The institutional sensitivity of speech

Arminen, I. (2000). On the context-sensitivity of institutional interaction. Discourse & Society, 11(4), 435-458.

Read the review here.

Theoretical orientations in the study of context

Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 3-66). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Levinson, S. C. (1992). Activity types and language. In P. Drew, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 66-101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schegloff, E. A. (1992). On talk in institutional settings. In P. Drew, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 101-137). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Read the review here

Philosophers hot and cool

Mason, J. (1989). Philosophical rhetoric: The function of indirection in philosophical writing. London/New York: Routledge

Read the review here

To be or to be said to be

Searle, J. (1983). Minds, brains and programs. In D. Hofstadter, & D. Dennet (Eds.), Mind design (pp. 353-383). London: The Harvester Press.

Read the review here

Dissolving Meno’s paradox

Hintikka, J. (1984). Questioning as a philosophical method. In J. H. Fetzer (Ed.), Principles of philosophical reasoning (pp. 25-44). Totowa, NJ: Rowan & Allanheid

Read the review here

CRA

van Eemeren & Garssen (2008) Controversy and confrontation

van Eemeren, F. H., & Garssen, B. (Eds.). (2008). Controversy and confrontation: Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Read the (partial) review: here