Auer2014
| Auer2014 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Auer2014 |
| Author(s) | Peter Auer |
| Title | There's no harm in glossing (but a need for a better understanding of the status of transcripts) |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | Interactional Linguistics, Transcription |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2014 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Research on Language and Social Interaction |
| Volume | 47 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 17–22 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/08351813.2014.871795 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
While agreeing with Walker’s (2014/this issue) appeal to keep form and function in linguistically-inclined conversation analysis separate, I argue that a discussion of what a transcript is and how it can be used is called for. The amount of detail included in a transcript can never be “exhaustive” (according to whatever standards) but is determined by the research question. Glosses are unavoidablefor interactional details outside the research focus. Data are in American English.
Notes
