Difference between revisions of "Golato2018a"
AndreaGolato (talk | contribs) m |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|Editor(s)=Andreas H. Jucker; Klaus P. Schneider; Wolfram Bublitz | |Editor(s)=Andreas H. Jucker; Klaus P. Schneider; Wolfram Bublitz | ||
|Tag(s)=EMCA; | |Tag(s)=EMCA; | ||
| − | |Key= | + | |Key=Golato2018a |
|Publisher=DE GRUYTER | |Publisher=DE GRUYTER | ||
|Year=2018 | |Year=2018 | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
|Address=Berlin | |Address=Berlin | ||
|Booktitle=Methods in Pragmatics | |Booktitle=Methods in Pragmatics | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=367–394 |
| + | |URL=https://www.degruyter.com/view/books/9783110424928/9783110424928-015/9783110424928-015.xml | ||
| + | |DOI=10.1515/9783110424928-015 | ||
| + | |Abstract=In this chapter we provide an overview of ethnomethodology (EM) and conversation analysis (CA). We first provide a historical backdrop of sociology within which EM emerged. This is followed by a brief discussion of EM’s methodological underpinnings. We then describe how CA developed out of EM together with CA’s main tenets and provide an example of how to conduct a CA analysis. Since interactional linguists have adopted CA methodology, the chapter also provides a brief introduction to this particular approach to the study of language. Next, we discuss the data typically used in CA and interactional linguistics (IL), after which we discuss the research topics in both fields, the advantages and disadvantages of the different methodologies, and their applications. Lastly, we provide a brief outlook on the directions that the field might take in the future. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 06:09, 13 January 2020
| Golato2018a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | INCOLLECTION |
| Key | Golato2018a |
| Author(s) | Andrea Golato, Peter Golato |
| Title | Ethnomethodology and conversation analysis |
| Editor(s) | Andreas H. Jucker, Klaus P. Schneider, Wolfram Bublitz |
| Tag(s) | EMCA |
| Publisher | DE GRUYTER |
| Year | 2018 |
| Language | English |
| City | Berlin |
| Month | |
| Journal | |
| Volume | |
| Number | |
| Pages | 367–394 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1515/9783110424928-015 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | Methods in Pragmatics |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
In this chapter we provide an overview of ethnomethodology (EM) and conversation analysis (CA). We first provide a historical backdrop of sociology within which EM emerged. This is followed by a brief discussion of EM’s methodological underpinnings. We then describe how CA developed out of EM together with CA’s main tenets and provide an example of how to conduct a CA analysis. Since interactional linguists have adopted CA methodology, the chapter also provides a brief introduction to this particular approach to the study of language. Next, we discuss the data typically used in CA and interactional linguistics (IL), after which we discuss the research topics in both fields, the advantages and disadvantages of the different methodologies, and their applications. Lastly, we provide a brief outlook on the directions that the field might take in the future.
Notes
