Arundale, R. B. (1999). An alternative model and ideology of communication for an alternative to politeness theory. Pragmatics, 9(1), 119–53.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2005). Pragmatics, conversational implicature, and conversation. In Fitch, K. L. and Sanders, R. E., eds., Handbook of Language and Social Interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 41–63.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2009). Face as emergent in interpersonal communication: An alternative to Goffman. In Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and Haugh, M., eds., Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox, pp. 33–54.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2010). Constituting face in conversation: Face, facework, and interactional achievement. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(8), 2078–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2013). Face as a research focus in interpersonal pragmatics: Relational and emic perspectives. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 108–20.Google Scholar

Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2003). Face and politeness: New (insights) for old (concepts). Journal of Pragmatics, 35(10–11), 1453–69.Google Scholar

Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2009). Facing the future: Some reflections. In Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and Haugh, M., eds., Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox, pp. 307–26.Google Scholar

Bogdanowska-Jakubowska, E. (2010). Face: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.Google Scholar

Bravo, D. (2008). (Im)politeness in Spanish-speaking socio-cultural contexts: Introduction. Pragmatics, 18(4), 563–76.Google Scholar

Brown, P. and Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Originally published as Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena, in E. Goody, ed. (1978), Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 56–289.Google Scholar

Chang, W. M. and Haugh, M. (2011). Strategic embarrassment and face threatening in business interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(12), 2948–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J. and Haugh, M. (2014). Pragmatics and the English Language. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J. and Terkourafi, M. (2017). Pragmatic approaches (im)politeness. In Culpeper, J., Haugh, M. and Kádár, D., eds., The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)Politeness. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 11–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eelen, G. (2001). A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester, UK: St. Jerome.Google Scholar

Ervin-Tripp, S., Nakamura, K. and Guo, J. (1995). Shifting face from Asia to Europe. In Shibatani, M. and Thompson, S., eds., Essays in Semantics and Pragmatics: In Honor of Charles J. Fillmore. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 43–71.Google Scholar

Fukushima, S. (2000). Requests and Culture: Politeness in British English and Japanese. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Fukushima, S. (2015). In search of another understanding of politeness: From the perspective of attentiveness. Journal of Politeness Research, 11(2), 261–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2009). Impoliteness and identity in the American news media: The “Culture Wars”. Journal of Politeness Research, 5(2), 273–304.Google Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2013). Face, identity, and im/politeness: Looking backwards, moving forward – From Goffman to Practice Theory. Journal of Politeness Research, 9(1), 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. and Bou-Franch, P. (2019). Emic conceptualizations of face (imagen) in Peninsular Spanish. In Ogiermann, E. and Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P., eds., From Speech Acts to Lay Understandings of Politeness: Multilingual and Multicultural Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 301–27.Google Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. and Sifianou, M. (2017). Im/politeness and identity. In Culpeper, J., Haugh, M. and Kádár, D., eds., The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 227–56.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. ([1955] 1972). On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. In Laver, J. and Hutcheson, S., eds., Communication in Face-to-Face Interaction. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin, pp. 319–46.Google Scholar

Gu, Y. (1990). Politeness phenomena in Modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(2), 237–58.Google Scholar

Hall, K. and Bucholtz, M. (2013). Epilogue: Facing identity. Journal of Politeness Research, 9, 123–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haugh, M. (2009). Face and interaction. In Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and Haugh, M., eds., Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox, pp. 1–30.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2010). When is an email really offensive? Argumentativity and variability in evaluations of impoliteness. Journal of Politeness Research, 6(1), 7–31.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2012). Epilogue: The first-second order distinction in face and politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research, 8(1), 111–34.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2013). Disentangling face, facework and im/politeness. Sociocultural Pragmatics, 1(1), 46–73.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. and Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2010). Editorial: Face in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2073–7.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. and Watanabe, Y. (2009). Analysing Japanese ‘face-in-interaction’: Insights from intercultural business meetings. In Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and Haugh, M., eds., Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox, pp. 78–95.Google Scholar

Hernández-Flores, N. (2008). Politeness and other types of facework: Communicative and social meaning in a television panel discussion. Pragmatics, 18(4), 681–706.Google Scholar

Hinze, C. G. (2012). Chinese politeness is not about ‘face’: Evidence from the business world. Journal of Politeness Research, 8(2), 11–27.Google Scholar

Hirschon, R. (2001). Freedom, solidarity and obligation: The socio-cultural context of Greek politeness. In Bayraktaroğlu, A. and Sifianou, M., eds., Linguistic Politeness across Boundaries: The Case of Greek and Turkish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 17–42.Google Scholar

Ho, D. Y. F., Fu, W. and Ng, S. M. (2004). Guilt, shame and embarrassment: Revelations of face and self. Culture and Psychology, 10, 64–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Holtgraves, T. (1992). The linguistic realization of face management: Implications of language production and comprehension, person perception, and cross-cultural communication. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 141–59.Google Scholar

Holtgraves, T. (2002). Language as Social Action. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Ide, S. (1989). Formal forms and discernment: Neglected aspects of linguistic politeness. Multilingua, 8(2), 223–48.Google Scholar

Intachakra, S. (2012). Politeness motivated by the ‘heart’ and ‘binary rationality’ in Thai culture. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(5), 619–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jones, S. M. and Bodie, G. D. (2014). Supportive communication. In Berger, C. R., ed., Handbooks of Communication Science: Vol. 6. Interpersonal Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 371–94.Google Scholar

Kádár, D. Z. and Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kasper, G. (1997). Linguistic etiquette. In Coulmas, F., ed., The Handbook of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 374–85.Google Scholar

Kinnison, L. Q. (2017). Power, integrity, and mask: An attempt to disentangle the Chinese face concept. Journal of Pragmatics, 114, 32–48.Google Scholar

Koutlaki, S. A. (2002). Offers and expressions of thanks as face enhancing acts: tæ’arof in Persian. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(12), 1733–56.Google Scholar

Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Leech, G. (2014). The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lim, T.-S. and Bowers, J. W. (1991). Facework: Solidarity, approbation, and tact. Human Communication Research, 17, 415–50.Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. (2004). Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. (2006). Polite behaviour within relational work: The discursive approach to politeness. Multilingua, 25(3), 249–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Locher, M. A. (2011). Situated impoliteness: The interface between relational work and identity construction. In Davies, B. L., Haugh, M. and Merrison, A. J., eds., Situated Politeness. London: Bloomsbury, pp. 187–208.Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. and Watts, R. J. (2005). Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), 9–34.Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. and Watts, R. J. (2008). Relational work and impoliteness: Negotiating norms of linguistic behaviour. In Bousfield, D. and Locher, M. A., eds., Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 77–99.Google Scholar

Linguistic Politeness Research Group (ed.). (2011). Discursive Approaches to Politeness. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Mao, L. M. (1994). Beyond politeness theory: ‘Face’ revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 451–86.Google Scholar

