Difference between revisions of "Garfinkel2019"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Harold Garfinkel; |Title=Notes on language games as a source of methods for studying the formal properties of linguistic events |Editor(...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Harold Garfinkel; | |Author(s)=Harold Garfinkel; | ||
|Title=Notes on language games as a source of methods for studying the formal properties of linguistic events | |Title=Notes on language games as a source of methods for studying the formal properties of linguistic events | ||
| − | |||
|Tag(s)=EMCA; constitutive rules/expectancies; culture; ethnomethodology; ethnoscience; game theory; Garfinkel; language; Parsons; social theory; trust conditions; Wittgenstein | |Tag(s)=EMCA; constitutive rules/expectancies; culture; ethnomethodology; ethnoscience; game theory; Garfinkel; language; Parsons; social theory; trust conditions; Wittgenstein | ||
|Key=Garfinkel2019 | |Key=Garfinkel2019 | ||
| Line 12: | Line 11: | ||
|Number=2 | |Number=2 | ||
|Pages=148–174 | |Pages=148–174 | ||
| + | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1368431018824733 | ||
|DOI=10.1177/1368431018824733 | |DOI=10.1177/1368431018824733 | ||
| − | |Abstract=One of three distinct approaches to his famous ‘Trust’ argument, this paper written by | + | |Abstract=One of three distinct approaches to his famous ‘Trust’ argument, this paper written by Garfinkel in 1960, and never before published, proposed a rethinking of rules, games and linguistic classifications in interactional terms consistent with Wittgenstein’s language games. Garfinkel had been working in collaboration with Parsons since 1958 to craft an approach to culture that would replace conceptual classification with the constitutive expectancies of interaction and systems of interaction. The argument challenged the work of cultural anthropologists influenced by zoology and biology, who called themselves ‘ethnoscientists’ and studied culture in terms of linguistic classification systems. Garfinkel had proposed an alternative sociological ‘ethnoscience’ of culture and language that would focus on how culture was made, on how linguistic events are achieved, and on the rules of their making. This ‘Language Games’ approach followed Wittgenstein in seeking what Garfinkel called a literal description of cultural/linguistic events: meaning by ‘literal’, a step-by-step account of the constitutive and preferred rules participants use to create a recognizable event-in-a-language. Made famous three years later in version associated with Schutz, Garfinkel’s Trust argument also appears in a 1962 text (Parsons’ Primer, published in 2019) in a version built on Parsons. |
| − | Garfinkel in 1960, and never before published, proposed a rethinking of rules, games and | ||
| − | linguistic classifications in interactional terms consistent with Wittgenstein’s language | ||
| − | games. Garfinkel had been working in collaboration with Parsons since 1958 to craft an | ||
| − | approach to culture that would replace conceptual classification with the constitutive | ||
| − | expectancies of interaction and systems of interaction. The argument challenged the work of cultural anthropologists influenced by zoology and biology, who called themselves ‘ethnoscientists’ and studied culture in terms of linguistic classification systems. | ||
| − | Garfinkel had proposed an alternative sociological ‘ethnoscience’ of culture and language | ||
| − | that would focus on how culture was made, on how linguistic events are achieved, and on | ||
| − | the rules of their making. This ‘Language Games’ approach followed Wittgenstein in seeking what Garfinkel called a literal description of cultural/linguistic events: meaning by | ||
| − | ‘literal’, a step-by-step account of the constitutive and preferred rules participants use to create a recognizable event-in-a-language. Made famous three years later in version | ||
| − | associated with Schutz, Garfinkel’s Trust argument also appears in a 1962 text (Parsons’ | ||
| − | Primer, published in 2019) in a version built on Parsons. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 02:59, 19 January 2020
| Garfinkel2019 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Garfinkel2019 |
| Author(s) | Harold Garfinkel |
| Title | Notes on language games as a source of methods for studying the formal properties of linguistic events |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, constitutive rules/expectancies, culture, ethnomethodology, ethnoscience, game theory, Garfinkel, language, Parsons, social theory, trust conditions, Wittgenstein |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2019 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | European Journal of Social Theory |
| Volume | 22 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 148–174 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/1368431018824733 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
One of three distinct approaches to his famous ‘Trust’ argument, this paper written by Garfinkel in 1960, and never before published, proposed a rethinking of rules, games and linguistic classifications in interactional terms consistent with Wittgenstein’s language games. Garfinkel had been working in collaboration with Parsons since 1958 to craft an approach to culture that would replace conceptual classification with the constitutive expectancies of interaction and systems of interaction. The argument challenged the work of cultural anthropologists influenced by zoology and biology, who called themselves ‘ethnoscientists’ and studied culture in terms of linguistic classification systems. Garfinkel had proposed an alternative sociological ‘ethnoscience’ of culture and language that would focus on how culture was made, on how linguistic events are achieved, and on the rules of their making. This ‘Language Games’ approach followed Wittgenstein in seeking what Garfinkel called a literal description of cultural/linguistic events: meaning by ‘literal’, a step-by-step account of the constitutive and preferred rules participants use to create a recognizable event-in-a-language. Made famous three years later in version associated with Schutz, Garfinkel’s Trust argument also appears in a 1962 text (Parsons’ Primer, published in 2019) in a version built on Parsons.
Notes
