘standard maximum silence of one second mconversation,//Roger and Bull, Conversation: an interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon:Multilingual Matters,1989:
166-96.
①具体参见Jefferson,G, A Technique for inviting langhter and its subsequentacceptance/declination.//Psathas,1979:79-96; Jefferson,G. An exercise in the transcription and analysis of langhter,//Dijk1985:25-34; Jefferson,G, Sacks,H.and Schegloff,E.A.Notes on laughter in pursuit of intimacy,//Button and lee1987:152-205.
②具体参见Heritage;J,&J.M.Atkinson,.//J.M.Atkinson&J.Heritage,eds, Structures of Social action: theory,methodand practice, London:Sage,1984:161-82; Psathas,G,&T.Anderson, The‵Practice′of transcription in conversationanalysis, Semiotica,1990:78:75-99; Have,P.ten,&G.Psathas,eds, Situated order:studies in the social organization oftalk and embodied activities,Washington,D.C: University Press of America,1995:45-47.
①参见Schenkein, Studies in the organisation of conversational interaction,.New York:Academic press,1978:56.
①Sacks,1984a Notes on methodology,//Atkinson&Heritage, Structures of social action: studies in conversationanalysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:27.
②同上。
③Psathas,G., Conversation analysis:the study of talk-in-interation.Thousand Oaks,CA:sage,1995:45.
④Psathas,G, Interactional competence.Washington,DC:University press of America,1990a:24-5.
①Schegloff, Confirming allusions: towards an empirical account of action, American Journal of Sociology,1996b(104):172.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:115.
②具体参见Have, Paul ten, Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide.London etc.Sage,2007:111-123.
①Jefferson,G., On"trouble-premonitory"response to inquiry, Sociological Inquiry,1980(50):153-85.
②Heritage, A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement,//Atkinson and Heritage,1984:299.
①Sacks,“On doing being ordinary”//J.M.Atkinsor&J.Heritage,eds,Structures of social action:studies inconversation analysis.Cambridge:Cup,1984b:411.
①Glaser and Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory:strategies for qualitative research.Chicago,IL:Aldine,1967:45-77.
①同上第61页。
①Clayman, S,E., Maynard D. W. Ethnomethodology and conversation analysis’.//Paul ten Have, George Psathas,eds., Situated order: Studies in the social organization of talk and embodied activities. Washington, D.C.: UniversityPress of America,1995:7-9.
①Jefferson.G.and Lee,J.R.E., The rejection of advice: Managing the problematic convergence of a "troubles telling"and a"service encounter".Journal of Pragmatics,1981(5):399-422.
①Eric Livingstone, Making Sense of Ethnomethodology, Routledge&Kegan Paul,1987:57
②Poller,M, Left of ethnomethodology: the rise and decline of redical reflexivity, A.S.R.,1991,(56):370.
③Swingewood,A.,A short History of Sociogical Thought.Macmillian,1991:274.
①科尔曼，美国社会学评论（ASR).“俗民方法学研究”讨论会.1968年，第3卷，124-126页。
②同上。126-130页。
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:152.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:26-7.
②同上。
③Heath, C., Body Movement and Speech in Medical Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1986;Heath, C., The analysis of activities in face to face interaction using video.//David Silverman, ed. Qualitativeresearch: Theory, method and practice. London: Sage,1997:183-200; Heath, C.,&Luff, P. Media space andcommunicative asymmetries: preliminary observations of video mediated interaction’, Human-Computer Interaction1992(7):315-46.
④Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:26-7.
①Cicourel, Aaron V.,The role of cognitive-linguistic concepts in understanding everydaysocial interactions. Annual Review of Sociology1981(7):87-106.
②Schegloff, E A. Conversation Analysis and Socially Shared Cognition’.//L.Resnick, J. Levine, S. Teasley, eds.,Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. Washington,D.C.: American Psychological Association,1991:150-71;Schegloff, E. A. Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation,American Journal of Sociology,1992(98):1295-1345.
③Watson, Rod, Ethnomethodology and textual analysis’.//David Silverman, ed. Qualitative research: Theory,method and practice. London: Sage,1997:80-98.
①Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol1, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:485.
②Sacks, H., Lectures on conversation. Vol2, Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992:26-7:570.
③Moerman, M., Talking culture: ethnography and conversational analysis. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press,1988:x.
①转引自李猛，俗民方法学，杨善华主编，《当代西方社会学理论》，北京：北京大学出版社，1999：74。
②同上。
①Heritage, John C., Ethnomethodology.//A. Giddens, J.H. Turner, eds. Social theory today. Cambridge: PolityPress,1987:256.
①刘少杰,《社会学的语言学转向》，《社会学研究》，1999年第4期.
①转引自梁卿,史玉华，《论职业教育作为独立学科的标准》，《理论经纬》。在本文中，作者总结了不同学者对独立学科标准的认识。
①Chinoy,Ely, Sociological Perspective Random House,Inc,1968:34.
②卡尔·波普尔，客观知识：一个进化论的研究，上海：上海译文出版社.1987:47
①Silverman, David, Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. Oxford: Policy Press,1998:188.
②乔纳森.H.特纳，《社会学理论的结构》，杭州：浙江人民出版社1987:5
①Hutchby, I.&Wooffitt R. Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge:Polity,1998:145-257.
②Sacks, H. Lectures on conversation. Vol2. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992: Xlix-I.
[1] Albert, E. Ethnomethodology: The audience that knows the speech discovers it.//McCormack,T.(ed) Culture, code and content analysis, Vol.2: Studies in Communications.Greenwich, CT:JAI Press.1982.
[2] Anderson, R.J. Representations and requirements: the value of ethnography in systems design.Human-Computer Interaction,1994,9(2),151-182.
[3] Anderson, R.J., Heath, C.C., Luff, P.K.&Moran, T. The Social and the Cognitive inHuman-Computer Interaction. International Journal of Man Machine Studies,1993(38):999-1016.