Marmaridou, S. A. S. (2011). The relevance of embodiment to lexical and collocational meaning: The case of prosopo ‘face’ in Modern Greek. In Maalej, Z. A. and Yu, N., eds., Embodiment via Body Parts: Studies from Various Languages and Cultures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 23–40.Google Scholar

Matsumoto, Y. (1988). Re-examination of the universality of face: Politeness phenomena in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 12(4), 403–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mey, J. L. (1993). Pragmatics: An Introduction. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Mills, S. (2003). Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Nwoye, O. G. (1992). Linguistic politeness and sociocultural variations of the notion of face. Journal of Pragmatics, 18(4), 309–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

O’Driscoll, J. (2007). Brown and Levinson’s face: How it can – and can’t – help us to understand interaction across cultures. Intercultural Pragmatics, 4, 463–92.Google Scholar

O’Driscoll, J. (2011a). Some issues with the concept of face: When, what, how and how much? In Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and Kádár, D. Z., eds., Politeness across Cultures. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 17–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

O’Driscoll, J. (2011b). Review of F. Bargiela-Chiappini and M. Haugh (eds.). 2009. Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox. Journal of Politeness Research, 7, 153–7.Google Scholar

O’Driscoll, J. (2017). Face and (im)politeness. In Culpeper, J., Haugh, M. and Kádár, D. Z., eds., The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)Politeness. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 89–118.Google Scholar

Pizziconi, B. (2003). Re-examining politeness, face and the Japanese language. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1471–1506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pomerantz, A. (1978). Compliment responses: Notes on the co-operation of multiple constraints. In Schenkein, J., ed., Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction. New York: Academic Press, pp. 79–112.Google Scholar

Ruhi, Ş. (2010). Face as an indexical category in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(8), 2131–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ruhi, Ş. and Işık-Güler, H. (2007). Conceptualizing face and relational work in (im)politeness: Revelations from politeness lexemes and idioms in Turkish. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 681–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ruhi, Ş. and Kádár, D. Z. (2011). ‘Face’ across historical cultures: A comparative study of Turkish and Chinese. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 12(1/2), 25–48.Google Scholar

Sifianou, M. (1997). Silence and politeness. In Jaworski, A., ed., Silence: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 63–84.Google Scholar

Sifianou, M. (2011). On the concept of face and politeness. In Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and Kádár, D. Z., eds., Politeness across Cultures. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 42–58.Google Scholar

Sifianou, M. (2012). Disagreements, politeness and face. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 1554–64.Google Scholar

Sifianou, M. (2016). On culture, face and politeness. Again. In Bogdanowska-Jakubowska, E., ed., New Ways to Face and (Im)Politeness. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego, pp. 15–30.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000). Rapport management: A framework for analysis. In Spencer-Oatey, H., ed., Culturally Speaking: Managing Rapport through Talk across Cultures. London: Continuum, pp. 11–46.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2002). Managing rapport in talk: Using rapport sensitive incidents to explore the motivational concerns underlying the management of relations. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(5), 529–45.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2005). (Im)politeness, face and perceptions of rapport: Unpackaging their bases and interrelationships. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), 95–119.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2007). Theories of identity and the analysis of face. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 639−56.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2008). Face, (im)politeness and rapport. In Spencer-Oatey, H., ed., Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory, 2nd ed. London: Continuum, pp. 11–47.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2009). Face, identity and interactional goals. In Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and Haugh, M., eds., Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox, pp. 137–54.Google Scholar

St. André, J. (2013). How the Chinese lost ‘face’. Journal of Pragmatics, 55, 68–85.Google Scholar

Terkourafi, M. (2007). Toward a universal notion of face for a universal notion of cooperation. In Kecskés, I. and Horn, L., eds., Explorations in Pragmatics: Linguistic, Cognitive and Intercultural Aspects. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 307–38.Google Scholar

Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4, 91–112.Google Scholar

Ting-Toomey, S. (2005). The matrix of face: An updated face-negotiation theory. In Gudykunst, W. B., ed., Theorizing about Intercultural Communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 71–91.Google Scholar

Ting-Toomey, S. (2009). Facework collision in intercultural communication. In Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and Haugh, M., eds., Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox, pp. 227–49.Google Scholar

Ting-Toomey, S. and Kurogi, A. (1998). Facework competence in intercultural conflict: An updated face-negotiation theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22(2), 187–225.Google Scholar

Ukosakul, M. (2005). The significance of ‘face’ and politeness in social interaction as revealed through Thai ‘face’ idioms. In Lakoff, R. and Ide, S., eds., Broadening the Horizon of Linguistic Politeness. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 117–25.Google Scholar

Van der Bom, I. and Mills, S. (2015). A discursive approach to the analysis of politeness data. Journal of Politeness Research, 11(2), 179–206.Google Scholar

Verschueren, J. (1999). Understanding Pragmatics. London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar

Watts, R. J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Watts, R. J. (2005). Linguistic politeness research. Quo vadis? In Watts, R. J., Ide, S. and Ehlich, K., eds., Politeness in Language: Studies in Its Hstory, Theory and Practice, 2nd ed. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. xi–xivii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Watts, R. J., Ide, S. and Ehlich, K. (1992). Introduction. In Watts, R. J., Ide, S. and Ehlich, K., eds., Politeness in Language: Studies in Its History, Theory and Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1–17.Google Scholar

Yu, N. (2001). What does our face mean to us? Pragmatics and Cognition, 9(1), 1–36.Google Scholar

Agha, A. (2007). Language and Social Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Antaki, C. and Widdicombe, S. (1998). Identity as an achievement and as a tool. In Antaki, C. and Widdicombe, S., eds., Identities in Talk. London: Sage, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar

Antos, G., Ventola, E. and Weber, T. (2008). Introduction: Interpersonal communication – Linguistic points of view. In Antos, G. and Ventola, E., eds., Handbook of Interpersonal Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2006). Face as relational and interactional: A communication framework for research on face, facework, and politeness. Journal of Politeness Research, 2(2), 193–216.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2010a). Constituting face in conversation: Face, facework, and interactional achievement. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(8), 2078–2105.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2010b). Relating. In Locher, M. A. and Graham, S. L., eds., Interpersonal Pragmatics, Vol. 6, Handbooks of Pragmatics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 137–65.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2013a). Conceptualizing “interaction” in interpersonal pragmatics: Implications for understanding and research. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 12–26.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2013b). Face, relating, and dialectics: A response to Spencer-Oatey. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 138–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2020). Communicating & Relating. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2015). Review of Relationship Thinking: Agency, Enchrony, and Human Sociality, by N. J. Enfield. Language in Society, 44(4), 584–7.Google Scholar

Bavelas, J. B. (2003). Relationship metaphors. In International Encyclopedia of Marriage and Family. www.encyclopedia.com/reference/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/relationship-metaphors.Google Scholar

Baxter, L. A. (2004). Relationships as dialogues. Personal Relationships, 11(1), 1–22.Google Scholar

