McHoul2009
Revision as of 16:49, 16 August 2017 by DarceySearles (talk | contribs)
| McHoul2009 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | McHoul2009 |
| Author(s) | Alec McHoul |
| Title | What are we doing when we analyse conversation? |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Ethnomethodology, Phenomenology |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2009 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Australian Journal of Communication |
| Volume | 36 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 15-21 |
| URL | |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Here I offer a reminder of some of the phenomenological and ethnomethodological roots of conversation analysis (CA) in the form of a set of ‘field propositions’. Over the years, CA has certainly ‘branched out’ from those roots. However, I believe a reminder is timely if we are to prevent a drift towards a rather mechanistic approach to the study of everyday cultural objects such as conversations and their ilk.
Notes
