{"title":"Sequence analysis in the development of ethnomethodological conversation analysis","authors":"H. Walter Schmitz","doi":"10.1016/j.langsci.2024.101646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>When Harvey Sacks and Emanuel A. Schegloff explored the possibility of a ‘naturalistic observational discipline that could deal with the details of social action(s) rigorously, empirically, and formally’ (Schegloff and Sacks, 1973), it was not by chance that their attention was attracted by records of natural conversations and by conversation as an activity in its own right. For, in conversation, every action, every speaking turn of its participants presents itself as a clearly determinable unit with a beginning and end. This appearance is reinforced by the conversation's transcript, which presents in a seeming order, a sequence of turns. Sequence analysis was developed for ‘conversations’ from this observational basis. In this paper, the requirements and implications concerning the role of indexicality in organising and interpreting participants' turns are examined critically and it is investigated whether sequence analysis is also applicable as a proof procedure to ‘talk in interaction’ and multimodal face-to-face interaction. It is argued that unclearly determined non-verbal actions and multiple forms of simultaneous events may restrict the applicability of sequence analysis or even prevent its successful application altogether. It is argued that for different forms of (communicative) interaction and their constitutive conditions of perception an empirical investigation of the relation between simultaneity and sequentiality may be necessary.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51592,"journal":{"name":"Language Sciences","volume":"105 ","pages":"Article 101646"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0388000124000354/pdfft?md5=fb82601e3da9fafbdcebcd68ba83f3ce&pid=1-s2.0-S0388000124000354-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0388000124000354","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
When Harvey Sacks and Emanuel A. Schegloff explored the possibility of a ‘naturalistic observational discipline that could deal with the details of social action(s) rigorously, empirically, and formally’ (Schegloff and Sacks, 1973), it was not by chance that their attention was attracted by records of natural conversations and by conversation as an activity in its own right. For, in conversation, every action, every speaking turn of its participants presents itself as a clearly determinable unit with a beginning and end. This appearance is reinforced by the conversation's transcript, which presents in a seeming order, a sequence of turns. Sequence analysis was developed for ‘conversations’ from this observational basis. In this paper, the requirements and implications concerning the role of indexicality in organising and interpreting participants' turns are examined critically and it is investigated whether sequence analysis is also applicable as a proof procedure to ‘talk in interaction’ and multimodal face-to-face interaction. It is argued that unclearly determined non-verbal actions and multiple forms of simultaneous events may restrict the applicability of sequence analysis or even prevent its successful application altogether. It is argued that for different forms of (communicative) interaction and their constitutive conditions of perception an empirical investigation of the relation between simultaneity and sequentiality may be necessary.
期刊介绍:
Language Sciences is a forum for debate, conducted so as to be of interest to the widest possible audience, on conceptual and theoretical issues in the various branches of general linguistics. The journal is also concerned with bringing to linguists attention current thinking about language within disciplines other than linguistics itself; relevant contributions from anthropologists, philosophers, psychologists and sociologists, among others, will be warmly received. In addition, the Editor is particularly keen to encourage the submission of essays on topics in the history and philosophy of language studies, and review articles discussing the import of significant recent works on language and linguistics.