Baxter, L. A. and Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and Dialectics. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Braithwaite, D. O. and Schrodt, P. (eds.). (2015). Engaging Theories of Interpersonal Communication: Multiple Perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Bucholtz, M. and Hall, K. (2005). Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7(4–5), 585–614.Google Scholar

Burleson, B. L., Metts, S. and Kirch, M. W. (2000). Communication in close relationships. In Hendrick, C. and Hendrick, S. S., eds., Close Relationships: A Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 245–58.Google Scholar

Carbaugh, D. and Boromisza-Habashi, D. (2015). Ethnography of communication. In Tracy, K., Ilie, C. and Sandell, T., eds., The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. Boston, MA: Wiley, pp. 537–52.Google Scholar

Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9(2), 119–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Craig, R. T. (2015). The constitutive metamodel: A Sixteen-year review. Communication Theory, 25(4), 356–74.Google Scholar

Duck, S. and McMahan, D. T. (2009). The Basics of Communication: A Relational Perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Enfield, N. J. (2009). Relationship thinking and human pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(1), 60–78.Google Scholar

Enfield, N. J. (2013). Relationship Thinking: Agency, Enchrony, and Human Sociality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Fitch, K. L. 1994. Culture, ideology, and interpersonal communication research. In Deetz, S. A., ed., Communication Yearbook 17. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 104–35.Google Scholar

Fitch, K. L. (1998). Speaking Relationally: Culture, Communication, and Interpersonal Connection. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Gergen, K. J. (2009.) Relational Being: Beyond Self and Community. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Goodwin, C. (1986). Audience diversity, participation and interpretation. Text, 6(3), 283–316.Google Scholar

Hall, J. A. and Davis, D. C. (2017). Proposing the communicate bond belong theory: Evolutionary intersections with episodic interpersonal communication. Communication Theory, 27(1), 21–47.Google Scholar

Haugh, M., Kádár, D. Z. and Mills, S. (2013). Interpersonal pragmatics: Issues and debates. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 1–11.Google Scholar

Kádár, D. Z. (2012). Relational ritual. In Östman, J. and Verschueren, J., eds., Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 1–40.Google Scholar

Kádár, D. Z. (2013). Relational Rituals and Communication: Ritual Interaction in Groups. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Kádár, D. Z. and Bax, M. M. H. (2013). In-group ritual and relational work. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 73–86.Google Scholar

Kádár, D. Z. and Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kaplan, A. (1964). The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science. San Francisco, CA: Chandler.Google Scholar

Krippendorff, K. (1970). On generating data in communication research. Journal of Communication, 20(3), 241–69.Google Scholar

Krippendorff, K. (2009). On Communicating: Otherness, Meaning, and Information. Edited by Bermejo, F.. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Langlotz, A. and Locher, M. A. (2013). The role of emotions in relational work. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 87–107.Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. (2008). Relational work, politeness, and identity construction. In Antos, G. and Ventola, E., eds., Handbook of Interpersonal Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 509–40.Google Scholar

Locher, M. and Graham, S. L. (2010). Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics. In Locher, M. and Graham, S. L., eds., Interpersonal Pragmatics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. (2013). Relational work and interpersonal pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 145–9.Google Scholar

Owen, W. F. (1990). Delimiting relational metaphors. Communication Studies, 41(1), 35–53.Google Scholar

Peräkylä, A., Ruusuvuori, J. and Vehviläinen, S. (2005). Introduction: Professional theories and institutional interaction. Communication and Medicine, 2(2), 105–9.Google Scholar

Sawyer, R. K. (2005). Social Emergence: Societies as Complex Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sigman, S. J. (1991). Handling the discontinuous aspects of continuous social relationships: Toward research on the persistence of social forms. Communication Theory, 1(2), 106–27.Google Scholar

Simmel, G. (1950). The Sociology of Georg Simmel. Translated by Wolff, K. H.. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000). Rapport management: A framework for analysis. In Spencer-Oatey, H., ed., Culturally Speaking: Managing Rapport through Talk across Cultures. London: Continuum, pp. 11–46.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2007). Theories of identity and the analysis of face. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(4), 639–56.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2011). Conceptualizing “the relational” in pragmatics: Insights from metapragmatic emotion and (im)politeness comments. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(14), 3565–78.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2013). Relating at work: Facets, dialectics, and face. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 121–37.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2015). Rapport management model. In Tracy, K., Ilie, C. and Sandell, T., eds., The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. Boston: John Wiley, pp. 1286–91.Google Scholar

Stewart, J. (2011). A contribution to ethical theory and praxis. In Cheney, G., May, S. and Munshi, D., eds., The Handbook of Communication Ethics. New York: Routledge, pp. 15–30.Google Scholar

Stewart, J. (2014). U and Me: Communicating in Moments That Matter. Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute.Google Scholar

Stewart, J., Zediker, K. E. and Witteborn, S. (2005). Together: Communicating Interpersonally, a Social Construction Approach. 6th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J. H. and Jackson, D. D. (1967). Pragmatics of Human Communication. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar

Ajtony, Z. (2013). Various facets of the English stereotype in Downton Abbey – A pragmatic approach. Topics in Linguistics, 12, 5–14.Google Scholar

Antaki, C. and Widdicombe, S. (eds.). (1998). Identities in Talk. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Anton, C. and Peterson, V. (2003). Who said what: Subject positions, rhetorical strategies and good faith. Communication Studies, 54, 403–19.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2005). Pragmatics, conversational implicature, and conversation. In Fitch, K. L. and Sanders, R. E., eds., Handbook of Language and Social Interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 41–63.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2006). Face as relational and interactional: A communication framework for research on face, facework and politeness. Journal of Politeness Research, 2(2), 193–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2009). Face as emergent in interpersonal communication: An alternative to Goffman. In Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and Haugh, M., eds., Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox, pp. 33–54.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2010). Constituting face in conversation: Face, facework, and interactional achievement. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(8), 2078–2105.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2013a). Face, relating, and dialectics: A response to Spencer-Oatey. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 138–42.Google Scholar

Arundale, R. B. (2013b). Face as a research focus in interpersonal pragmatics: Relational and emic perspectives. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 108–20.Google Scholar

Bamberg, M. (1997) Positioning between structure and performance. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7, 335–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bamberg, M. and Georgakopoulou, A. (2008). Small stories as a new perspective in narrative and identity analysis. Text and Talk, 28, 377–96.Google Scholar

Barke, A. (2010). Manipulating honorifics in the construction of social identities in Japanese television drama. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 14(4), 456–76.Google Scholar

Basturkmen, H. (2010). Developing Courses in English for Specific Purposes. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Benwell, B. and Stokoe, E. (2006). Discourse and Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Blommaert, J. and De Fina, A. (2017). Chronotopic identities: On the timespace organization of who we are. In De Fina, A., Ikizoglu, D. and Wegner, J., eds., Diversity and Super-diversity. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar

Blum-Kulka, S. and Hamo, M. (2011). Discourse pragmatics. In van Dijk, T., ed., Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. London: Sage, pp. 143–65.Google Scholar

Blum-Kulka, S., House, J. and Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. New York: Ablex.Google Scholar

