25.3186, Calls: Discourse Analysis, Pragmatics/Belgium

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-25-3186. Mon Aug 04 2014. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 25.3186, Calls: Discourse Analysis, Pragmatics/Belgium

Moderators: Damir Cavar, Eastern Michigan U <damir at linguistlist.org>
            Malgorzata E. Cavar, Eastern Michigan U <gosia at linguistlist.org>

Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org
Anthony Aristar <aristar at linguistlist.org>
Helen Aristar-Dry <hdry at linguistlist.org>
Mateja Schuck, U of Wisconsin Madison

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Do you want to donate to LINGUIST without spending an extra penny? Bookmark
the Amazon link for your country below; then use it whenever you buy from
Amazon!

USA: http://www.amazon.com/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-20
Britain: http://www.amazon.co.uk/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-21
Germany: http://www.amazon.de/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistd-21
Japan: http://www.amazon.co.jp/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-22
Canada: http://www.amazon.ca/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistc-20
France: http://www.amazon.fr/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistf-21

For more information on the LINGUIST Amazon store please visit our
FAQ at http://linguistlist.org/amazon-faq.cfm.

Editor for this issue: Anna White <awhite at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  


Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 16:37:11
From: Valerie Williams [val.williams at bristol.ac.uk]
Subject: Interactional Dynamics in Research Interviews

E-mail this message to a friend:
http://linguistlist.org/issues/emailmessage/verification.cfm?iss=25-3186.html&submissionid=35644959&topicid=3&msgnumber=1
 
Full Title: Interactional Dynamics in Research Interviews 
Short Title: ‘Tell me all about it’ 

Date: 26-Jul-2015 - 31-Jul-2015
Location: Antwerp, Belgium 
Contact Person: Valerie Williams
Meeting Email: val.williams at bristol.ac.uk

Linguistic Field(s): Discourse Analysis; Pragmatics 

Call Deadline: 15-Oct-2014 

Meeting Description:

‘Tell me all about it’: Interactional dynamics in research interviews
Valerie Williams, Kathryn Roulston

Conversation analysis addresses itself to the ‘mundane’ in everyday talk, and has taken pains to unpick the regularities in naturally occurring data, distinguishing that from the contrived data in research interviews. However, from the start of the CA project there has been a parallel interest in analysing the research interview as a site of active meaning making (Baker, 1997; Silverman, 1973; Williams, 2011; see Roulston, 2006 for an overview). As van den Berg et al (2001: 1) put it: ‘The empirical data of social research are predominantly products of specific discursive practices’. Some CA analysis has addressed itself to the troubles in structured, survey-type interviews (Suchman & Jordan, 1990; Antaki et al., 2002). By contrast, much of the in-depth qualitative interviewing that describes itself as ‘semi-structured’ or narrative, aims to open up and listen to the participant on their own terms. As Widdicombe and Wooffitt (2006) suggest, much of what goes on in a research interview depends on the tacit understanding each participant has of the expectations on them to ask and answer questions.

Call for Papers:

This panel will include at least four papers, all of which pursue the analysis of interaction during qualitative research interviews, either via a CA analysis, or with an emphasis on Membership Categorization Analysis (MCA). We are interested in how researchers and respondents manage moments of trouble, how they understand each other, and how they jointly construct and make meaning of research topics within the socially situated setting of a research interview.

Some papers in this panel will focus on particular interactional problems, and others will examine the conversation resources and descriptive practices used by speakers to construct research data. Face-to-face interviews can offer rich sites to study some of the basic units of interaction, as well as the ways in which category membership is negotiated, formulated and described during interaction. Our topics range from the task of clarification with research participants who have communication disorders (Williams) or young children, to the questioning techniques used by peer researchers, who share an aspect of identity with the respondent (Jepson). We are interested in analysis of interviews that touch on sensitive topics, such as disability, personal illness, sex or relationships, but also interviews about professional status with teachers, and research about ‘good leadership’.

We would welcome CA papers, but also those that have a wider interest in MCA, or in how alignment can occur in the local context of an interview (see Prior, 2014). We would like to discuss with the audience what all this tells us about the research interview as a type of institutional talk, and a social activity.







----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-25-3186	
----------------------------------------------------------