[4] Anderson, R.J.&Sharrock, W.W. Aspects of the distribution of work tasks in medicalencounters. Analytic Sociology,1981,2(4).
[5] Antaki, C. Assessing quality of life of persons with a learning disability: How setting lowerstandards may inflate well-being scores. Qualitative Health Research1999(9):437-454.
[6] Antaki, C.&Horowitz, A. Using Identity Ascription to Disqualify A Rival Version ofEvents as "Interested". Research on Language and Social Interaction,2000(33):155-177.
[7] Arminen, I. Conversation Analysis: A quest for Order in Social Interaction and Language Use.Acta Sociologica,1999(42):251-257.
[8] Arminen, I. On the context sensitivity of institutional interaction”. Discourse&Society,2000(11):435-458.
[9] Arminen, I., Institutional interaction: studies of talk at work. Aldershot: Ashgate,2005b.
[10] Atkinson, J.M. Ethnomethodological approaches to socio-legal studies”.//Podgorecki, A.&Whelan, C.J.(eds) Sociological approaches to law, London, UK: Croom Helm,1981:201-223.
[11] Atkinson, J.M. Public speaking and audience responses: some techniques for inviting audienceapplause.//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies inConversation Analysis.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984b:370-407.
[12] Atkinson, J.M. Refusing invited applause: preliminary observations from a case study ofcharismatic oratory.//van Dijk, T.A.(ed). Handbook of discourse analysis, Vol. III,. London:Academic Press,1985:161-181.
[13] Atkinson, J.M. Displaying neutrality: formal aspects of informal court proceedings.//Drew, P.&Heritage, J.(eds) Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings, Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.1992:.199-211.
[14] Atkinson, J.M.&Drew, P.Order in Court: The Organisation of Verbal Interaction in JudicialSettings. London: Macmillan,1979.
[15] Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds), Structures of Social Action: Studies in ConversationAnalysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984.
[16] Atkinson, P.A.Ethnomethodology: A critical review. Annual review of sociology,1988(14):441-465.
[17] Atkinson, P.A.&Heath, C.C.(eds), Medical work: Realities and routines. Farnborough, UK,Gower.[Review: Helm, D.(1983) Social Science and Medicine,17:51-52.,1981.
[18] Auer, P. Rhythm in telephone closings. Human Studies,1990(13):361-392.
[19] Austin, J,L How to do things with words. Oxford:Clarendon press.1962.
[20] Baccus, M.D. Sociological indication and the visibility criterion of real word theorizing”.//Garfinkel, H.(ed) Ethnomethodological studies of work, London, UK: Routledge and KeganPaul,1986a:1-19.
[21] Baker, C.D. Ethnomethodological Studies of Talk in Educational Settings,//Davies, B.&Corson, D.(eds) Oral Discourse and Education. Volume3, Encylopedia of Language andEducation, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic,1997a:43-52.
[22] Baker, C.D. Membership categorization and interview accounts,//Silverman D.,(ed) Qualitativeresearch: Theory, method and practice, London: Sage,1997b:130-143.
[23] Beach, W.A. Foreward: Sequential organization of conversational activities. Western Journal ofSpeech Communication,1989,53(2),85-90.
[24] Beach, W.A. Orienting to the phenomenon,//Anderson, J.A.(ed) Communication Yearbook13.Newbury Park: Sage.1990a:216-244.
[25] Beach, W.A. Language as and in technology: facilitating topic organization in a Videotex focusgroup meeting,//Medhurst, M.J., Gonzalez, A&Peterson, T.R (eds) Communication and theculture of technology. Pullman: Washington State University Press,1990b.
[26] Bergmann, J rg R. Veiled morality: notes on discretion in psychiatry,//Drew, Paul,JohnHeritage, eds. Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1992:137-62.
[27] Bergmann, J.R.Introduction: Morality in Discourse. Research on Language and SocialInteraction,1998(31).
[28] Bilmes, J. Questions, answers, and the organization of talk in the1992vice presidential debate:Fundamental considerations. Research in Language and Social Interaction,1999(32):213-242.
[29] Bjelic, D.I. An ethnomethodological clarification of Husserl's concepts of "Regressive Inquiry"and "Galilean Physics" by means of discovering praxioms”, Human Studies,1995(18):189-225.
[30] Boden, D. The world as it happens: ethnomethodology and conversation analysis,//Ritzer, G.(ed) Frontiers of social theory: the new synthesis, New York: Columbia UniversityPress,1990a.:185-213.
[31] Boden, D. The business of talk: organizations in action. Cambridge: Polity Press,1994a.
[32] Boden, D.&Zimmerman, D.H.(eds), Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodologyand conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press.1991.
[33] Bogen, D. The Allure of a "Truly General Theory of Knowledge and Science": A Comment onPels”. Sociological Theory,1996(14):187-192.
[34] Bogen, D. Order without rules: Critical theory and the logic of conversation. New York: SUNYPress,1999.
[35] Bogen, D.&Lynch, M. Taking account of the hostile native: plausible deniability and theproduction of conventional history in the Iran-contra Hearings”. Social Problems,1989,36(3),197-224.
[36] Bogen, D.&Lynch, M. Social critique and the logic of description: a response to McHoul.Journal of Pragmatics,1990,14(3),505-521.
[37] Button, G.&Sharrock, W.W. The mundane work of writing and reading computer programs,//Have, P. ten.&Psathas, G.(eds) Situated order: Studies in the social organization of talk andembodied activities, Washington, D.C.: University Press of America.1995b:231-258.
[38] Button, G.&Sharrock, W.W. On simulacrums of conversation: toward a clarification of therelevance of conversation analysis for human-computer interaction.//Thomas, P.(ed) TheSocial and Interactional Dimensions of Human-Computer Interfaces, Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.1995c:107-125.
