References
Berkeley, G. (1710/1957). The principles of human knowledge. New York: Liberal Arts Press.
Connolly, W. E. (1982). Appearance and reality in politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davidson, D. (1973–74). On the very idea of a conceptual scheme. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Association 47: 5–20.
Davis, M. S. (1975). Review of Frame analysis. Contemporary Sociology 4: 599–603.
Denzin, N. K. and Keller, C. M. (1981). Frame analysis reconsidered. Contemporary Sociology 10: 52–60.
Derrida, J. (1972/1981). Dissemination. Trans. B. Johnson. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Derrida, J. (1978). La vérité en peinture. Paris: Flammarion.
Edmondson, R. (1984). Rhetoric in sociology. London: Macmillan.
Fabian, J. (1983). Time and the other. New York: Columbia University Press.
Gamson, W. A. (1975). Review of Frame analysis. Contemporary Sociology 4: 603–607.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Geertz, C. (1980). Blurred genres: The refiguration of social thought. The American Scholar 49: 165–179.
Geertz, C. (1983). Local knowledge. New York: Basic Books.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday Anchor.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Goffman, E. (1977). The arrangement between the sexes. Theory and Society 4: 301–331.
Goffman, E. (1981). A reply to Denzin and Keller. Contemporary Sociology 10: 60–68.
Goffman, E. (1983). The interaction order. American Sociological Review 48: 1–17.
Gonos, G. (1977). “Situation” versus “frame.” American Sociological Review 42: 854–867.
Goodman, N. (1984). Of mind and other matters. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Habermas, J. (1972/1983). Walter Benjamin: Consciousness-raising or rescuing critique. In Philosophical political profiles. Trans. F. G. Lawrence. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Hazelrigg, L. (1989). Social science and the challenge of relativism. Vol. I. Gainesville: University Presses of Florida.
Hazelrigg, L. (1991). The problem of micro-macro linkage: Rethinking questions of the individual, social structure, and autonomy of action. Current Perspectives in Social Theory 11: 229–254.
Hegel, G. W. F. (1807/1977). Phenomenology of spirit. 5th edition, ed. J. Hofmeister, trans. A. V. Miller. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hollis, M. (1982). The social destruction of reality. In M. Hollis and S. Lukes (Eds.), Rationality and relativism. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jameson, F. (1976). On Goffman's frame analysis. Theory and Society 3: 119–133.
Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1954). A conceptual introduction to latent structure analysis. In P. F. Lazarsfeld (Ed.), Mathematical thinking in the social sciences. New York: Free Press.
MacIntyre, A. (1981). After virtue. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Manning, P. K. (1977). Review of Frame analysis. American Journal of Sociology 82: 1361–1364.
O'Neill, J. (1981). A preface to frame analysis. Human Studies 4: 359–364.
Rehberg, K.-S. (1985). Anti-sociology. History of Sociology 5: 45–60.
Ryle, G. (1968/1971). The thinking of thoughts: what is le Penseur doing? In Collected Papers. Vol. 2. London: Hutchinson.
Said, E. W. (1975). Beginnings. New York: Basic Books.
Scheffler, I. (1974). Four Pragmatists. New York: Humanities.
Schutz, A. (1953/1962). Common sense and scientific interpretations of human action. In Collected papers. Vol. 1, ed. M. Natanson. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Schutz, A. (1954/1962). Concept and theory formation in the social sciences. In Collected papers. Vol. 1, ed. M. Natanson. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Simmel, G. (1905/1977). The Problem of the philosophy of history. 2nd edition, ed. and trans. G. Oakes. New York: Free Press.
Sloterdijk, P. (1983/1987). Critique of cynical reason. Trans. M. Eldred. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
I thank Peter Manning anf two anonymous readers for their encouraging comments
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hazelrigg, L. Reading Goffman's framing as provocation of a discipline. Hum Stud 15, 239–264 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00182108
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00182108