Difference between revisions of "Havlik2007"
JakubMlynar (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Martin Havlík; |Title=‘Slušný’ Bursík a ‘neslušný’ Železný v Otázkách Václava Moravce |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Anal...") |
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) |
||
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Martin Havlík; | |Author(s)=Martin Havlík; | ||
|Title=‘Slušný’ Bursík a ‘neslušný’ Železný v Otázkách Václava Moravce | |Title=‘Slušný’ Bursík a ‘neslušný’ Železný v Otázkách Václava Moravce | ||
− | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Turn-taking; Morality; TV; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Turn-taking; Morality; TV; |
|Key=Havlik2007 | |Key=Havlik2007 | ||
|Year=2007 | |Year=2007 | ||
+ | |Language=Czech | ||
|Journal=Biograf | |Journal=Biograf | ||
|Number=43-44 | |Number=43-44 | ||
|Pages=33-68 | |Pages=33-68 | ||
− | |Abstract=Participating in a TV political debate not only offers the opportunity to present information, opinions etc., but it also gives the participants a chance to present themselves and others. Such a self- and other-presentation is firmly based on the social norms and moral order of a society. We can, therefore, understand what is going on in TV debates (or in any talk-in-interaction) only because we are familiar with such norms and order. However, this familiarity might not be conscious knowledge. Hence a detailed description of a TV debate (or any talk-in-interaction, or, in fact, any Member’s interaction) can help us to gain a better understanding of the norms and moral order in our society. Describing communicative practices of two politicians involved in one particular TV debate by means of ethnomethodological conversation analysis, I point out just how their self- and other-presentation is rooted in our moral order and social norms including the norms of the TV debate and in which particular ones. | + | |Abstract='Fair' Bursík and 'unfair' Železný in Questions of Václav Moravec |
+ | |||
+ | Participating in a TV political debate not only offers the opportunity to present information, opinions etc., but it also gives the participants a chance to present themselves and others. Such a self- and other-presentation is firmly based on the social norms and moral order of a society. We can, therefore, understand what is going on in TV debates (or in any talk-in-interaction) only because we are familiar with such norms and order. However, this familiarity might not be conscious knowledge. Hence a detailed description of a TV debate (or any talk-in-interaction, or, in fact, any Member’s interaction) can help us to gain a better understanding of the norms and moral order in our society. Describing communicative practices of two politicians involved in one particular TV debate by means of ethnomethodological conversation analysis, I point out just how their self- and other-presentation is rooted in our moral order and social norms including the norms of the TV debate and in which particular ones. | ||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 04:02, 9 October 2017
Havlik2007 | |
---|---|
BibType | ARTICLE |
Key | Havlik2007 |
Author(s) | Martin Havlík |
Title | ‘Slušný’ Bursík a ‘neslušný’ Železný v Otázkách Václava Moravce |
Editor(s) | |
Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Turn-taking, Morality, TV |
Publisher | |
Year | 2007 |
Language | Czech |
City | |
Month | |
Journal | Biograf |
Volume | |
Number | 43-44 |
Pages | 33-68 |
URL | |
DOI | |
ISBN | |
Organization | |
Institution | |
School | |
Type | |
Edition | |
Series | |
Howpublished | |
Book title | |
Chapter |
Abstract
'Fair' Bursík and 'unfair' Železný in Questions of Václav Moravec
Participating in a TV political debate not only offers the opportunity to present information, opinions etc., but it also gives the participants a chance to present themselves and others. Such a self- and other-presentation is firmly based on the social norms and moral order of a society. We can, therefore, understand what is going on in TV debates (or in any talk-in-interaction) only because we are familiar with such norms and order. However, this familiarity might not be conscious knowledge. Hence a detailed description of a TV debate (or any talk-in-interaction, or, in fact, any Member’s interaction) can help us to gain a better understanding of the norms and moral order in our society. Describing communicative practices of two politicians involved in one particular TV debate by means of ethnomethodological conversation analysis, I point out just how their self- and other-presentation is rooted in our moral order and social norms including the norms of the TV debate and in which particular ones.
Notes