Abstract
Two seminal notions of Harold Garfinkel have endured despite some uncertainty and indeterminacy that accompany them: “autochthonous” and “tendentious”. These terms, which respect the dynamic and evolving nature of social interaction, describe how local parties discover, come upon, or develop coherent accounts that can assist them to lay hold of a local orderliness that is governing some mundane interaction. This paper illuminates these two notions, first theoretically and then empirically. Drawing upon the reflections of Garfinkel, Sacks, Schegloff, Mead, Husserl, Schutz, Gurwitsch, and others, the radical consequences of these two notions are elucidated and then applied to two perspicuous conversations where it is possible to witness autochthony and tendentiousness in action. This provides a clearer understanding of the importance that these features of social interaction can play in our everyday lives. The two illustrations reveal occasions where a local orderliness appears on its own, autochthonously, without requiring a heavy dose of deliberate conceptual control by parties.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bartlett, F. (1958). Thinking: An experimental and social study. Allen and Unwin.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall.
Garfinkel, H. (1977). Lecture notes. UCLA Department of Sociology.
Garfinkel, H. (2019). Interview with Harold Garfinkel. Human Studies, 42, 165–181.
Garfinkel, H (2002). Ethnomethodology’s program: Working out Durkheim's aphorism (A. W. Rawls, Ed.). Rowman & Littlefeld.
Garfinkel, H (2006). Seeing sociologically. Paradigm Publishers.
Garfinkel, H. (2021). Ethnomethodological misreading of Aron Gurwitsch on the phenomenal field (C. Eisenmann & M. Lynch, Eds.). Human Studies, 44, 19–42.
Garfinkel, H. (2022). Studies of work in the sciences. Routledge.
Garfinkel, H., & Sacks, H. (1970). On formal structures of practical actions. In J. C. McKinney & E. Tiryakian (Eds.), Theoretical sociology. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Geertz, C. (1973). Interpretation of cultures. Basic Books.
Gurwitsch, A. (1964). Field of consciousness. Duquesne University Press.
Heritage, J., & Geoffrey, R. (2005). The terms of agreement: epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. In Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(1), 15–38.
Horkheimer, Max and Theodor Adorno, Dialectic of Enlightenment, NY: Herder and Herder, 1972.
Husserl, E. (2001). Analyses concerning passive and active synthesis. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Liberman, K. (1994). A natural history of some intercultural collaboration. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 28(2), 117–146.
Lynch, M. (1993). Scientific practice and ordinary action. Cambridge University Press.
Macbeth, D. (2022). Some notes on the play of basketball in its circumstantial detail. In M. Lynch (Ed.), Harold Garfinkel: Studies of work in the sciences (pp. 58-70). Routledge.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. University of Chicago Press.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The primacy of perception. Northwestern University Press.
Meyer, C. (2018). Culture, practice, and the body: Conversational organization and embodied culture in Northwestern Senegal. Metzler Verlag.
Meyer, C. (2022). The phenomenological foundations of ethnomethodology’s conceptions of sequentiality and indexicality: Harold Garfinkel’s references to Aron Gurwitsch’s 'field of consciousness'. Gesprächsforschung - Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion, 23, 111-144.
Moerman, M., & Sacks, H. (1988). On ‘understanding’ in the analysis of natural conversation. In M. Moerman (Ed.), Talking culture. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Perullo, N. (2022). Estetica senza (s)oggetti: Per una nuova ecologia del percepire. Habitus Environmental Humanities.
Rawls, A. (1989). Simmel, Parsons, and the interaction order. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 124–129.
Rawls, A. (2022). Editors introduction. In H. Garfinkel, Ethnomethodology's program: Working out Durkheim's aphorism (pp. 1-64). Rowman & Littlefield.
Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures in conversation. Blackwell.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.
Schegloff, E. (2010). Commentary on Stivers and Rossano: ‘Mobilizing response’. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(1), 38–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810903471282
Schegloff, E., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8(4), 289–327.
Schutz, A. (1971). Collected papers, Vol I: The problem of social reality. Martinus Nijhoff.
Schutz, A. (1978). Parson’s theory of social action. In R. Grathoff (Ed.), The theory of social action. Indiana University Press
vom Lehm, D. (2014). Harold Garfinkel: The creation and development of ethnomethodology. Left Coast Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
An early version of this paper was presented at the 'New Directions in Ethnomethodology Workshop' at the University of Gothenburg in May, 2023.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Liberman, K. Autochthony: Abandoning Social Mythologies of Rationality. Hum Stud (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-024-09715-8
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-024-09715-8