Button2016
| Button2016 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Button2016 |
| Author(s) | Graham Button, Wes Sharrock |
| Title | In support of conversation analysis radical agenda |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, conversation analysis, ethnomethodology, knowledge, sequential organisation, turn-taking in |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2016 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | oct |
| Journal | Discourse Studies |
| Volume | 18 |
| Number | 5 |
| Pages | 610–620 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/1461445616657955 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This comment provides an overview of the four articles by Lindwall, Lymer and Ivarsson; Lynch and Wong; Macbeth, Wong and Lynch; and Macbeth and Wong, which make up the kernel of this Special Issue of Discourse Studies on Epistemics; and it also examines the reasons for the assorted difficulties the authors of those articles have with the Epistemic Programme (EP) being proposed for conversation analysis (CA). The legitimacy of their concerns is underscored by showing that the charge the EP makes, which is that the CA developed by Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson gives an incomplete account of linguistic interaction, is founded on a number of mistakes. The first mistake is the idea that CA cannot effectively address so-called action formation. The second is a misunderstanding of the idea of ‘proof procedure' in CA. The third mistake is that conversation can better be understood through an abstract analytic construction, rather than an emphasis on participants' analysis. And the fourth is that it is necessary to rely upon an imputed cognitive machinery that is asserted to underlie conversation. The systematicity and generative power of Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson's radical work on turn-taking in conversation is emphasised and a question that begs to be answered arises, which is how well the EP compares to that earlier and still-radical work, something that the kernel articles address in their return to key transcripts used in the EP.
Notes
