Discussion on the Objectivity and Scientificity of Conversation Analysis

hwsy@overseaen.comISSN 1009- -5039htt://ww.overseaen.comOverseas English海外英語(yǔ)Tel:+86- -551-65690811 65690812Discussion on the Objectivity and Scientificity of Conversation AnalysisZOU Zhuo-ya(School of FLS Education, Jilin University, Changchun 130012, China)Abstract: Through summarizing the methodological characteristics of Conversation Analysis (CA) School and combing the CAprocedure, this paper tries to confirm the scientificity and objectivity of this methodology; and to discuss CA' s merits for aca-demic research with the support of classic theories.Key words: Conversation Analysis; methodology; ethnomethodology中圖分類(lèi)號:H0文獻標識碼:A 文 章編號: 1009-5039(2016)01-0230-02Ethnomethodological Conversation analysis (CA) refers to a tried to make CA become a science. During the late 1960s and ear-method for the close analysis of sequences of actions and the waly 1970s, CA was developed principally by Harvey Sacks, Emanuellanguage is formulated to perform those actions (Sacks, Schegloff,Schegloff and Gail Jefferson. Their famousthesisA Simplest System-& Jfferson, 1974).It was developed in the late 1960s and early atics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation made an1970s prineipally by the sociologist Harvey Sacks, Emanuel Sche- influence on the CA study of style.gloff and Gail Jefferson. CA aims to“describe, analyze, and under-The data of CA are presented by researchers mainly in two .stand talk as a basic and constitutive feature of human social life”stages, explanation to the conversations and the analysis of them.(Sidnell, 2012, cited inSert& Seedhouse, 2011, p.1). Rooted in soci- Besides, CA is known for the conversations are stretches of mun-ology, precisely, CA is a subdiscipline of ethnomethodology (Liu，dane talk (Mori, 2004). Since the data resource is recordings of con-2002). The data collection of CA is realized mainly by tape- record- versations,there is lttle interaction between the researchers anding or by video- recording, and then the researchers will transcribe participants. These featuresdistinct CA from other scientifie ap-the data through meticulous observation.“CA also practices unmo- proaches.The researchers on critical side consider the way of CAtivated looking, that is, it is theoretically agnostic about any a priori data collection exclude the interaction with the participants. Theytheoretical status that a particular piece of tlk may have” (Mori, argue that if there is no interaction with the participants, nor feed-2004, p.539). In this way, CA can provide detailed information for back with the speakers, how we can confirm the analysis of the con-researchers and learners in the study of social interaction.versation is correct? Base on Liu (2002), they also doubt that with-Inextricably linked with sociology and ethnomethodology, CAout mass data, the researchrelies on the stretches of the conversa-acquires is methodological characteristics and has suffered from a tion thencan it be authentic and representative? Known for the me-cult- like image, especially in its early years.This article' s goals ticulous observation and keen look at the conversation, the analystsare two- fold. Through combing CA's basic research method and are by virtue of their experiment and personal knowledge, CA re-characteristics, the primary goal is to help readers can understand searchers often have bear the Empirical Orientation' or‘Impres-CA better. The secondary goal is tojustify CA”s scientificity and ob-sionism’(Liu). Seemingly, these doubts have some sense. However,jectivity with the support of classic theories. Besides, I would like as far as I know, it is largely because those doubters have lack ofto present some of my personal opinions to prove its merits.understanding of CA’s systematic method.In this part, 1 will ilustrate the CA's characteristics. TheseAccording to ten Have (1990), we can summarize the CA pro-characteristics make CA different from other research approaches cedure into seven steps: ①record the conversations; ②transcribemeanwhile attract criticisms for itself.the recordings;③select the episodes from the transcripts to be ana-When you read an article of a conversation analysis research- lyzed;④ make sense of the episode with analyst ' sindividual com-er, you will find an interesting and distinguish feature, which is the mon sense;⑤to give a further analysis, explicate the grounds of pre-main body of the article is a part or several parts of conversations vious step;6the analyst can support the analysis in various ways,and their transcripts. According to Liu (2002), the early academic for example, the participants of the episode can provide their under-papers of CA have litle or no quotation from predecessors ’theory,standing of the interaction to the analyst; ⑦the analyst also canor even no references. Largely for this reason, CA school incurs var- compare the episode to other instances so as to verify the credibili-ious misunderstanding and criticisms. The criticisms are mainly ty of the analysis. The seven steps will be explained in further de-against its unscientific feature and subjectivity. Rather than justify tail below.CA method with theoretical ilustration, CA researchers tried toAs I mentioned earlier, the conversation is recorded by audiomake CA method more standard and objective through endeavor to recorder or video recorder. Ten Have (1990) claims “In general, .dispel people ’s misunderstanding and criticisms. Harvey SacksConversation Analysts are rather easygoing about these decisions中國煤化工MYHCNMHG收稿日期:2015-11-12修回日 期:2015-11-25作者簡(jiǎn)介:鄒卓雅(1988- -),吉林長(cháng)春人, 碩士研究生,主要從事外國語(yǔ)言學(xué)及應用語(yǔ)言學(xué)研究。