Difference between revisions of "Lynch2007a"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=INCOLLECTION |Author(s)=Michael Lynch; |Title=The origins of ethnomethodology |Editor(s)=S. P. Turner; M. W. Risjord |Tag(s)=EMCA; Ethnomethodology; Basic...")
 
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{BibEntry
 
{{BibEntry
 
|BibType=INCOLLECTION
 
|BibType=INCOLLECTION
|Author(s)=Michael Lynch;  
+
|Author(s)=Michael Lynch;
 
|Title=The origins of ethnomethodology
 
|Title=The origins of ethnomethodology
|Editor(s)=S. P. Turner; M. W. Risjord
+
|Editor(s)=Stephen P. Turner; Mark W. Risjord
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Ethnomethodology; Basic Resources;  
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Ethnomethodology; Basic Resources;
 
|Key=Lynch2007a
 
|Key=Lynch2007a
|Publisher=Elsevier B.V.
+
|Publisher=Elsevier
 
|Year=2007
 
|Year=2007
 
|Address=Amsterdam, Oxford
 
|Address=Amsterdam, Oxford
 
|Booktitle=Philosophy of Anthropology and Sociology
 
|Booktitle=Philosophy of Anthropology and Sociology
|Pages=485-515
+
|Pages=485–515
 +
|URL=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780444515421500155
 +
|DOI=10.1016/B978-044451542-1/50015-5
 +
|Abstract=This chapter develops four different accounts of ethnomethodology's origins: a discrete origin story that situates ethnomethodology in an intellectual biography; a conventional academic history that traces ethnomethodology back to lines of social theory and philosophy; an account of a revolutionary “break” with the existing social sciences; and, finally, a substantive genealogy that identifies ethnomethodology with the things it investigates. Ethnomethodology is a source of bafflement, frustration, and outright hostility for many of its interpreters—especially the doyens of American sociology who pronounced opinions about it in the 1960s and ’70s. Moreover, the development of the field has involved a confusing divergence between different lines of work, many of which have become intertwined with other disciplinary and sub-disciplinary developments in sociolinguistics, science and technology studies, workplace studies, organizational studies, and various topical specialties within sociology. Ethnomethodology is unusual among sociological research programs, because it can be traced to a deliberate attempt to launch a novel research program.
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 11:22, 18 November 2019

Lynch2007a
BibType INCOLLECTION
Key Lynch2007a
Author(s) Michael Lynch
Title The origins of ethnomethodology
Editor(s) Stephen P. Turner, Mark W. Risjord
Tag(s) EMCA, Ethnomethodology, Basic Resources
Publisher Elsevier
Year 2007
Language
City Amsterdam, Oxford
Month
Journal
Volume
Number
Pages 485–515
URL Link
DOI 10.1016/B978-044451542-1/50015-5
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title Philosophy of Anthropology and Sociology
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This chapter develops four different accounts of ethnomethodology's origins: a discrete origin story that situates ethnomethodology in an intellectual biography; a conventional academic history that traces ethnomethodology back to lines of social theory and philosophy; an account of a revolutionary “break” with the existing social sciences; and, finally, a substantive genealogy that identifies ethnomethodology with the things it investigates. Ethnomethodology is a source of bafflement, frustration, and outright hostility for many of its interpreters—especially the doyens of American sociology who pronounced opinions about it in the 1960s and ’70s. Moreover, the development of the field has involved a confusing divergence between different lines of work, many of which have become intertwined with other disciplinary and sub-disciplinary developments in sociolinguistics, science and technology studies, workplace studies, organizational studies, and various topical specialties within sociology. Ethnomethodology is unusual among sociological research programs, because it can be traced to a deliberate attempt to launch a novel research program.

Notes