Interpretive Methods in Disability Studies: Dyslexia Inflected Inquiry

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Qualitative Inquiry Pub Date : 2024-06-03 DOI:10.1177/10778004241254394
Tanya Titchkosky
{"title":"Interpretive Methods in Disability Studies: Dyslexia Inflected Inquiry","authors":"Tanya Titchkosky","doi":"10.1177/10778004241254394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article explores how disability studies can take shape as an interpretive method and how disability-perception can influence this. My exploration is organized in relation to the following question: In what ways might attention to dyslexia as an interpretive act inflect social inquiry? I treat interpretive methods as a form of inquiry that attends to the social activity of interpretation itself and I regard dyslexia as part of such activity. A key issue for such inquiry is how to methodically engage appearances as an interpretive encounter: That is, how can we make the taken-for-granted activity of perception as interpretation available for reflection and keep the subject ∞ object chiasma* relation a primary focus? Disability studies is a starting point for such inquiry in at least two ways: (a) it brings to attention the ways in which people interpret disability and (b) it considers how impairment experience itself is an interpretive modality that can momentarily disrupt the normative flow of common-sense, revealing aspects of the act of interpretation, and making it available for reflection. This article will show how the perception of disability as well as disability-perception can be regarded as enacting a “pause” in the everyday flow of common-sense and, thereby, encounter interpretive acts as an occasion for further inquiry. I turn to descriptions of perceptions and experiences of dyslexia as interpretive scenes where the normative order of ordinary interpretation can be revealed. I address various ways that dyslexia is described as a disruption to the normative order of language, especially the written word, print-language, even as the term dyslexia is used as a sense-making-device to reassert the primacy of normative expectations and values in literate-culture. As a sense-making-device imposed from without or as experience that seems to come from within, or as both, the appearance of “dyslexia” serves as a primal scene for uncovering the ways in which the social order of interpretation works. *Chiasma is not a dyslexic rendering of “chasm.” Instead, chiasma refers to the crosswise relation between concepts and structures that rely on each other for their meaning, for example, reading and readers; subject and object.","PeriodicalId":48395,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Inquiry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004241254394","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article explores how disability studies can take shape as an interpretive method and how disability-perception can influence this. My exploration is organized in relation to the following question: In what ways might attention to dyslexia as an interpretive act inflect social inquiry? I treat interpretive methods as a form of inquiry that attends to the social activity of interpretation itself and I regard dyslexia as part of such activity. A key issue for such inquiry is how to methodically engage appearances as an interpretive encounter: That is, how can we make the taken-for-granted activity of perception as interpretation available for reflection and keep the subject ∞ object chiasma* relation a primary focus? Disability studies is a starting point for such inquiry in at least two ways: (a) it brings to attention the ways in which people interpret disability and (b) it considers how impairment experience itself is an interpretive modality that can momentarily disrupt the normative flow of common-sense, revealing aspects of the act of interpretation, and making it available for reflection. This article will show how the perception of disability as well as disability-perception can be regarded as enacting a “pause” in the everyday flow of common-sense and, thereby, encounter interpretive acts as an occasion for further inquiry. I turn to descriptions of perceptions and experiences of dyslexia as interpretive scenes where the normative order of ordinary interpretation can be revealed. I address various ways that dyslexia is described as a disruption to the normative order of language, especially the written word, print-language, even as the term dyslexia is used as a sense-making-device to reassert the primacy of normative expectations and values in literate-culture. As a sense-making-device imposed from without or as experience that seems to come from within, or as both, the appearance of “dyslexia” serves as a primal scene for uncovering the ways in which the social order of interpretation works. *Chiasma is not a dyslexic rendering of “chasm.” Instead, chiasma refers to the crosswise relation between concepts and structures that rely on each other for their meaning, for example, reading and readers; subject and object.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
残疾研究中的解释方法:以阅读障碍为折射的探究
本文探讨了残疾研究如何形成一种解释性方法,以及残疾观念如何影响这种方法。我的探讨围绕以下问题展开:作为一种解释行为,对阅读障碍的关注会以何种方式影响社会调查?我将阐释方法视为一种探究形式,关注阐释本身的社会活动,并将阅读障碍视为这种活动的一部分。这种探究的一个关键问题是如何有条不紊地将表象作为一种解释性遭遇:也就是说,我们如何才能使作为阐释的理所当然的感知活动得到反思,并将主体∞客体的 "chiasma*"关系作为首要关注点?残疾研究至少在以下两个方面是这种探索的起点:(a) 它使人们注意到人们解释残疾的方式;(b) 它考虑了损伤体验本身是如何成为一种解释方式的,这种解释方式可以瞬间扰乱常识的规范流程,揭示解释行为的各个方面,并使之可供反思。本文将说明,对残疾的感知以及对残疾的感知如何被视为在常识的日常流动中 "暂停",从而使解释行为成为进一步探究的契机。我将对阅读障碍的认知和体验的描述视为解释性场景,在这里可以揭示普通解释的规范秩序。诵读困难被描述为对语言规范秩序的破坏,尤其是对书面语言、印刷语言的破坏,即使诵读困难一词被用作一种感知工具,以重申规范性期望和价值在识字文化中的首要地位。"阅读障碍 "作为一种从外部强加的感官制造工具,或作为似乎来自内部的经验,或两者兼而有之,它的出现成为揭示社会解释秩序运作方式的原始场景。*Chiasma "并非 "鸿沟 "的 "阅读障碍"。相反,"鸿沟 "指的是概念和结构之间的交叉关系,这些概念和结构的意义依赖于彼此,例如阅读和读者;主体和客体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Qualitative Inquiry
Qualitative Inquiry SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
143
期刊介绍: Qualitative Inquiry provides an interdisciplinary forum for qualitative methodology and related issues in the human sciences. With Qualitative Inquiry you have access to lively dialogues, current research and the latest developments in qualitative methodology.
期刊最新文献
Teaching Postqualitatively Feeling or Funding? Critical Coproduction, Rationality, Emotionality, and Axiological Reflections The Researcher’s Facilitating Role in Stimulating a Constructive Group Climate in Online Focus-Group Interviews Danger, Desire, and Disclosure: A Postqualitative Trauma-Informed Approach to the Ethics of Secrets and Emotion in Qualitative Research Humility, Textuality, and Method in Phenomenological Research
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1