[39] Button, G.&Sharrock, W.W. Project Work: The Organisation of Collaborative Design andDevelopment in Software Engineering. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW),1996(5):369-386.
[40] Button, G.&Sharrock, W.W. The organizational accountability of technological work. SocialStudies of Science,1998(28):73-102.
[41] Button, G.&Sharrock, W.W. Design by problem solving,//Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J.&Heath C.C.(eds)(2000). Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing Systems Design, pp.46-67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000.
[42] Clark, C., T. Pinch, The anatomy of a deception: fraud and finesse in the mock auction salescon, Qualitative Sociology,1992(15):151-75.
[43] Clark, C., Drew, P.&Pinch T, Managing customer 'objections' during reallife salesnegotiations. Discourse and Society,,1994(5):437-462.
[44] Clayman, S. Gatekeeping in action: editorial conferences and assessments of newsworthiness,American Sociological Review,1998,63(2):178-99.
[45] Clayman, S.E.&Maynard D.W. Ethnomethodology and conversation analysis,//P. ten Have,G. Psathas, eds., Situated order: Studies in the social organization of talk and embodiedactivities. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America,1995:1-30.
[46] Clayman, S.E.&Whalen J. When the medium becomes the message: the case of theRather-Bush encounter, Research on Language and Social Interaction,1988/89(22):241-72.
[47] Coulter, J. Recognition in Wittgenstein and contemporary thought,//Chapman, M.&Dixon, R.A.(eds) Meaning and the growth of understanding: Wittgenstein's significance for developmentalpsychology, Berlin, BRD: Springer-Verlag,1987.85-102.
[48] Coulter, J. Cognitive "penetrability" and the emotions.//Franks, D.&McCarthy, E.D.(eds) Thesociology of emotion, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.1989a:33-50.
[49] Coulter, J. Mind in action. Cambridge: Polity Press,1989b.
[50] Coulter,J.(ed) Ethnomethodological sociology. Aldershot: Elgar.[Includes bibliographycompiled by B. J. Fehr and Jeff Stetson with the assistance of Yoshifumi Mizukawa,1990a.
[51] Coulter, J. Discourse and Mind, Human Studies,1999,22(2-4), Oct,163-181.
[52] Davidson, Judy A. Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests, and proposals dealingwith potential or actual rejection.//Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage, eds.Structures ofSocial Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984):102-28.
[53] Dijk, T.A. van (ed.) Handbook of discourse analysis, Vol.3: Discourse and dialogue. London,UK: Academic Press.[See especially chapters by: Sacks, Jefferson, Heritage, Mehan, Drew,Cuff&Sharrock, and Atkinson.],1985.
[54] Drew, P. Analyzing the use of language in courtroom interaction.//van Dijk, T.A.(ed.),Handbook of discourse analysis, vol. III, London: Academic Press.1985:133-147.
[55] Drew, P."Open" class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles inconversation. Journal of Pragmatics,1997(28):69-101.
[56] Drew, P.&Heritage, J. Analyzing talk at work: an introduction,//Drew, P.&Heritage, J.(eds)Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1992:3-65.
[57] Drew, P.&Heritage, J.(eds) Talk at work: interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1992.
[58] Duranti, Alessandro, Charles Goodwin, eds. Rethinking context: language as an interactivephenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992.
[59] Edwards, D.&Potter, J. Discursive Psychology. London: Sage,1992.
[60] Filmer, P. On Garfinkel's ethnomethodology,//Filmer, M. Phillipson, D. Silverman, and D.Walsh (eds.) New directions in sociological theory, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,1972:203-234.
[61] Firth, A.(ed). The discourse of negotiation: studies of language in the workplace. Oxford:Pergamon,1995a.
[62] Firth, A. Ethnomethodology,//Vershueren, J., stman, Jan-Ola.&Blommaert, J.(eds),Handbook of Pragmatics, Amsterdam: Benjamins,1995,269-278.
[63] Firth, A.&Wagner, J. On discourse, communication and (some) fundamental concepts insecond language acquisition research. The Modern Language Journal,1997,81(3),285-300.
[64] Francis, D.W.&Hester, S. Analysing ‘institutional talk’: a reply to Watson. Text,2000a,20(3),373-375.
[65] Francis, D.W.&Hester, S. Ethnomethodology, conversation analysis and gender,//Quere, L.&Smoreda Z.(eds) Reseaux103: Le Sexe du Telephone, pp.215-251. Paris: Hermes Science,2000b.
[66] Francis, D.W.&Hester, S. Ethnomethodology, conversation analysis and ‘institutional talk’.Text,2000c,20(3),391-413.
[67] Garfinkel, H. Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc,1967a.
[68] Garfinkel, H. Evidence for locally produced, naturally accountable phenomena of order, logic,reason, meaning, method, etc. in and as of the essential quiddity of immortal ordinary society (Iof IV): an announcement of studies, Sociological Theory,1988(60:10-39.
[69] Garfinkel, H. An Overview of Ethnomethodology's Program, Social Psychology Quarterl,1996(59):5-21.
[70] Garfinkel, H., and Sacks, H. On formal structures of practical actions.//J.C. McKinney and E.A.Tiryakian (Eds.) Theoretical sociology: Perspectives and developments New York, NY:Appleton-Century-Crofts,1970:337-366.
[71] Goodwin, C. Conversational organization: interaction between speakers and hearers. NewYork: Academic Press,1981.
[72] Goodwin, Charles, Notes on story structure and the organization of participation,//Atkinson, J.Maxwell, John Heritage, eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984:225-46.
[73] Goodwin, Charles, Recording human interaction in natural settings, Pragmatics,1994(3):181-209.
[74] Goodwin, CharlesAction and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal ofPragmatics,(2000(32),1489-1522.