Bousfield, D. (2008). Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Bousfield, D. (2013). Face in conflict. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict, 1(1), 37.Google Scholar

Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Goody, E. N., ed., Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 56–289.Google Scholar

Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals of Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Brubaker, R. and Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond “identity”. Theory and Society, 29(1), 1–47.Google Scholar

Bucholtz, M. and Hall, K. (2005). Identity and interaction: A socio-cultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7(4/5), 585–614.Google Scholar

Chaemsaithong, K. (2019). Person reference, identity, and linguistic violence in capital trials. Journal of Pragmatics, 142, 90–104.Google Scholar

Cheng-Tuan, L. and Yong-Ping, R. (2016). Self-professional identity construction through other-identity deconstruction in Chinese televised debating discourse.  Journal of Pragmatics, 94, 47–63.Google Scholar

Clark, B. (2016). Flight attendant identity construction in inflight incident reports. Pragmatics and Society, 7(1), 8–29.Google Scholar

Comstock, L. B. (2015). Facilitating active engagement in intercultural teleconferences: A pragmalinguistic study of Russian and Irish participation frameworks. Intercultural Pragmatics, 12(4), 481–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

de Fina, A. and Perrino, S. (2013). Transnational identities. Applied Linguistics, 34(5), 509–15.Google Scholar

Dings, A. (2012). Native speaker/nonnative speaker interaction and orientation to novice/expert identity. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(11), 1503–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dobs, A. M. (2014). Identities in conflict: Examining the co-construction of impoliteness and identity in classroom interaction. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict, 2(1), 36–73.Google Scholar

Donaghue, H. (2018). Relational work and identity negotiation in critical post observation teacher feedback. Journal of Pragmatics, 135, 101–16.Google Scholar

Edwards, J. (2009). Language and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Eelen, G. (2001). A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester, UK: St. Jerome.Google Scholar

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

File, K. A. and Schnurr, S. (2018). That match was “a bit like losing your virginity”: Failed humour, face and identity construction in TV interviews with professional athletes and coaches. Journal of Pragmatics, 152, 132–44.Google Scholar

Finnis, K. (2013). Creating a “new space”: Code-switching among British-born Greek-Cypriots in London. Pragmatics and Society, 4(2), 137–57.Google Scholar

Flowerdew, J. and Leong, S. (2010). Presumed knowledge in the discursive construction of socio-political and cultural identity. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(8), 2240–52.Google Scholar

Fukushima, S. and Sifianou, M. (2017). Conceptualizing politeness in Japanese and Greek. Intercultural Pragmatics, 14(4), 525–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2009). Impoliteness and identity in the American news media: The Culture Wars. Journal of Politeness Research, 5, 273–304.Google Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2010). A genre approach to the study of im-politeness. International Review of Pragmatics, 2, 46–94.Google Scholar

Garcés-Coneos Blitvich, P. (ed.). (2013). Special issue: Face, identity, and impoliteness. Journal of Politeness Research, 9(1).Google Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2013). Face, identity, and im/politeness: Looking backwards, moving forward – From Goffman to Practice Theory. Journal of Politeness Research, 9(1), 1–33.Google Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2018). Globalization, transnational identities, and conflict talk: The complexity of the Latino identity. Journal of Pragmatics, 134, 120–33.Google Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. and Sifianou, M. (2017). Im/politeness and identity. In Culpeper, J., Haugh, M. and Kádár, D., eds., The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 227–56.Google Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P., Bou-Franch, P. and Lorenzo-Dus, N. (2010). A genre-approach to im-politeness in a Spanish TV talk show: Evidence from corpus-based analysis, questionnaires and focus groups. Intercultural Pragmatics, 7(4), 689–723.Google Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P., Bou-Franch, P. and Lorenzo-Dus, N. (2013). Identity and impoliteness: The expert in the talent show Idol. Journal of Politeness Research, 9(1), 97–121.Google Scholar

Garcia-Bedolla, L. (2003). The identity paradox: Latino language, politics and selective dissociation. Latino Studies, 1, 264–83.Google Scholar

Gee, J. P. (2005). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis Theory and Method. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Georgakopoulou, A. (2007). Small Stories, Interaction and Identities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Georgakopoulou, A. (2008). “On MSN with buff boys”: Self‐and other‐identity claims in the context of small stories 1. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12(5), 597–626.Google Scholar

Georgakopoulou, A. (2013a). Building iterativity into positioning analysis: A practice-based approach to small stories and self. Special Issue on Positioning. Narrative Inquiry, 23, 89–110.Google Scholar

Georgakopoulou, A. (2013b). Small stories and identities analysis as a framework for the study of im/politeness-in-interaction. Journal of Politeness Research, 9(1), 55–74.Google Scholar

Georgakopoulou, A. (2017). Sharing the moment as small stories: The interplay between practices and affordances in the social media-curation of lives. Narrative Inquiry, 27, 311–33.Google Scholar

Georgakopoulou, A. (2019). Designing stories on social media: A corpus-assisted critical perspective on the mismatches of story-curation. Linguistics and Education.Google Scholar

Georgakopoulou, A. and Vasilaki, M. (2018). The personal and/as the political. Internet Pragmatics, 1(2), 215–40.Google Scholar

Grainger, K. (2011). “First order” and “second order” politeness: Institutional and intercultural contexts. In Linguistic Politeness Research Group, ed., Discursive Approaches to Politeness. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 167–88.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. ([1955] 1967). Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar

González-Cruz, M. (2014). Request patterns by EFL Canarian Spanish students: Contrasting data by languages and research methods. Intercultural Pragmatics, 11(4), 547–73.Google Scholar

Grice, H. P. (1967). Logic and conversation. William James Lectures.Google Scholar

Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Hall, S. and Du Gay, P. (eds.). (1996). Questions of Cultural Identity. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2007). The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative. Journal of Politeness Research, 3(2), 295–317.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2013). Disentangling face, facework and im/politeness. Sociocultural Pragmatics, 1(1), 46–73.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2015). Im/politeness Implicatures. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. and Culpeper, J. (2017). Integrative pragmatics and (im)politeness theory. In Ilie, C. and Norrick, N., eds., Pragmatics and Its Interfaces. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 213–39.Google Scholar

Haugh, M., Chang, Wei-Lin M. and Kádár, D. (2015) ‘Doing deference’: Identities and relational practices in Chinese online discussion boards. Pragmatics, 25, 73–98.Google Scholar

Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Hlavac, J., Xu, Z. and  Yong, D. X. (2015). Intercultural pragmatics at work: (Self)perceptions of intercultural behavior of Chinese and English speakers and interpreters in healthcare interactions. Intercultural Pragmatics,  12(1), 91–118.Google Scholar

Ige, B. (2010). Identity and language choice: ‘We equals I’. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(11), 3047–54.Google Scholar

Jaffe, A. (ed.). (2009). Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Stance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Jones, R. (forthcoming). Discourse analysis and digital surveillance. In de Fina, A. and Georgakopoulou, A., eds., Handbook of Discourse Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 708–31.Google Scholar

