The Role of Gender in Verbal Disagreement: A Study of Disagreement Strategies Employed by Hungarian Undergraduate Students

Coates, J. 1989. ‘Gossip Revisited: Language in All-Female Groups’ in J. Coates and D. Cameron (eds.). Women in their Speech Communities. London: Longman, pp.75-94.Search in Google Scholar

Culpeper, J. 2011. Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511975752Search in Google Scholar

Edelsky, C. 1981. ‘Who’s Got the Floor?’ in Language in Society. 10 /3, pp.383-421.Search in Google Scholar

Georgakopoulou, A. 2001. ‘Arguing about the Future: on Indirect Disagreements in Conversations’ in Journal of Pragmatics. 33, pp.1881-1900.Search in Google Scholar

Guiller, J. and A. Durndell. 2006. ‘‘I totally agree with you’: Gender Interactions in Educational Online Discussion Groups’ in Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 22, pp. 368-381.Search in Google Scholar

Holtgraves, T. M. 1997. ‘Yes, but...: Positive Politeness in Conversation Arguments’ in Journal ofLanguage and Social Psychology. 16, pp.222-239.Search in Google Scholar

Kakavá, C. 1995. ‘Directness and Indirectness in Professor-Student Interactions: The Intersection of Contextual and Cultural Constraints’ in Georgetown University Round Table, pp.229-246.Search in Google Scholar

Koczogh, H. V. 2011. ‘Gender Differences in Disagreement Strategies Employed by Speakers of Hungarian’ in California Linguistic Notes. 36/2 [Online]. Available: http://hss.fullerton.edu/linguistics/cln/Sp2011PDF/Koczogh-GenderDiff.pdf [2011, September 25].Search in Google Scholar

Kotthoff, H. 1993. ‘Disagrement and Concession in Disputes: on the Context Sensitivity of Preference Structures’ in Language in Society. 22, pp.193-216.Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, R. 1975. ‘Language and Women’s Place’ in Language and Society. 2, pp.45-80.Search in Google Scholar

Locher, M. 2004. Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110926552Search in Google Scholar

Muntigl, P. and W. Turnbull. 1998. ‘Conversational Structure and Facework in Arguing’ in Journal ofPragmatics. 29/3, pp.225-256.Search in Google Scholar

Pilkington, J. 1992. ‘‘Don’t try and make out that I’m nice!’ The Different Strategies Women and Men Use when Gossiping’ in Wellington Working Papers in Linguistics. 5, pp.37-60.Search in Google Scholar

Pomerantz, A. 1984. ‘Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes’ in J. Atkinson and J. Heritage, (eds.). Structures of SocialAction: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511665868.008Search in Google Scholar

Rees-Miller, J. 1995. Linguistic Features of Disagreement in Face-to-Face Encounters in UniversitySettings. Unpublished PhD thesis. SUNY at Stony Brook.Search in Google Scholar

Rees-Miller, J. 2000. ‘Power, Severity, and Context in Disagreement’ in Journal of Pragmatics. 32, pp.1087-1111.Search in Google Scholar

Sacks, H. 1987. ‘On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation’ in G. Button and J.R. Lee (eds.). Talk and Social Organisation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp.54-69.Search in Google Scholar

Schiffrin, D. 1985. ‘Everyday Argument: The Organization of Diversity in Talk’ in T. van Dijk (ed.). Handbook of Discourse Analysis: Discourse and Dialogue. London: Academic Press, pp.35-46.Search in Google Scholar

Sornig, K. 1977. ‘Disagreement and Contradiction as Communicative Acts’ in Journal of Pragmatics. 1, pp.347-374.Search in Google Scholar

Tannen, D. 1990. You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: Ballantine Books. Search in Google Scholar