[75] Greatbatch, D. Conversation analysis: neutralism in British news interviews',//A. Bell, P. Garrett,eds. Approaches to media discourse. Oxford: Blackwell,1998:163-85.
[76] Have, P. ten, Contrastive analyses of interview talk,//T. Hak, J. Haafkens, G. Nijhof, eds.Working papers on discourse and conversational analysis. Rotterdam: Instituut PreventieveSociale Psychiatrie EUR,1985a:151-63.
[77] Have, P. ten, Methodological issues in conversation analysis, Bulletin de MéthodologieSociologique,1990c:23-51.
[78] Have, P. ten, Talk and institution: a reconsideration of the 'asymmetry' of doctorpatientinteraction,//D. Boden&D.H. Zimmerman, eds. Talk and social structure: studies inethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991c:138-63.
[79] Have, P. ten, Medical ethnomethodology: An Overview, Human Studies,1995c:18:245-61.
[80] Have, P. ten, Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide. London, etc.: Sage Publications.1999a.
[81] Heath, C.C. Embarrassment and Interactional Organisation,//Giddens, A.(ed), Sociology:Introductory Readings. Oxford: Polity Press,1997a.
[82] Heath, C.C. The analysis of activities in face to face interaction using video,//Silverman, D.(ed.)Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice. London: Sage,1997b:183-200.
[83] Heath, C.C. Exploring work and interaction. Revue Champs Visuel,1997c（1）.
[84] Heath, C.C. Analysing work and interaction,//May, T. Qualitative Research. London: Sage:2000.
[85] Heath, C.C.&Hindmarsh, J. Configuring Action in Objects: From mutual spaces to mediaspaces. Mind, Culture and Activity,2000,7(1/2),81-104.
[86] Heath, C.C., Knoblauch, H.&Luff, P. Technology and Social Interaction: The emergence of'workplace studies. British Journal of Sociology,2000(51):299-320.
[87] Heath, C.C.&Luff, P.K. Technology in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000.
[88] Heritage, J. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.1984a:203-205.
[89] Heritage, J.C. Recent developments in conversation analysis, Sociolinguistics,1985a(15):118.
[90] Heritage, J.C. Ethnomethodology,//A. Giddens, J.H. Turner, eds. Social theory today.Cambridge: Polity Press,1987a,224-72.
[91] Heritage, J.C. Explanations as accounts: a conversation analytic perspective,//Charles Antaki,ed. Analyzing everyday explanation: a casebook of methods. London: Sage,1988:131.
[92] Heritage, J. Current developments in conversation analysis,//Roger, D., P. Bull, eds.,Conversation: an interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters,1989:21-47.
[93] Heritage, J. Conversation analysis: methodological aspects,//U.M. Quasthoff, ed., Aspects oforal communication. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter,1995:391-418.
[94] Heritage, J. Conversation analysis and institutional talk: analysing data,//D. Silverman,(ed),Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice.London: Sage,1997:161-82.
[95] Heritage, J. Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk: Analyzing Distinctive Turn-TakingSystems,//Cmejrková, S., Hoffmannová, J.,Müllerová, O.&Svetlá J.(eds) Dialoganalyse VI(Volume2) Proceedings of the6th International Congress of IADA-International Associationfor Dialog Analysis, Tubingen: Niemeyer.,1998a:3-17.
[96] Heritage, J.&Atkinson, J.M. Introduction,//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures ofSocial Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1984:1-15.
[97] Heritage, J., S. Clayman, D.H. Zimmerman, Discourse and message analysis: the microstructure of mass media messages,//R. Hawkins, J.M. Wieman, S. Pingree, eds. Advancingcommunication science: merging mass and interpersonal processes. Sage Annual Reviews ofCommunication Research, vol.16. London: Sage,1988:77-109.
[98] Heritage, J.&Greatbatch, D. On the institutional character of institutional talk: the case of newsinterviews,//Boden D.&Zimmerman, D.H.(eds) Talk and social structure: studies inethnomethodology and conversation analysis, Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:93-137.
[99] Hilbert, R.A. The classical roots of Ethnomethodology: Durkheim, Weber, and Garfinkel.Foreword by Randall Collins. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.,1992a.
[100] Hilbert, R. Ethnomethodological Recovery of Durkheim. Sociological Perspectives,1992b(34):337-57.
[101] Hindmarsh, J.&Heath, C.C Embodied Reference: A study of deixis in workplace interaction,Journal of Pragmatics,2000b,32,(12),1855-1878.
[102] Holmes, D. Explicit-implicit address. Journal of Pragmatics,1984.8,311-320.
[103] Hopper, R. Conversation analysis and social psychology as descriptions of interpersonalcommunication,//D. Roger and P. Bull (Eds.) Conversation: An interdisciplinary perspective.Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters,1988b:48-65.
[104] Hopper, R. Speech in telephone openings: Emergent interaction vs. routines. Western Journalof Speech Communication,1989a.53(2),178-194.
[105] Hopper, R. Hold the phone,//D. Boden&D.H. Zimmerman, eds. Talk and social structure:studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:217-31.
[106] Hopper, R. Telephone conversation. Bloomington: Indiana Press,1992.
[107] Hopper, R. Episode Trajectory in Conversational Play,//ten Have, G. Psathas, eds., Situatedorder: Studies in the social organization of talk and embodied activities. Washington, D.C.:University Press of America,1995:57-72.
[108] Hopper, R.(with K. Drummond) Language use and media: A micro-analytic perspective.Critical Studies in Mass Communication,1988(5),163-166.
[109] Hopper, R., Glenn, P. J. Repetition and play in conversation,//B. Johnstone, ed., Repetition indiscourse: Interdisciplinary perspectives, Vol. II. Norwood, NJ: Ablex,1994:29-40.
