Hejhalova2010

From emcawiki
Revision as of 08:48, 12 October 2017 by JakubMlynar (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Ivana Hejhalová; |Title=Výcvik vodicích psů v organizaci |Tag(s)=EMCA; Human-Animal Communication; Visual impairment |Key=Hejhalova2...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Hejhalova2010
BibType ARTICLE
Key Hejhalova2010
Author(s) Ivana Hejhalová
Title Výcvik vodicích psů v organizaci
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Human-Animal Communication, Visual impairment
Publisher
Year 2010
Language Czech
City
Month
Journal Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review
Volume 46
Number 4
Pages 569-592
URL Link
DOI
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This article contributes to the ethnomethodological investigation of the human-animal relationship, focusing on practically oriented and situated members’ methods, categorisations, and forms of interactions. The analysis shows how members reconstruct the rules of the training of guide dogs at a particular guide dog training centre (SVVP), and, while acting, how they orient themselves towards the principles of the broader framework, namely, the ‘institution of the guide dog’. The participation of the dogs in these interactions is also considered. The use of the rules and the principles is interpreted through the concepts of positioning (Harré, Davies), claiming (Bottero, Irwin), and, in general, the framework of the ethnomethodological respecification of the concept of organisation, that is, ‘organisation-in-action’. The article demonstrates how the image of the professional charitable client-orientated organisation is constructed in situ, and how the positions of the guide dogs and the visually impaired are presented by particular speakers. It also reveals that telling moral stories is one of the most frequently used ethnomethods of self-presentation, and that the positions and the claims of the actors are constructed in two main contexts: visual impairment and the ‘dog companion culture’.

Notes