Joseph, J. (2004). Language and Identity: National, Ethnic, Religious. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Joseph, J. (2010). Identity. In Llamas, C. and Watt, D., eds., Language and Identities. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 9–17.Google Scholar

Joseph, J. (2013). Identity work and face work across linguistic and cultural boundaries. Journal of Politeness Research, 9(1), 35–54.Google Scholar

Kádár, D. Z. and Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kádár, D., Haugh, M. and Chang, W. M. (2013). Aggression and perceived national face threats in mainland Chinese and Taiwanese CMC discussion boards. Multilingua, 32(3), 343–72.Google Scholar

Karachaliou, R. and Argiris, A. (2015). Identity construction patterns via swearing: Evidence from Greek teenage storytelling. Pragmatics and Society, 6(3), 421–43.Google Scholar

Kasper, G. (2006). Speech acts in interaction: Towards discursive pragmatics. Pragmatics and Language Learning, 11, 281–314.Google Scholar

Kasper, G. and Blum-Kulka, S. (eds.). (1993). Interlanguage Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kiesling, S. (2013). Constructing identity. In Chambers, J. and Schilling, N., eds., The Handbook of Language Variation and Change, 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Willey, pp. 448–67.Google Scholar

Koenig, K. and Zhu, Q. (2017). Communicative constructions of space in epistemic asymmetry: The case of German-Chinese university placement interviews. Intercultural Pragmatics, 14(2), 239–76.Google Scholar

Labov, W. (1963). The social motivation of a sound change. Word, 19(3), 273–309.Google Scholar

Labov, W. (1972). Language in the Inner City: Studies in the Black English Vernacular. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar

Lakoff, R. T. (1975). Language and Woman’s Place. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar

Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. Harlow, UK: Longman.Google Scholar

Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. (2008). Relational work, politeness and identity construction. In Antos, G. and Ventola, E., eds., Handbooks of Applied Linguistics. Issue 2: Interpersonal Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 509–40.Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. (ed.). (2010). Politeness and computer-mediated communication. Special Issue. Journal of Politeness Research, 6(1).Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. and Graham, S. L. (eds.). (2010). Interpersonal Pragmatics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. and Watts, R. J. (2005). Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research, 1, 9–33.Google Scholar

Marquez Reiter, R. (2000). Linguistic Politeness in Britain and Uruguay. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Mendoza-Denton, N. (2008). Language and identity. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P. and Schilling-Estes, N., eds., The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 475–99.Google Scholar

Mey, J. L. (1993). Pragmatics: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Miller, E. (2013). Positioning selves, doing relational work and constructing identities in interview talk, Journal of Politeness Research, 9(1), 75–95.Google Scholar

Mills, S. (2003). Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mouffe, C. (2005). For an agonistic public sphere. In Tønder, L. and Thomassen, L., eds., Radical Democracy: Politics between Abundance and Lack. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, pp. 123–32.Google Scholar

Ochs, E. (1992). Indexing gender. In Duranti, A. and Goodwinm, C., eds., Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 335–58.Google Scholar

O’Driscoll, J. (2011). Some issues with the concept of face: When, what, how and how much? In Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and Kádár, D., eds., Politeness across Cultures. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 17–41.Google Scholar

Perelmutter, R. (2018). Globalization, conflict discourse, and Jewish identity in an Israeli Russian-speaking online community. Journal of Pragmatics, 134, 134–48.Google Scholar

Placencia, M. E. (2008). Pragmatic variation in corner shop transactions in Ecuadorian Andean and Coastal Spanish. In Schneider, K. P. and Barron, A., eds., Variational Pragmatics: A Focus on Regional Varieties in Pluricentric Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 307–32.Google Scholar

Ponton, D. M. The female political leader: A study of gender-identity in the case of Margaret Thatcher. Journal of Language and Politics, 9(2), 195–218.Google Scholar

Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practice. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–63.Google Scholar

Rees, C. E. and Monrouxe, L. V. (2010). “I should be lucky ha ha ha ha”: The construction of power, identity and gender through laughter within medical workplace learning encounters. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(12), 3384–99.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1997). Whose text? Whose context? Discourse and Society, 8(2), 165–87.Google Scholar

Schneider, K. P. and Barron, A. (eds.). (2014). Pragmatics of Discourse. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2007). Theories of identity and the analysis of face. Journal of Pragmatics, 29(4), 639–56.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2009). Face, identity and interactional goals. In Bargiela-Chiappini, F. and Haugh, M., eds., Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox, pp. 137–54.Google Scholar

Taylor, C. (2016). Mock politeness and culture: Perceptions and practice in UK and Italian data. Intercultural Pragmatics, 13(4), 463–98.Google Scholar

Terkourafi, M. (2005). Beyond the micro-level in politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(2), 237–62.Google Scholar

Terkourafi, M. (2013). Re-assessing the speech act schema: Twenty-first century reflections International Review of Pragmatics, 5, 197–216.Google Scholar

van Dijk, T. (1998). Opinions and ideologies in the press. In Bell, A. and Garrett, P., eds., Approaches to Media Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 21–63.Google Scholar

Verschueren, J. (1999). Understanding Pragmatics. London: Arnold.Google Scholar

Vöge, M. (2010). Local identity processes in business meetings displayed through laughter in complaint sequences. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(6), 1556–76.Google Scholar

Wetherell, M. (1998). Positioning and interpretative repertoires: Conversation analysis and post-structuralism in dialogue. Discourse and Society, 9(3), 387–412.Google Scholar

Wolfers, S., File, K. and Schnurr, S. (2017). “Just because he’s black”: Identity construction and racial humour in a German U-19 football team. Journal of Pragmatics, 112, 83–96.Google Scholar

Wortham, S. (2010). Learning Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Zienkowski, J., Östman, J. and Verschueren, J. (eds.). (2011). Discursive Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Zimmerman, D. H. (1998). Identity, context and interaction. In Antaki, C. and Widdicombe, S., eds., Identities in Talk. London: Sage, pp. 87–106.Google Scholar

Aijmer, K. (1996). Conversational Routines in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Allen, K. (2016). A benchmark of politeness. In Capone, A. and Mey, J., eds., Interdisciplinary Studies in Pragmatics, Culture and Society. Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 397–420.Google Scholar

Bousfield, D. (2008). Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Bousfield, D. and Culpeper, J. (eds.). (2008). Impoliteness: Eclecticism and Diaspora. Special Issue. Journal of Politeness Research, 4(2).Google Scholar

Bousfield, D. and Locher, M. (eds.). (2008). Impoliteness in Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Brown, P. (2017). Politeness and impoliteness. In Huang, Y., ed., Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 383–99.Google Scholar

Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cialdini, R., Reno, R. and Kallgren, C. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015–26.Google Scholar