[110] Hopper, R., S. Koch, J. Mandelbaum Conversation analysis methods,//D.G. Ellis, W.A.Donahue, eds. Contemporary issues in language and discourse processes. Beverly Hills:Sage,1986:77-109.
[111] Housley,W. Category Work and Knowledgeability within Multidisciplinary Team Meetings,TEXT,2000(20):83-107.
[112] Housley,W. Story, Narrative and Teamwork, The Sociological Review,2000(48):425-43.
[113] Housley,W., R. Fitzgerald Conversation Analysis, Practitioner Based Research, Reflexivity andReflective Practice: Some Exploratory Remarks, Ethnographic Studies,2000（5）:27-44.
[114] Hutchby, I. Power in discourse: the case of arguments on a British talk radio show. Discourse&Society,1996a,7(4),481-498.
[115] Hutchby, I. Conversation and Technology: From the Telephone to the Internet. Cambridge:Polity,2001b.
[116] Hutchby, I.&Wooffitt R. Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications.Cambridge: Polity,1998.
[117] Hutchby, I.(with Drew, P.) Conversation analysis,//Ostman, J.-O., Verschueren, J.&Blommaert, J.(eds.) Handbook of Pragmatics, Antwerp: John Benjamins,1995:182-190.
[118] Graham, J.R.E. Lee, eds., Talk and social organisation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters,2000:86-100.
[119] Jefferson, Gail Side sequences,//David Sudnow, ed. Studies in social interaction. New York:Free Press,1972:294-338.
[120] Jefferson, G. On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles,//Atkinson, J.M., J. Heritage,eds. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1984b:346-69.
[121] Jefferson, G.'Notes on a systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens "Yeah" and"Mm hm', Papers in Linguistics,1984c(17):197-206.
[122] Jefferson, G. Notes on some orderlinesses of overlap onset.//V. D'Urso and P. Leonardi (Eds.)Discourse analysis and natural rhetoric Padua, Italy: Cleup Editore.,1984d:11-38.
[123] Jefferson, Gail On exposed and embedded correction in conversation,//Button, Graham, J.R.E.Lee, eds., Talk and social organisation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters,1987:86-100.
[124] Jefferson, G. On the sequential organization of troubles talk in ordinary conversation. SocialProblems,1988a(35):418-41.
[125] Jefferson, G. A case of transcriptional stereotyping, Journal of Pragmatics,1996(26):159-70.
[126] Levinson, S.C. Pragmatics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,1983:299.
[127] Livingston, E. Making sense of ethnomethodology. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul，1987.
[128] Luff, P.K. Computers and Interaction: The Social Organisation of a Human-ComputerInteraction in the Workplace. PhD. University of Surrey，1997.
[129] Luff, P.K., Gilbert,G.N.&Frohlich, D.M.(eds) Computers and conversation. London:Academic Press，1990.
[130] Luff, P.K.&Heath C.C. Towards the social organisation of human computer interaction,//Button, G.(ed.), Technology in working order: studies of work, interaction and technology,London: Routledge Kegan Paul.1993b:72-98.
[131] Luff, P.K.&Heath, C.C. Mobility in Collaboration,//Proceedings of CSCW'98, Seattle, WA,,1998, November14-18:305-314.
[132] Luff, P.K.&Heath, C.C. Surveying the scene: the monitoring practices of staff in controlrooms,//Noyes, J.&Bransby, M.(eds) People in Control. Proceedings of An InternationalConference on Human Interfaces in Control Rooms, Cockpits and Command Centres,1999:1-6.
[133] Luff, P.K., Hindmarsh, J. and Heath, C.C. Introduction,//Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J.&Heath, C.C.(eds) Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing System Design.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.2000a:1-26.
[134] Luff, P.K., Hindmarsh, J.&Heath C.C.(eds) Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practiceand Informing Systems Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000b.
[135] Lynch, M. The ethnomethodological foundations of conversation analysis. Text,2000c,20(4),517-32.
[136] Lynch, M&Collins, H.M.(Guest Eds.) Humans, Animals, and Machines. Special Issue ofScience, Technology&Human Values,1998,23(4),371-83.
[137] McHoul, A. The organization of repair in classroom talk. Language in Society,1990b(19):349-77.
[138] McHoul, A. Towards a critical ethnomethodology. Theory, Culture&Society,1994(11):105-26.
[139] McHoul, A.&Rapley, M. How To Analyse Talk in Institutional Settings: A casebook ofMethods. Dorset: Continuum,2001.
[140] Maynard, D.W.&Clayman, S.E. The diversity of ethnomethodology, Annual Review ofSociology,1991(17):385-418.
[141] Modaff, J.V.&Modaff, D. P. Technical notes on audio recording. Research on Language andSocial Interaction,2000,33(1),101-118.
[142] Moerman, M. Talking culture: Ethnography and conversation analysis. Philadelphia, PA:University of Pennsylvania Press,1988.
[143] Moerman, M.&Sacks, H. On "understanding" in the analysis of natural conversation,//Moerman, M. Talking culture: Ethnography and conversation analysis. Philadelphia, PA:University of Pennsylvania,1988:180-186.
[144] Moerman, M. Exploring talk and interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction,1990/1991(24):173-87.
[145] Nevile, MauriceIntegrity in the Airline Cockpit: Embodying Claims About Progress for theConduct of an Approach Briefing, Research on Language&Social Interaction,2004(37):447-81
[146] Phillips, N.&Hardy, Cynthia. Discourse Analysis: investigating processes of socialconstruction. Thousang Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,2002:2.
[147] Pollner, M. Left of ethnomethodology: the rise and decline of radical reflexivity. AmericanSociological Review,1991(56):370-380.
[148] Pollner, M.&Goode, D. Ethnomethodology and person-centered practices. Person CenteredReview,1990(5):203-220.
[149] Pomerantz, A. Pursuing a response,//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of SocialAction: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress,1984b:152-163.