230 /遭愛(ài)研7本欄目責任編輯:謝嬡嬡2016年1月.Overseas English海外英語(yǔ)and their consequences”(A Model of CA' s Research Practices sec - thatthere are two most outstanding characteristic within CA meth-tion, para.2).CA school emphasizes that it does not matter what you od. Firstly, CA schoo insists on that the basic data should be natu-record as long as it is natural conversation. Even though the record- rally conversation collected by audio or video apparatus. Based oned conversation will be transcribed into witten form, the audio or Liu (2002), some eritics' attack CA 's data collection method is de-video version is the initialdata. Greiffenhagenmentions CA school ficient for CA school excludes using questionnaire, statistic analy-wouldnotexist without the invention of the audio or video apparatus sis, experiment and etc. CA researchers maintain that these meth-(Chen, 2013).ods will involve personal preconception and prejudice. With regardThe method of transcribing the conversation is initially de- to interview method, is also unacceptable for CA researchers forsigned by Gail Jefferson (Chen, 2013). One should notice that anythe reason that interview belongs to communicative interactiontype of the transcript would not and should not be exactly the sameas the original data. According to Sacks, Schegloff& Jefferson used repeatedly, not only by the researchers who transcribethe data(1974), the researcher should conduct the analysis in a selective but also by other researchers who need the data. In Liu' s article,and targeted way. The researcher should observe several aspects, he points out that transcribing process will make usual daily con-such as the speaker- change recurs, transitions, turn order varies, versation acquire defamiliarization.In this way, researchers canturn- allocation, repair mechanisms and etc. Besides, ten Haveconduct the research more aloof and objective.(1990) points out the researcher should make the transcriptions heSecondly, CA’s methodology is of Empirical Orientation (Liu,be used, the researcher should at least check the transcripts theories. Rather than theories, CA researchers are willingly depend-against the recordings. Generally the transcribing procedure in- ing on the real life and they prefer the conversations with behaviorvolves the researcher’s personal knowledgeand experience inevita- (Chen, 2013).They strive to restore the nature of life through the de-bly.Ten Have suggests that researcher can look for other people to tails of the episode under consideration and its analytic resources,check his or her transcripts so as to increase the credibility.the common sense knowledge used (ten Have, 1990). At the same .When one tries to decide which part of episode should be se- time, without pre- specified scope and participants, the features oflected, he or she can be intuitively intrigued by some materials (tenthe conversation will manifest easily. Harvey Sacks refers this man-Have, 1990). However, the episode will consist of one or more se- ner as unmotiated examination(cited in Liu, 2002). He holds thatquences, in which an interactant initiates an action and (the) other the rules within the conversations are universal, then where and(s) react(s) to it (ten Have).how to conduct research will not impede researchers' founding.When the researcher tries to make sense of the episode withAbove all, CA school attaches great importance to the method-his or her common sense, the knowledge is in principle procedural-ology. CA researchers carried out valuable research practically andly similar to the one used by the interactants themselves in recog- theoretically. They have a critical attitude towards the traditionalnizing and producing the episode under consideration(ten Have,quantitative research methods (Liu, 2002). They accept the misun-1990). .derstanding and face criticism. At the same time, CA researchersThe fifth step is to clarify the analysis from the forth step. One never cease from exploration of improvement and perfection. CA al-should use both the details of the interaction and his own member- so provides new perspectives for the researchers in other areas. In .ship knowledge as a resource for the study of the knowledge used a word, there is no doubt that CA is an approach which is very spe-by the participants in bringing off the sequence under consider- cial, subjective and scientific.ation. In this way, the researchers can provide further analysis(tenReferences:Have, 1990), .As I mentioned previously,nalyst can support the analy- [1] 陳安媛.會(huì )話(huà)分析:作為研究有含義社會(huì )行為的- 種方法sis in various ways. One way, for instance, participants can refer to[J].山西農業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報:社會(huì )科學(xué)版，2013,12(6): 584- -589.an episode, impicily or eplcily, much later in the iteraction, [2] 劉運同.會(huì )話(huà)分析學(xué)派的研究方法及理論基礎J.同濟大學(xué)and in so doing give a hunch as to how they have‘heard' it (ten學(xué)報:社會(huì )科學(xué)版, 2002(4).Have, 1990).[3] Mori J Negotiating sequential boundaries and learning oppor-Another way to support method so that one can increase thetunities: a case from a Japanese language classroom[J]. Thecredibility of the analysis is to compare the episode to the instanc-Modern Language Journal, 2004, 88(4): 536-550.es, either directly or indirectly.“Comparison with similar or dissim- [4] Sacks H, Schegloff E, Jefferson G. A simplest systematics forilar cases, either implicitly or explicitly, is an important resourcethe organization of turn- taking for conversation[J]Language,for what is called‘ single case analyses', which focuses on the ex-1974, 50(4): 696-735.plication of one particular episode”(ten Have, 1990, A Model of [5] Sert O, Seedhouse P. Introduction: conversation analysis in ap-CA' s Research Practices section, para.8).plied linguistics[J]. Novitas- ROYAL :Research on Youth andFrom the practical method of CA we can find that CA schoolLanguage, 2011, 5(1).emphasizes the methodological scientificity and practicability. [6] Ten Have P. Mythological issues in conversation analysis[J] .Through the presentation and ilustration above, one may noticeBulletin de MethodologieSociologique, 1990, 27: 23- -51.中國煤化工MYHCNMHG本欄目責任編輯:謝媛嬡Y 逼奚逐魂 231