Coulmas, F. (1981). Conversational Routine. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 25, 349–67.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J. (2008). Reflections on impoliteness, relational work and power. In Bousfield, D. and Locher, M., eds., Impoliteness in Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 17–44.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J. and Haugh, M. (2014). Pragmatics and the English Language. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J. and Haugh, M. (forthcoming). The metalinguistics of offence in (British) English: A corpus-based metapragmatic approach. Journal of Language, Aggression and Conflict.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J. and Terkourafi, M. (2017). Pragmatics and (im)politeness. In Culpeper, J., Haugh, M. and Kádár, D. Z., eds., Palgrave Handbook of (Im)politeness. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave, pp. 11–39.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J., Haugh, M. and Kádár, D. (eds.). (2017). Palgrave Handbook of (Im)politeness. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar

Deutsch, M. and Gerard, H. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629–36.Google Scholar

Eelen, G. (2001). A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester, UK: St. Jerome.Google Scholar

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Firth, J. (1957). A synopsis of linguistic theory 1930–1955. In Firth, J. R., ed., Studies in Linguistic Analysis. Oxford: Philological Society, pp. 1–32.Google Scholar

Freedman, D. (2001). Ecological inference and the ecological fallacy. In Smelser, N. J. and Baltes, P. B., eds., International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 6. New York: Elsevier, pp. 4027–30.Google Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. and Sifianou, M. (2019). Im/politeness and discursive pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 145, 91–101.Google Scholar

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2010). A genre approach to the study of im-politeness. International Review of Pragmatics, 2(1), 46–94.Google Scholar

Grainger, K. (2011). ‘First order’ and ‘second order’ politeness: Institutional and intercultural contexts. In Linguistic Politeness Research Group, eds., Discursive Approaches to Politeness. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 167–88.Google Scholar

Grainger, K. (2013). Of babies and bath water: Is there any place for Austin and Grice in interpersonal pragmatics? Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 27–38.Google Scholar

Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. and Morgan, J., eds., Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 41–58.Google Scholar

Gumperz, J. (1982). Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Haakana, M. (2007). Reported thought in complaint stories. In Holt, E. and Clift, R., eds., Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 150–78.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2012). Epilogue: The first-second order distinction in face and politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research, 8(1), 111–34.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2013). Im/politeness, social practice and the participation order. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 52–72.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2015). Im/politeness Implicatures. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2017). Implicature and the inferential substrate. In Cap, P. and Dynel, M., eds., Implicitness: From Lexis to Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 281–304.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2018). Afterword: Theorising (im)politeness. Journal of Politeness Research, 14(1), 153-65.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. and Culpeper, J. (2018). Integrative pragmatics and (im)politeness theory. In Ilie, C. and Norrick, N. R., eds., Pragmatics and Its Interfaces. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 213–39.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. and Watanabe, Y. (2017). (Im)politeness theory. In Vine, B., ed., Handbook of Language in the Workplace. London: Routledge, pp. 65–76.Google Scholar

Holmes, J. (1996). Women’s role in language change: A place for quantification. In Warner, N., Ahlers, J., Bilmes, L., Oliver, M., Wertheim, S. and Chen, M., eds., Gender and Belief Systems. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley Women and Language Group, pp. 313–30.Google Scholar

Holmes, J. and Schnurr, S. (2005). Politeness, humor and gender in the workplace: Negotiating norms and identifying contestation. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), 121–49.Google Scholar

Holmes, J., Marra, M. and Vine, B. (2011). Leadership, Discourse and Ethnicity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Holt, E. (2012). Using laugh responses to defuse complaints. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(4), 430–48.Google Scholar

Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Lerner, G., ed., Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 13–23.Google Scholar

Jucker, A. (2020). Politeness in the History of English: From the Middle Ages to the Present Day. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kádár, D. and Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kádár, D. (2017). Politeness, Impoliteness and Ritual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lakoff, R. (1973). The logic of politeness; or, minding your p’s and q’s’. Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 292–305.Google Scholar

Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Leech, G. (2014). The Pragmatics of Politeness. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Levinson, S. (1979). Activity types and language. Linguistics, 17(5–6), 365–99.Google Scholar

Levinson, S. (2013). Action formation and ascription. In Sidnell, J. and Stivers, T., eds., Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 103–30.Google Scholar

Locher, M. (2015). Interpersonal pragmatics and its link to (im)politeness research. Journal of Pragmatics, 86, 5–10.Google Scholar

Locher, M. and Bolander, B. (2019). Ethics in pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 145, 83–90.Google Scholar

Locher, M. and Larina, T. (2019). Introduction to politeness and impoliteness research in global contexts. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 23(4), 873–903.Google Scholar

Locher, M. and Watts, R. (2005). Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), 9–33.Google Scholar

Mills, S. (2003). Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mills, S. (2011). Communities of practice and politeness. In Davis, B., Haugh, M. and Merrison, A., eds., Situated Politeness. London: Continuum, pp. 73–87.Google Scholar

Mills, S. (2017). English Politeness and Class. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Minsky, M. (1975). A framework for representing knowledge. In Winston, P. H., ed., The Psychology of Computer Vision. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp. 211–77.Google Scholar

Mitchell, N. and Haugh, M. (2015). Agency, accountability and evaluations of impoliteness.” Journal of Politeness Research, 11(2), 207–38.Google Scholar

Mulder, J. and Thompson, S. (2008). The grammaticalization of but as a final particle in English conversation. In Laury, R., ed., Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining: The Multifunctionality of Conjunctions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 179–204.Google Scholar

Ogiermann, E. and Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2019). Im/politeness between the analyst and participant perspective: An overview of the field. In Ogiermann, E. and Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P., eds., From Speech Acts to Lay Understandings of Politeness: Multilingual and Multicultural Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar

Pike, K. (1967). Etic and emic standpoints for the description of behavior. In Hildum, D. C., ed., Language and Thought: An Enduring Problem in Psychology. Princeton, NJ: Van Norstrand, pp. 32–39.Google Scholar

Pomerantz, A. (1978). Compliment responses: Notes on the cooperation of multiple constraints. In Schenkein, J., ed., Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction. New York: Academic Press, pp. 79–112.Google Scholar

Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In Atkinson, J. and Heritage, J., eds., Structures of Social Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 57–101.Google Scholar

Robinson, W. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behaviour of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15(3), 351–7.Google Scholar

Schank, R. and Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. (2000). On granularity. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 715–20.Google Scholar

Searle, J. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In Cole, P. and Morgan, J., eds., Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 59–82.Google Scholar

Sifianou, M. and Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2017). (Im)politeness and cultural variation. In Culpeper, J., Haugh, M. and Kádár, D., eds., Palgrave Handbook of (Im)politeness. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave, pp. 571–99.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2005). (Im)politeness, face and perceptions of rapport: Unpackaging their bases and interrelationships. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), 95–119.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. and Kádár, D. (2016). The bases of (im)politeness evaluations: Culture, the moral order and the East-West debate. East Asian Pragmatics, 1(1), 73–106.Google Scholar

Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. ([1986] 1995). Relevance: Communication and Cognition. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Tayebi, T. (2018). Implying an impolite belief: A case of tikkeh in Persian. Intercultural Pragmatics, 15(1), 89–113.Google Scholar

