The data and methodology of Harvey Sacks: Lessons from the archive

2019 ◽  
Vol 143 ◽  
pp. 205-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Fitzgerald
Keyword(s):  
Sociology ◽  
1976 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 507-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff Coulter
Keyword(s):  

KWALON ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ineke Graumans ◽  
Harry van den Berg

Harvey Sacks, die vooral bekend is als grondlegger van de conversatie-analyse, heeft daarnaast in de jaren zeventig van de vorige eeuw ook de basis gelegd voor een veelbelovende theoretisch-methodische benadering van sociale categorisering: Membership Categorization Analysis (MCA) (Sacks 1979, 1992). Die benadering heeft lange tijd weinig aandacht gekregen, maar staat sinds de jaren negentig van de vorige eeuw opnieuw in de belangstelling. Een belangrijk doel van kwalitatief onderzoek is het reconstrueren van de belevingswereld van mensen en groepen. MCA is een methode die daar bij uitstek geschikt voor is (Lepper, 2000). De belangrijkste redenen daarvoor zijn dat MCA gebaseerd is op een strikt participantgerichte (emic) benadering van alledaagse gesprekken en dat het een zeer systematische werkwijze presenteert.


2006 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 148-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Shuman

My review of the past thirty years of narrative scholarship returns to the work of Harvey Sacks and Erving Goffman, situated in Dell Hymes’ ethnography of communication, to examine where their interactive model for understanding narrative has taken us. Although in some disciplines, narrative research is used as empirical evidence of how people interpret their experiences, Sacks’ work points more to the ways that personal narrative destabilizes the relationship between narrative and experience. Current work focuses on narrative at its limits, including the study of fragmented, rather than coherent, selves; multiply voiced, rather than monologic, points of view; and compromised, rather than easily empathetic, relations of understanding. This work builds on, rather than departs from, research on narrative thirty years ago. In this essay, I suggest a connection between early research on entitlement and contemporary research on the ethics of narrative, and I focus in particular on the problem of empathy.


2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 329-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Silverman

In this response, I examine the ambiguity about the status of Membership Categorization Device Analysis (MCDA) in the work of Harvey Sacks. The ‘five guiding principles’ of MCDA that Stokoe enunciates serve as a crucial guide to future research. In what follows, I give some further examples of data analysis which, I believe, supports both her strong and weaker claims.


Human Studies ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 12 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 185-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuel A. Schegloff
Keyword(s):  

لارك ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (32) ◽  
pp. 21-34
Author(s):  
Mohammed Abed Saleh Albadri ◽  
Salah Hadi Shuker

From a sociolinguistic perspective, greetings and farewells are part of what Goffman (1963) calls the ethnography of encounter. These encounters are not randomly made. They are governed by a set of strategies which enable participants to enter and exit conversations in a socially accepted manner. Such strategies are tackled within the scope of conversation analysis, henceforth CA, which is an approach that studies talk in interaction. It grew out of the ethnomethodological tradition in sociology, embracing both verbal and non-verbal conduct. This approach is initiated during the late 1950s of the last century by the works of Harold Garfinkel and Erving Goffman, then, developed in the late 1960s and early 1970s by the sociologists Harvey Sacks, Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson. Today CA is an established method used in sociology, anthropology, linguistics, speech-communication and psychology. This study is going to detect entry and exit strategies in English and Arabic by analyzing two episodes of ‘The Doctors’ show in its American and Arabic versions. The study conveys this topic on two interrelated scales as it employs sociolinguistic and discourse perspectives altogether, discussing how the two approaches cooperate to give a comprehensible view of the nature of entering and exiting conversation. Meanwhile, the data to be analyzed does not convey an ordinary type of conversation but a special kind of conversation, that is called institutional talk. This involves some specialization and re-specification of the interactional relevance. It refers to conversations that take place under focused and specialized conditions like media, courts, educational institutions and health establishments (Gumperz, 2001: 218). For the most of our knowledge, such type of conversation is not expected to show everything about talk in interaction, yet, it shows a big deal of conformity to the premises of conversation analysis, and it appears to have a good amount of flexibility.


2000 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 590-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas W. Maynard

In his Introduction to Volume I of Sacks's Lectures on conversation (1992), Emmanuel Schegloff observes (1992:lviii) that his own effort at overview was “truly daunting,” mostly because of “the extraordinary richness and multi-facetedness of Sacks's corpus … In its variety, depth, and freshness of vision it defies domestication into convenient guidelines to a reader.” Such a statement – indeed, any reading of the two-volume set of Lectures – should give pause to someone attempting a textbook rendering of Sacks and his work. But such a text is precisely what Silverman has produced, and the effort is remarkably successful on its own terms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document