Difference between revisions of "West1996"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Candace West; |Title=Ethnography and orthography: A (modest) proposal |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Transcription; Ethnography;...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Candace West; | + | |Author(s)=Candace West; |
| − | |Title=Ethnography and | + | |Title=Ethnography and Orthography: A (Modest) Methodological Proposal |
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Transcription; Ethnography; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Transcription; Ethnography; |
|Key=West1996 | |Key=West1996 | ||
|Year=1996 | |Year=1996 | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|Volume=25 | |Volume=25 | ||
|Number=3 | |Number=3 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=327–352 |
| − | |URL= | + | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/089124196025003002 |
| + | |DOI=10.1177/089124196025003002 | ||
| + | |Abstract=In this article, I make a methodological plea for the utility of transcribing in field research. I begin by noting that, despite much recent talk of the mutual relevance of ethnography and conversation analysis, transcribing has not been addressed as a topic in its own right. I consider the goals of transcribing from a conversation analytic perspective and compare these with the aims of producing field notes. Then, I explicate the process of transcribing, calling attention to problems that arise from conventional procedures for representing talk in texts. Consideration of the difficulties many ethnographers face in attempting to introduce audio and video tape recorders into their field sites leads me to examine the analytical advantages of transcribing with—and without—tape-recorded data. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 04:51, 20 October 2019
| West1996 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | West1996 |
| Author(s) | Candace West |
| Title | Ethnography and Orthography: A (Modest) Methodological Proposal |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Transcription, Ethnography |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1996 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Contemporary Ethnography |
| Volume | 25 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 327–352 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/089124196025003002 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
In this article, I make a methodological plea for the utility of transcribing in field research. I begin by noting that, despite much recent talk of the mutual relevance of ethnography and conversation analysis, transcribing has not been addressed as a topic in its own right. I consider the goals of transcribing from a conversation analytic perspective and compare these with the aims of producing field notes. Then, I explicate the process of transcribing, calling attention to problems that arise from conventional procedures for representing talk in texts. Consideration of the difficulties many ethnographers face in attempting to introduce audio and video tape recorders into their field sites leads me to examine the analytical advantages of transcribing with—and without—tape-recorded data.
Notes