Terkourafi, M. (2001). Politeness in Cypriot Greek: A frame-based approach. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar

Terkourafi, M. (2005a). Beyond the micro-level in politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(2), 237–62.Google Scholar

Terkourafi, M. (2005b). Pragmatic correlates of frequency of use: The case for a notion of ‘minimal context’. In Marmaridou, S., Nikiforidou, K. and Antonopoulou, E., eds., Reviewing Linguistic Thought: Converging Trends for the 21st Century. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 209–33.Google Scholar

Terkourafi, M. (2011). From politeness1 to politeness2: Tracking norms of im/politeness across time and space. Journal of Politeness Research, 7(2), 159–85.Google Scholar

Terkourafi, M. (2019a). Im/politeness: a twenty-first century appraisal. Foreign Language and Foreign Language Teaching [外语与外语教学] (Dalian University of Foreign Languages), 2019(6), 1–17.Google Scholar

Terkourafi, M. (2019b). Coming to grips with variation in sociocultural interpretations: methodological considerations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 50(10), 1198–1215.Google Scholar

Thomas, J. (1981). Pragmatic failure, unpublished MA dissertation, University of Lancaster.Google Scholar

Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 91–112.Google Scholar

Watts, R. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Watts, R., Ide, S. and Ehlich, K. (1992). Introduction. In Watts, R., Ide, S. and Ehlich, K., eds., Politeness in Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1–17.Google Scholar

Watts, R., Ide, S. and Ehlich, K. (eds.). (1992). Politeness in Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Wilkinson, S. and Kitzinger, C. (2006). Surprise as an interactional achievement: Reaction tokens in conversation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69(2), 150–82.Google Scholar

Alba-Juez, L. (2016). The variables of the evaluative functional relationship: The case of humorous discourse. In Ruiz Gurillo, L. (ed.) Metapragmatics of Humor: Current Research Trends. IVITRA Research in Linguistics and Literature. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 11–34.Google Scholar

Alba-Juez, L. (2018). Emotion and appraisal processes in language: How are they related? In Gómez González, M. and Mackenzie, J. L., eds., The Construction of Discourse as Verbal Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 227–50.Google Scholar

Alba-Juez, L. and Attardo, S. (2014). The evaluative palette of verbal irony. In Thompson, G. and Alba-Juez, L., eds., Evaluation in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 93–115.Google Scholar

Alba-Juez, L. and Mackenzie, J. L. (2019). Emotion processes in discourse. In Mackenzie, J. L. and Alba-Juez, L., eds., Emotion in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 3–26.Google Scholar

Alba-Juez, L. and Pérez-González, J. C. (2019). Emotion and language ‘at work’: The relationship between Trait Emotional Intelligence and communicative competence as manifested at the workplace. In Mackenzie, J. L. and Alba-Juez, L., eds., Emotion in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 247–78.Google Scholar

Alba-Juez, L. and Thompson, , G. (2014). The many faces and phases of evaluation. In Thompson, G. and Alba-Juez, L. (eds.), Evaluation in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 3–23.Google Scholar

Alonso Belmonte, I. (2019). Victims, heroes and villains in newsbites: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Spanish eviction crisis in El País. In Mackenzie, J. L. and Alba-Juez, L., eds., Emotion in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 335–55.Google Scholar

Attardo, S. (2008). Semantics and pragmatics of humor. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2(6), 1203–15.Google Scholar

Attardo, S. (2019). Humor and mirth: Emotions, sustained humor and embodied cognition. In Mackenzie, J. L. and Alba-Juez, L., eds., Emotion in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 199–211.Google Scholar

Bamberg, M. (1997). Language, concepts and emotions: The role of language in the construction of emotions. www.econgeography.org/~mbamberg/Material_files/1997A.pdf.Google Scholar

Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2013). Embodied discursivity: Introducing sensory pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 39–51.Google Scholar

Bateson, M. C. (1975). Mother–infant exchanges: The epigenesis of conversation interaction. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 263, 101–13.Google Scholar

Bednarek, M. (2008). Emotion Talk across Corpora. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Bednarek, M. (2019). The multifunctionality of swear/taboo words in television series. In Mackenzie, J. L. and Alba-Juez, L., eds., Emotion in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 29–54.Google Scholar

Benítez Castro, M. A. and Hidalgo Tenorio, E. (2019). Rethinking Martin and White’s AFFECT taxonomy: A psychologically-inspired approach to the linguistic expression of emotion. In Mackenzie, J. L. and Alba-Juez, L., eds., Emotion in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 29–54.Google Scholar

Bosque, I. (2010). Aspectos individuales y sociales de las emociones. Sobre la noción de ‘vergüenza’ y sus variantes. Páginas de Guarda, 10, 13–27.Google Scholar

Brown, P. and Levinson, S. ([1978] 1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cockcroft, R., Cockcroft, S., Hamilton, C. and Hidalgo Downing, L. ([1992] 2014). Persuading People: An Introduction to Rhetoric. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 25, 349–67.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J., Shauer, G., Marti, L., Mei, M. and Nevala, M. (2014). Impoliteness and emotions in a cross-cultural perspective. SPELL: Swiss Papers in English Language and Literature, 30, 67–88.Google Scholar

Damasio, A. (2003). Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar

Damasio, A. (2018). The Strange Order of Things. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar

Darwin, C. (1872). The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals. London: John Murray. http://darwin-online.org.uk/converted/pdf/1872_Expression_F1142.pdf.Google Scholar

Dynel, M. (2011). Revisiting Goffman’s postulates on participant statuses in verbal interaction. Language and Linguistic Compass, 5, 454–65.Google Scholar

Ekman, P. (2003). Emotions Revealed: Recognizing Faces and Feelings to Improve Communication and Emotional Life. Rev. ed. New York: St. Martin’s Griffin.Google Scholar

Ekman, P. and Friesen, W. V. (1975). Unmasking the Face. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Escandell-Vidal, V. (2017). Expectations in interaction. In Allan, K., Capone, A. and Kecskes, I., eds., Pragmemes and Theories of Language Use. Cham: Springer International, pp. 493‒503.Google Scholar

Evans, N. (2007). Insubordination and its uses. In Nikolaeva, I., ed., Finiteness: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 366–431.Google Scholar

Foolen, A. P. (2012). The relevance of emotion for language and linguistics. In Foolen, A., Lüdtke, U. M., Racine, T. P. and Zlatev, J., eds., Moving Ourselves, Moving Others: Motion and Emotion in Intersubjectivity, Consciousness and Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 349‒68.Google Scholar

Foolen, A. P. (2017). Expressives. In de Stadler, L. and Eyrich, C., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Semantics. London: Routledge, pp. 473–90.Google Scholar

Frijda, N. H. (1998). The laws of emotion. American Psychologist, 43(5), 349–58.Google Scholar

Geeraerts, D. and Grondelaers, S. (1995). Looking back at anger: Cultural traditions and metaphorical patterns. In Taylor, J. and MacLaury, R. E., eds., Language and the Construal of the World. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 153–80.Google Scholar