[150] Pomerantz, A.M. Ethnomethodology, conversation analysis and the study of courtroombehavior,//Muller, D.J. et al.(eds.) Topics in psychology and law. New York, NY: Wiley,1984c.
[151] Pomerantz, A.M.&Atkinson, J.M. Ethnomethodology, conversation analysis and the study ofcourtroom interaction,//Muller, D.J., Blackman, D.E.&Chapman, A.J.(eds) Topics inpsychology and law, Chichester: Wiley.,1984:283-94.
[152] Pomerantz, Anita. Offering a candidate answer: An information seeking strategy,Communication Monographs,1988(55):9.
[153] Pomerantz, A.&Fehr, B. J. Conversation Analysis: An approach to the study of social actionas sense making practices,//Dijk, T. A. van (ed) Discourse Studies: A MultidisciplinaryIntroduction London: Sage,1997:.64-91.
[154] Pomerantz, A.M., Mastriano, B.P.&Halfond, M.M. Students clinicians' difficulties whileconducting the summary diagnostic interview, Text,1987(7):19-36.
[155] Psathas, G. Introduction: Methodological issues and recent developments in the study ofnaturally occurring interaction,//Psathas, G.(ed) Interactional Competence, Washington:University Press of America,1990:1-30.
[156] Psathas, G. The structure of direction-giving in interaction,//Boden, D.&Zimmerman, D.H.(eds) Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis,Cambridge: Polity Press,1991:195-216.
[157] Psathas, G. Conversation analysis: the study of Talk-in-Interaction. Thousand Oaks: Sage,1995.
[158] Psathas, G.,(ed) Ethnomethodology: discussions and contributions. Special Issue of HumanStudies,1995(18):107-336.
[159] Psathas, G. Talk and Social Structure and "Studies of Work". Human Studies,1995(18):139-55.
[160] Psathas, G. Studying the organization in action: Membership categorization and interactionanalysis” Human Studies,1999,22(2-4), Oct,139-162.
[161] Psathas, G.&Anderson, T. The 'practices' of transcription in conversation analysis. Semiotica,1990(78):75-99.
[162] Ragin, C.C. Constructing social research: the unity and diversity of method. ThousandOaks,CA: Pine Forge Press,1994.
[163] Roger, D.&Bull, P.(eds). Conversation: an interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon:Multilingual Matters,1989.
[164] Sacks, H. Everyone has to lie,//Sanches, M.&Blount, B.(eds) Sociocultural dimensions oflanguage use. New York: Academic Press.1975:.57-80.
[165] Sacks, H. Notes on methodology,//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of SocialAction: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress,1984a:.2-27.
[166] Sacks, H. On doing "being ordinary",//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds) Structures of SocialAction: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1984b413-29.
[167] Sacks, H. Some considerations of a story told in ordinary conversation, Poetics,1986(15):127-138.
[168] Sacks, H. Lectures on conversation.2vols. edited by Gail Jefferson; with an introduction byEmanuel A. Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1992.
[169] Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A.&Jefferson, G. A simplest systematics for the organization ofturn-taking in conversation. Language,1974,50(4),696-735.
[170] Sarangi, S.,&Roberts. C., Talk, work and institutional order: discourse in medical, medicationand management settingd, New York: Mouton de Gruyter,1999.
[171] Schegloff, E.A. Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist,1968,(70):1075-1095.
[172] Schegloff, Emanuel A. The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation’,//T. Givon,ed.Syntax and semantics12: Discourse and syntax. New York: Academic Press,1979a:261-86.
[173] Schegloff, E.A. On some questions and ambiguities in conversation,//Atkinson, J.M.&Heritage, J.(eds).. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press,1984b:28-52.
[174] Schegloff, E.A. Goffman and the analysis of conversation,//Drew, P.&Wootton, A.(eds)Erving Goffman: exploring the interaction order, Cambridge: Polity Press,1988a:.89-135.
[175] Schegloff, Emanuel A. Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense ofintersubjectivity in conversation, American Journal of Sociology,1992c (98):1295-1345.
[176] Schegloff, E.A., and Sacks, H. Opening up closings. Semiotica,1973(7):289-327.
[177] Schegloff, Emanuel A., Gail Jefferson, Harvey SacksThe preference for self-correction in theorganization of repair in conversation, Language,1977(53):361-82.
[178] Schegloff, E.A., Ochs, S.&Thompson, S.A. Introduction,//Ochs, S.A., Schegloff, E.A.&Thompson, S.A.(eds) Interaction and Grammar, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1996:1-51.
[179] Silverman, D. Communication and medical practice: social relations in the clinic. London:Sage,1987.
[180] Silverman, D. The Machinery of Interaction: Sacks’ Lectures on Conversation. SociologicalReview,1993,41(4):731-752.
[181] Silverman, D. Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. Oxford: PolicyPress,1998a.
[182] Silverman, D. Analysing conversation,//Seale, C.(ed.), Researching society and culture,London: Sage,1998b:261-74.
[183] Silverman, D. Warriors or Collaborators: Reworking Methodological Controversies in theStudy of Institutional Interaction,//Sarangi, S.&Roberts, C.(eds) Talk, Work and InstitiutionalOrder: Discourse in Medical Mediation and Management Settings. Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter,1999.
[184] Silverman, D., Baker, C.D.&Keogh, J. The Case of the Silent Child: Advice-Giving andAdvice-Reception in Parent-Teacher Interviews,//Hutchby, I.&Moran-Ellis, J.(eds) Childrenand Social Competence: Arenas of Action, London, Falmer,1998:220-240.
[185] Silverman, D., Bor, R., Miller, R.&Goldman, E. Advice-Giving and Advice-Reception inAIDS Counselling,//Aggleton, P. et al.(eds) AIDS: Rights, Risks and Reason. FalmerPress.,1992.
