Pollner2012a
| Pollner2012a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Pollner2012a |
| Author(s) | Melvin Pollner |
| Title | The end(s) of ethnomethodology |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Ethnomethodology, Melvin Pollner |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2012 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | American Sociologist |
| Volume | 43 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 7–20 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1007/s12108-011-9144-z |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
From the outset, Melvin Pollner tried to come to grips with ethnomethodology, especially Harold Garfinkel’s contributions. In recent years he was especially concerned with where ethnomethodology had gone and where it was headed. In Garfinkel’s recent book, Ethnomethodology’s Program (2002), and other writings, Pollner saw a distinctly different version of ethnomethodology in contrast with Garfinkel’s (and others’) earlier work. “The End(s) of Ethnomethodology” represents Pollner’s most polished, if still incomplete, reflection upon the state of ethnomethodology in the early 21st century. This article is published posthumously. Robert M. Emerson and James A Holstein assembled and edited the final text.
Notes
