Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository
Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository
4.0 Introduction CHAPTER 4 DOING SOCIA(B)L(E) SCIENCE In the previous three chapters I have drawn on a substantial and eclectic body of literature to address face and facework (Chapter 1), German-English differences in communicative style (Chapter 2), and posited a framework for addressing facework as alignment in sociable episodes (Chapter 3). In this chapter, before moving on to the analytical chapters, I want to briefly outline my general methodology for the collection and initial management and analysis of conversational data. After formally out setting the research questions (4.1), 1 shall provide a brief description of the data sites from which my data are drawn. This will include details of settings and participants. I shall outline my methodology for data collection, focusing on the nature of the data employed, the recording remit, and technical aspects of data collection, as well as additional methods employed to enhance the depth of the analysis (4.2). Following this I shall provide an overview of the initial organisation and analysis of the conversational data (4.3). Issues concerning my role, relationship to participants, and related ethical issues will then be discussed (4.4). Finally, I will provide a conclusion (4.5). In effect, this chapter relates to the pre-analytical phase of this study, that is, the fieldwork phase. In that sense it shall focus on the procedures employed to gather data from sociable gatherings, as well as focusing on the actual experiences and contingencies of working in such milieu. The title of the chapter 'doing social(b)l(e) science has been deliberately contrived to capture the full set of contingencies of this particular type of data collection ethnographic work. 100
4.1 Research Questions In the previous chapter I advanced a model of facework as alignment. It was proposed that sociable conversation could be conceived of as being characterised by what I termed positive and negative alignment, that is, positive alignments in and through claims to sameness, and negative alignment in claims to difference. Importantly, such claims were seen to be achieved in a and through the alignment of what I referred to as sociable selves. Based upon these propositions, I suggested certain fundamental questions which might need to be addressed if German and English differences in communicative style - specifically within sociable episodes - was to be understood as face as alignment. These were quite general questions, but are ones which related directly to the model set out above. More pertinently, they have fundamentally informed the chosen methodology which I shall outline here, and subsequent analytical stance developed in Chapters 5 to 8.1 have accorded these questions a separate section heading due to their centrality to the wider concerns with methodology. Based on my discussion and propositions set out in Chapter 3, the research questions can now be formally posited: 1. What is the nature of positive and negative claims in each culture? 2. How do participants collectively align to allow these claims to be ratified? 3. What is the nature of conversational selves mobilised in the doing of sociable conversation? 4. How are selves used as resources for alignment? In subsequent chapters, I shall attempt to unpack these rather general questions by considering in both cultures the development of conversational topic as a collaborative sociable act and the prevalence and nature of positive and negative alignment in both cultures (see Chapters 5-8). These three areas will form the central themes around which the analytical part of this study is organised (see fig. 4.1). 101
- Page 59 and 60: in potential or actual conflict sit
- Page 61 and 62: salient differences. For example, G
- Page 63 and 64: Watts observed that German conversa
- Page 65 and 66: Finally, although Watts argued that
- Page 67 and 68: elatively little overlap, and a gen
- Page 69 and 70: contributions, with the former set
- Page 71 and 72: fully and substantively, what was r
- Page 73 and 74: oriented to unmitigated disagreemen
- Page 75 and 76: 2.3 Communicative Underpinnings The
- Page 77 and 78: service but by more confrontational
- Page 79 and 80: Finally, additional explanatory dim
- Page 81 and 82: specific communicative practices, a
- Page 83 and 84: Brown and Levinson (1987). Indeed,
- Page 85 and 86: Notes to Chapter 2 11 use the term
- Page 87 and 88: This chapter then can be regarded a
- Page 89 and 90: asic irreducible sociological varia
- Page 91 and 92: Fraser (1990) who, in also attempti
- Page 93 and 94: particularly amenable to such a heu
- Page 95 and 96: identify certain underlying dynamic
- Page 97 and 98: In fact, these two opposing orienta
- Page 99 and 100: at any given point in the flow of c
- Page 101 and 102: orderly and meaningful conversation
- Page 103 and 104: locally managed and constantly in d
- Page 105 and 106: Poles of Alignment Fig. 3.6 Sociabl
- Page 107 and 108: toward a clearer understanding of w
- Page 109: Notes to Chapter 3 1 See also Brown
- Page 113 and 114: eferring to as sociable includes in
- Page 115 and 116: The decision on quantity of data wa
- Page 117 and 118: largely anecdotal evidence from whi
- Page 119 and 120: such as laughter sequences. I also
- Page 121 and 122: Table 4.3 Data: Omissions from Anal
- Page 123 and 124: The obtrusiveness of my recording w
- Page 125 and 126: hand, I did not want to engage in t
- Page 127 and 128: German. However, these episodes asi
- Page 129 and 130: presented here provides a necessary
- Page 131 and 132: two chapters (Chapters 6 and 7). He
- Page 133 and 134: Hand shakes for example were infreq
- Page 135 and 136: eing invariably solidaric in nature
- Page 137 and 138: claimed on the part of the particip
- Page 139 and 140: Table 5.1 Sociable Topics Topic Cat
- Page 141 and 142: in my observations of German sociab
- Page 143 and 144: collective past peppered with indiv
- Page 145 and 146: In the next chapter I want to explo
- Page 147 and 148: CHAPTER 6 ALIGNMENT IN ACTION: NEGA
- Page 149 and 150: shall not be carried forward into t
- Page 151 and 152: These various symbols are intended
- Page 153 and 154: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 155 and 156: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Rather than
- Page 157 and 158: 19 EP: ' [Although I mean that [now
- Page 159 and 160: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
4.1 Research Questions<br />
In the previous chapter I advanced a model <strong>of</strong> facework as alignment. It<br />
was proposed that sociable conversation could be conceived <strong>of</strong> as being<br />
characterised by what I termed positive and negative alignment, that is, positive<br />
alignments in and through claims to sameness, and negative alignment in<br />
claims to difference. Importantly, such claims were seen to be achieved in a and<br />
through the alignment <strong>of</strong> what I referred to as sociable selves. Based upon<br />
these propositions, I suggested certain fundamental questions which might<br />
need to be addressed if German and English differences in communicative style<br />
- specifically within sociable episodes - was to be understood as face as<br />
alignment. These were quite general questions, but are ones which related<br />
directly to the model set out above. More pertinently, they have fundamentally<br />
informed the chosen methodology which I shall outline here, and subsequent<br />
analytical stance developed in Chapters 5 to 8.1 have accorded these questions<br />
a separate section heading due to their centrality to the wider concerns with<br />
methodology.<br />
Based on my discussion and propositions set out in Chapter 3, the<br />
research questions can now be formally posited:<br />
1. What is the nature <strong>of</strong> positive and negative claims in each culture?<br />
2. How do participants collectively align to allow these claims to be ratified?<br />
3. What is the nature <strong>of</strong> conversational selves mobilised in the doing <strong>of</strong><br />
sociable conversation?<br />
4. How are selves used as resources for alignment?<br />
In subsequent chapters, I shall attempt to unpack these rather general<br />
questions by considering in both cultures the development <strong>of</strong> conversational<br />
topic as a collaborative sociable act and the prevalence and nature <strong>of</strong> positive<br />
and negative alignment in both cultures (see Chapters 5-8). These three areas<br />
will form the central themes around which the analytical part <strong>of</strong> this study is<br />
organised (see fig. 4.1).<br />
101
Change language