|
|
| Line 12: |
Line 12: |
| | |URL=http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/semi.1976.17.issue-3/semi.1976.17.3.233/semi.1976.17.3.233.xml | | |URL=http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/semi.1976.17.issue-3/semi.1976.17.3.233/semi.1976.17.3.233.xml |
| | |DOI=10.1515/semi.1976.17.3.233 | | |DOI=10.1515/semi.1976.17.3.233 |
| − | |Abstract=The analyzability of conversation by professional students of language use
| |
| − | depends upon the analyzability of conversation in its production, and over
| |
| − | its course, by participant conversationalists.
| |
| − | 1
| |
| − | The analysis which partici-
| |
| − | pant conversationalists perform upon their own and other's talk in the
| |
| − | course of its production, however, is not to be confused with the later com-
| |
| − | mentaries that participants or other interested parties may give, or be per-
| |
| − | suaded to give, as 'clarification' of 'what really happened' or what was
| |
| − | 'meant at the time'. Such commentaries are themselves features of the very
| |
| − | action scenes they are directed to clarifying, and are products of attention
| |
| − | to the action field's relevances. Insofar as they can be said to constitute
| |
| − | analysis of conversation at all, they constitute an essentially interested
| |
| − | analysis, responsive to the accountable features of the domain of activities
| |
| − | of which it is a part.
| |
| − | An interested analysis is to be distinguished from that attention to the
| |
| − | structural properties of on-going talk which attempts to delineate them as
| |
| − | speaker/hearer products. But the distinction is not merely one of emphasis,
| |
| − | for, as I shall attempt to demonstrate in the following pages, interested
| |
| − | analyses are essentially ad hoc (they are required to be, of course, by vir-
| |
| − | tue of their attachment to the domain of action); while the kind of analysis
| |
| − | we must pursue as students of conversational order is directed to the con-
| |
| − | struction of an apparatus which is usable on materials other than the data it
| |
| − | initially handles. I hope to clarify this distinction by presenting for exam-
| |
| − | ination an essentially interested analysis of a conversation, furnishing some
| |
| − | comments upon its ad hoc character, and in contrast, offering an analysis
| |
| − | which explicitly orients to its working apparatus as the latter is built and
| |
| − | put into service.
| |
| | }} | | }} |
