Difference between revisions of "Arminen2000"
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Ilkka Arminen; |Title=On the context sensitivity of institutional interaction |Tag(s)=EMCA; Institutional; Context; Institutional inter...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Ilkka Arminen; | + | |Author(s)=Ilkka Arminen; |
|Title=On the context sensitivity of institutional interaction | |Title=On the context sensitivity of institutional interaction | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Institutional; Context; Institutional interaction; Institutional talk; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Institutional; Context; Institutional interaction; Institutional talk; Institutional identities; Institutional power; Procedural consequentiality; Procedural relevancy; |
|Key=Arminen2000 | |Key=Arminen2000 | ||
|Year=2000 | |Year=2000 | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|Volume=11 | |Volume=11 | ||
|Number=4 | |Number=4 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=435–458 |
| + | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0957926500011004001 | ||
| + | |DOI=10.1177/0957926500011004001 | ||
| + | |Abstract=The study of institutional interaction explicates the verbal activities and interactional arrangements through which institutional practices are realized. I demonstrate that to analyse these practices sensitively, the analyst must possess sufficient knowledge of the context. In institutional settings an agent may orient to expert knowledge or organizational procedures taken for granted for the practice in question, but not known to outsiders. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Understanding the context-sensitive meaning of the activities may depend on access to these particulars. Methodologically, the procedural relevancy of context is a crucial criterion against arbitrary invocation of a countless number of extrinsic, potential aspects of context. I will show that the analyst's ability to use procedural consequentiality as an analytical criterion depends on the analyst's sufficient knowledge of the context in question. By characterizing the ways `generic' interactional patterns are used in institutional settings, we can also address larger sociological questions about institutional identities and the exercise of institutional power. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:12, 27 October 2019
| Arminen2000 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Arminen2000 |
| Author(s) | Ilkka Arminen |
| Title | On the context sensitivity of institutional interaction |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Institutional, Context, Institutional interaction, Institutional talk, Institutional identities, Institutional power, Procedural consequentiality, Procedural relevancy |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2000 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Discourse & Society |
| Volume | 11 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 435–458 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/0957926500011004001 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The study of institutional interaction explicates the verbal activities and interactional arrangements through which institutional practices are realized. I demonstrate that to analyse these practices sensitively, the analyst must possess sufficient knowledge of the context. In institutional settings an agent may orient to expert knowledge or organizational procedures taken for granted for the practice in question, but not known to outsiders.
Understanding the context-sensitive meaning of the activities may depend on access to these particulars. Methodologically, the procedural relevancy of context is a crucial criterion against arbitrary invocation of a countless number of extrinsic, potential aspects of context. I will show that the analyst's ability to use procedural consequentiality as an analytical criterion depends on the analyst's sufficient knowledge of the context in question. By characterizing the ways `generic' interactional patterns are used in institutional settings, we can also address larger sociological questions about institutional identities and the exercise of institutional power.
Notes