Gironzetti, E., Attardo, S. and Pickering, , L. (2016). Smiling, gaze and humor in conversation. In Ruiz-Gurillo, L., ed., Metapragmatics of Humor: Current Research Trends. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 235–54.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. (1967). Interactional Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. (1981). Footing. In Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 124–59.Google Scholar

Goodwin, C. (2007). Participation, stance, and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse and Society, 18, 53–73.Google Scholar

Haddington, P. (2005). The Intersubjectivity of Stance Taking in Talk-in-Interaction. Oulu: Oulu University Press.Google Scholar

Harré, R. (ed.). (1986). The Social Construction of the Emotions. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2008). Intention and diverging interpretings of implicature in the “uncovered meat” sermon. Intercultural Pragmatics, 5, 201–29.Google Scholar

Haugh, M. (2013). Im/politeness, social practice and the participation order. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 52–72.Google Scholar

Kádár, D. Z. and Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kaufer, D. (1983). Irony, interpretive form and the theory of meaning. Poetics Today, 4(3), 451–64.Google Scholar

Labov, W. (1997). Some further steps in narrative analysis. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7(1-4), 3–38.Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. (2016). Language and emotion. Emotion Review, 8(3), 269‒73.Google Scholar

Larina, T. (2015). Culture-specific communicative styles as a framework for interpreting linguistic and cultural idiosyncrasies. International Review of Pragmatics, 7(5), 195–215.Google Scholar

Langlotz, A. (2017). Language and emotion in fiction. In Locher, M. A. and Jucker, A. H., eds., Pragmatics of Fiction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 515–52.Google Scholar

Langlotz, A. and Locher, M. A. (2013). The role of emotions in relational work. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 87–107.Google Scholar

Le Doux, J. E. (2000). Emotion circuits in the brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 23, 155‒84.Google Scholar

Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Leech, G. (2014). The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. and Watts, R. J. (2005). Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research, 1, 9–33.Google Scholar

Locher, M. A. and Watts, R. J. (2008). Relational work and impoliteness: Negotiating norms of linguistic behavior. In Bousfield, D. and Locher, M., eds., Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 77–99.Google Scholar

Lutz, C. A. (1988). Unnatural Emotions: Everyday Sentiments on a Micronesian Atoll and Their Challenge to Western Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Mackenzie, J. L. and Alba-Juez, L. (eds.). (2019). Emotion in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Majid, A. (2013). Discussion note: Making semantics and pragmatics “sensory”. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 48–51.Google Scholar

Martin, J. R. and White, P. R. R. (2005). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Mayer, J., Salovey, P. and Caruso, D. (2000). Models of emotional intelligence. In Sternberg, R., ed., Handbook of Intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 396–420.Google Scholar

McKeon, R. (1941). The Basic Works of Aristotle. New York: Random House.Google Scholar

Myers, D. G. (2004). Theories of Emotion in Psychology. 7th ed. New York: Worth.Google Scholar

Nash, W. (1985). The Language of Humour. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Niemelä, M. (2010). The reporting space in conversational storytelling: Orchestrating all semiotic channels for taking a stance. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(12), 3258–70.Google Scholar

Niemelä, M. (2011). Resonance in Storytelling: Verbal, Prosodic and Embodied Practices of Stance Taking. Acta Universitatis Ouluensis B95. Oulu: Oulu University Press.Google Scholar

Ochs, E. and Schieffelin, B. (1989). Language has a heart. Text, 9(1), 7‒25.Google Scholar

Ortony, A. and Turner, T. J. (1990). What’s basic about emotions? Psychological Review, 97(3), 315-31.Google Scholar

Planalp, S. (1999). Communicating Emotion: Social, Moral and Cultural Processes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Price, M. (2014). Profiles in evolutionary moral psychology: Richard Joyce. https://evolution-institute.org/article/profiles-in-evolutionary-moral-psychology-richard-joyce/?source=.Google Scholar

Quintilian., (AD 35–100). Institutio Oratoria. 4 vols. Translated by Butler, H. (1920–22). Loeb Classical Library. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar

Rollins, P. R. (2017). Developmental pragmatics. In Huang, Y., ed., The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 300–309.Google Scholar

Romano, M. (2014). Evaluation in emotion narratives. In Thompson, G. and Alba-Juez, L., eds., Evaluation in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 367–86.Google Scholar

Russell, J. A. (1991). In defense of a prototype approach to emotion concepts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(1), 37–47.Google Scholar

Sancho Guinda, C. (2019). Promoemotional science? Emotion and intersemiosis in graphical abstracts. In Mackenzie, J. L. and Alba-Juez, L., eds., Emotion in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 357–86.Google Scholar

Scherer, K. R. (2009). The dynamic architecture of emotion: evidence for the component process model. Cognition and Emotion, 23, 347‒85.Google Scholar

Schiff, B. and Noy, C. (2006). Making it personal: Shared meanings in the narratives of Holocaust survivors. In de Fina, A., Schiffrin, D. and Bamberg, M., eds., Discourse and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 398–425.Google Scholar

Schwarz-Friesel, M. (2010). Expressive Bedeutung und E-Implikaturen – Zur Relevanz konzeptueller Bewertungen bei indirekten Sprechakten: Das Streichbarkeitskriterium und seine kognitive Realität. In Rudnitzky, W., ed., Kultura Kak Tekst . Moscow: SGT, pp. 12–27.Google Scholar

Schwarz-Friesel, M. (2015). Language and emotion: The cognitive linguistic perspective. In Lüdtke, U. M., ed., Emotion in Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 157‒73.Google Scholar

Shakovsky, V. I. (2016). Dissonance in Communicative Sustainability: People, Language, Emotions. Volgograd: IP Polikarpov.Google Scholar

Soriano, C., Fontaine, J. R. and Scherer, K. R. (2015). Surprise in the GRID. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 13(2), 436–60.Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2013). Conceptualizing ‘the relational’ in pragmatics: Insights from metapragmatic emotion and (im)politeness comments. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(14), 3565–78.Google Scholar

Stapleton, K. (2010). Swearing. In Locher, M. A. and Graham, S. L., eds., Interpersonal Pragmatics. Berlin: Mouton, pp. 289–305.Google Scholar

Taboada, M. (2016). Sentiment analysis: An overview from linguistics. Annual Review of Linguistics, 2, 1–23.Google Scholar

Terkourafi, M. (2015). The linguistics of politeness and social relations. In Allan, K., ed., Routledge Handbook of Linguistics. London: Routledge, pp. 221–35.Google Scholar

Terkourafi, M., Weissman, B. and Roy, J. (2020). Different scalar terms are affected by face differently. International Review of Pragmatics, 12(1), 1–43.Google Scholar

Thompson, G. (2014). AFFECT and emotion, target-value mismatches, and Russian dolls: Refining the APPRAISAL model. In Thompson, G. and Alba-Juez, L., eds., Evaluation in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 47–66.Google Scholar