[186] Silverman, D.&Miller, G. Troubles Talk and Counselling Discourse: A Comparative Study.Sociological Quarterly,1995,36(4),725-747.
[187] Suchman, L. Plans and situated action: the problem of human-machine communication.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1987.
[188] Suchman, L.'Working relations of technology production and use, Computer SupportedCooperative Work,1994b（2）:21-39.
[189] Suchman, L. Constitting shared workspaces,//Y. Engestr m, D. Middleton, eds. Cognition andcommunication at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1996a:35-60.
[190] Suchman, L. Supporting articulation work,//R. Kling, ed. Computerization and controversy:value conflicts and social choices.2nded. London: Academic Press,1996b:407-23.
[191] Suchman, L. Making a case:"Knowledge" and "Routine" work in document production',//Luff,P., J. Hindmarsh, C. Heath (eds.)(2000) Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice andInforming Systems Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000:29-45.
[192] Turner, R., ed. Ethnomethodology: selected readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin,1974.
[193] Wagner, J., ed. Conversation analysis of foreign language data. Special Issue of Journal ofPragmatics,1996,26(2),145-259.
[194] Wagner, J. Language aquisition through foreign language interaction-a critical review ofstudies in Second Language Aquisition. Journal of Pragmatics,1996,(26):215-35.
[195] Wagner, J., A. Firth Communication strategies at work,//E. Kellerman, G. Kasper, eds.Communication strategies: psycholinguistics and sociolinguistic perspectives. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1997:323-44.
[196] Wasson, C. Ethnography in the field of design. Human Organization,2000.,59(4),377-388.
[197] Watson, G., R.M. Seiler, eds. Text in Context: Contributions to ethnomethodology. London:Sage,1992.
[198] Watson, Rod Ethnomethodology and textual analysis,//David Silverman, ed. Qualitativeresearch: Theory, method and practice. London: Sage,1997:80-98.
[199] Watson, R. The Character of ‘Institutional Talk’: A Response to Hester and Francis. Text,2000,20(3),377.
[200] Wittgenstein, L. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.1968:129.
[201] Wooffitt, R. Telling tales of the unexpected: the organization of factual discourse. HemelHempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf,1992.
[202] Wooffitt, R. Reported speech and displays of mind, Special Issue of Communication andCognition on 'Accessing Aspects of Consciousness'(edited by M. Ball),2000a:141-158.
[203] Wooffitt, R. Some properties of the interactional organisation of displays of paranormalcognition in psychic-sitter interaction. Sociology,2000b,vol.43, no3,457-479.
[204] Young, T.R. The politics of sociology: Gouldner, Goffman, and Garfinkel. The AmericanSociologist,1971(6),276-281.
[205] Zimmerman, D.H.Studies in ethnomethodology: Twenty years later. The Discourse AnalysisResearch Group Newsletter,1987,3(2),20-25.
[206] Zimmerman, D.H.&Boden, D. Structure-in-Action.//D. Boden&D.H. Zimmerman, eds. Talkand social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Cambridge:Polity Press,1991:3-21.
[207] Zimmerman, D.H., and West, C.(Eds.) Special Issue: Language and social interaction.Sociological Inquiry,1980(50),(3/4).
[208] Zimmerman, D.H.&Weider, D.L. Ethnomethodology and the problem of order: Comment onDenzin,//Douglas, J.D.(ed) Understanding everyday life: Toward the reconstruction ofsociological knowledg,,Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Co,1970:285-298).
[209] Zimmerman, D.H., D.L. WiederYou can't help but get stoned: notes on the social organizationof marijuana smoking, Social Problems,1977(25):198-207.
[1]阿尔弗雷德·舒茨.社会世界的现象学.卢岚兰译,台北:桂冠图书有限公司,1997.
[2]布迪厄.实践与反思:反思社会学导引.华康德、李猛、李康译.北京:中央编译出版社,1998.
[3]布赖恩·特纳.身体与社会.马海良、赵国新译,北京:春风文艺出版社,2000.
[4]陈嘉映.语言哲学.北京:北京大学出版社.2006.
[5]程雨明.语言系统及其运作.上海:上海外语教育出版社.1997.
[6]代树兰.电视访谈话语研究.上海外国语大学博士论文.2007.
[7]戴维·贾里.社会学辞典.周业谦、周光淦译，香港：成邦出版集团，2000.
[8]丹尼尔·贝尔.后工业时代的来临.王宏周等译,北京:新华出版社,1997.
[9]迪尔凯姆.社会学方法的原则.狄玉明译,北京:商务出版社,1964.
[10]杜金榜.论语篇分析的理论与方法,外语学刊，2008年第1期.
[11]梵·迪克.话语分析—一门新的交叉学科,徐纠纠译,国外语言学,1990年第2期。
[12]梵·迪克.话语、心理与社会，施蓄等译，中华书局,1993.
[13]范宏雅.话语含义的认知模式探微.郑州大学学报,2007年第3期.
[14]福柯.知识考古学.谢强、马月译,北京:三联书店,1998.
[15]付习涛.言语行为理论研究综述.求索,2004年第6期.
[16]高宣扬.当代社会理论.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2005.
[17]高一虹.“咨询者中心”和“来话者中心”：两种电话心理咨询模式的语言特点.语言文字应用,1995年第3期.
[18]戈夫曼.日常生活中的自我呈现.黄爱华、冯钢译.杭州:浙江人民出版社.1989.
[19]戈夫曼.日重接触.北京:华夏出版社.1990.
[20]谷小娟,李艺.话语与身份建构,外语学刊,2007年第6期.
[21]郭贵春.语用分析方法的意义.哲学研究.1999年第5期.
[22]何自然,陈新仁.当代语用学.北京:外语教学研究出版社,2004.
[23]何安平.英语会话中的简短反馈语.现代外语.1998年第1期.
