Difference between revisions of "Whelan2012"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Pauline Whelan |Title=Oxymoronic and sociologically monstrous? Feminist conversation analysis |Tag(s)=EMCA; Feminist CA; conversation an...")
 
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 10:23, 10 July 2019

Whelan2012
BibType ARTICLE
Key Whelan2012
Author(s) Pauline Whelan
Title Oxymoronic and sociologically monstrous? Feminist conversation analysis
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Feminist CA, conversation analysis, discourse, feminism, feminist conversation analysis, gender
Publisher
Year 2012
Language English
City
Month
Journal Qualitative Research In Psychology
Volume 9
Number 4
Pages 279-291
URL Link
DOI 10.1080/14780887.2011.634360
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

The relatively recent surge of interest in feminist conversation analysis within the United Kingdom appears to have been met with a largely positive response. Proponents declare that they “know of no other approach which offers a more viable basis from which to drive social change” (Speer 2005, p. 192), and they envisage in conversa- tion analysis (CA) “exciting possibilities for lesbian and feminist research” (Kitzinger 2000, p. 164). While debates continue about the relative merits of CA over other dis- cursive approaches (e.g., critical discourse analysis; see Hammersley 2003), there has been relatively little published about this emergent, explicitly feminist variety of CA that does not portray the field in a favourable light (although see Wowk 2007 for a notable exception). This article adopts a more cautionary approach toward employing CA to further feminist aims and seeks instead to interrogate the theoretical underpinnings of CA and problematise its application in feminist praxis.

Notes