Difference between revisions of "Auer2014"
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) m (Text replace - "Research on Language & Social" to "Research on Language and Social") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
| + | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| + | |Author(s)=Peter Auer; | ||
| + | |Title=There's no harm in glossing (but a need for a better understanding of the status of transcripts) | ||
| + | |Tag(s)=Interactional Linguistics; Transcription; | ||
|Key=Auer2014 | |Key=Auer2014 | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
|Year=2014 | |Year=2014 | ||
| − | | | + | |Language=English |
|Journal=Research on Language and Social Interaction | |Journal=Research on Language and Social Interaction | ||
|Volume=47 | |Volume=47 | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
|URL=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08351813.2014.871795 | |URL=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08351813.2014.871795 | ||
|DOI=10.1080/08351813.2014.871795 | |DOI=10.1080/08351813.2014.871795 | ||
| + | |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. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 07:45, 6 December 2019
| 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