[24]侯钧生.西方社会学理论教程.天津:南开大学出版社,2006.
[25]胡春阳.话语分析:传播研究的新路径.上海:上海人民出版社,2007.
[26]胡瑞娜.当代反实在论的语用分析走向.山西大学学报(哲社版).2009年第4期.
[27]黄国文.语篇分析概要.长沙:湖南教育出版社,1988年.
[28]黄国文.英语广告标题的“提问”与“应答”分析.外语教学,1998年第1期.
[29]黄国文、徐珺.语篇分析与话语分析.外语与外语教学.2006年第10期.
[30]吉登斯.社会学方法的新规则.田佐中等译,北京:社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[31]贾春增.外国社会学史.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2000.
[32]姜望琪.当代语用学.北京:北京大学出版社,2005年.
[33]姜学林、曾孔生.医疗语言学.香港:世界医药出版社,2000年.
[34]科尔曼.社会理论的基础.邓方译,北京:社会科学文献出版社,1999.
[35]肯尼斯等.当代西方话语修辞学:演讲与话语批评.常昌富、顾宝桐译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1998年.
[36]莱文森.语用学论题之五:会话结构.沈家煊译.国外语言学,1987年第1期.
[37]李德顺.21世纪人类思维方式的变革趋势.社会科学辑刊,2003年第1期.
[38]]廖美珍.法庭互动话语与合作问题研究.当代语言学探索.北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2003年.
[39]李猛.常人方法学四十年:1954—1994.国外社会学,1997(2).
[40]李悦娥,范宏雅.话语分析.上海:上海外语教育出版社,2002.
[41]林聚任.从话语分析到反思性:科学知识社会学发展的一个新趋向.自然辩证法通讯.2007年第2期.
[42]林聚任.科学世界的话语建构:马尔凯话语分析研究纲领探析.自然辩证法研究.2010年第6期.
[43]刘虹.会话结构研究.北京:北京大学出版社.2004.
[44]刘立华.批评话语分析概览,外语学刊，年2008年第1期．
[45]刘少杰.后现代西方社会学理论.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[46]刘少杰.国外社会学理论.北京:高等教育出版社,2006.
[47]刘兴兵.医患门诊互动中的目的与权势.外语学刊.2009年第4期.
[48]刘玉安.西方社会学史.济南:山东大学出版社,1993.
[49]刘运同.试评会话分析学派.上海市语文学会编.语文论丛第6辑.上海:上海教育出版社,2000.
[50]刘运同.会话分析学派的研究方法及理论基础.同济大学学报(社科版).2001年第3期.
[51]刘运同.会话分析概要.上海:学林出版社.2007.
[52]罗伯特.重组话语频道:电视与当代批评.麦勇雄等译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2000年.
[53]马尔科姆·沃特斯.现代社会学理论.杨善华等译.北京:华夏出版社,2000.
[54]诺曼·费尔克拉夫.话语与社会变迁.殷晓蓉译,北京:华夏出版社,2003.
[55]乔纳森·特纳.社会学理论的结构.邱泽奇等译,北京:华夏出版社,2001.
[56]钱伟量.语言与实践:实践唯物主义的语言哲学导论.北京:北京科学文献出版社.2003年.
[57]宋林飞.西方社会学理论.南京:南京大学出版社,1997.
[58]桑新民.建构主义的历史、哲学、文化和教育解读.全球教育展望.2005年第4期.
[59]盛晓明.话语规则与知识基础:语用学维度.上海:学林出版社.2000年.
[60]索绪尔.普通语言学教程.张绍杰译,长沙:湖南教育出版社,2001.
[61]涂纪亮．维特根斯坦后期哲学思想研究――英美语言哲学概论．武汉：武汉大学出版社．2007.
[62]王淂杏.英语话语分析与跨文化交际.北京:北京语言文化大学出版社.1998年.
[63]王福祥.话语语言学论文集.北京:外语教育与研究出版社,1989.
[64]王晋军.医生和病人会话中的问句和权势关系.解放军外国语学院学报,2002年第5期.
[65]汪民安.身体、空间与后现代.南京:江苏人民出版社.2006年.
[66]王守元.英语文体学要略.济南:山东大学出版社.2000年.
[67]温锁林.语言学方法对当代哲学研究的影响.山西大学学报.2002年第4期.
[68]吴中宇、胡仕勇.戈夫曼与舒茨的社会情境中个人及个人行动理论分析—现代社会学思想流派中的主观主义倾向.华中科技大学学报(社科版),2001年第4期.
[69]辛斌.语言、权力和意识形态.现代外语.1996年第1期.
[70]辛斌．批评话语分析：批评与反思，外语学刊.2008年第6期．
[71]徐赳赳.话语分析20年.外语教学与研究.1995年第1期.
[72]徐赳赳.话语分析在中国.外语教学与研究.1997年第4期.
[73]严明.话语分析的基础:话语共同体.外语学刊.2009年第4期.
[74]杨善华主编.当代西方社会学理论.北京:北京大学出版社.1999.
[75]杨玉成.奥斯汀:语言现象学与哲学,北京:商务印书馆,2002.
[76]耶夫·维索尔伦.语用学诠释.钱冠连、霍永寿译，北京:清华大学出版社,2003.
[77]约翰·甘伯兹.会话策略.徐大明、高海洋译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2001.
[78]于国栋.机构性谈话的会话分析研究.科学技术哲学研究.2010年第2期.
[79]于国栋.会话分析.上海:上海外与教育出版社.2008.
[80]中国大百科全书出版社编辑部编.中国大百科全书(社会学卷).北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1991.
[81]张维鼎.意义与认知范畴化.成都:四川大学出版社,2007.
[82]朱慧敏.语言哲学视野中的言语行为理论发展述评.山东社会科学.2009年第3期.
[83]朱永生.话语分析五十年:回顾与展望.外国语.2003年第3期.