Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Microsociological Contextualisation Analysis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Public Representations of Immigrants in Museums

Part of the book series: Postdisciplinary Studies in Discourse ((PSDS))

  • 327 Accesses

Abstract

This methodology assembles compatible tools from ethnomethodological Conversation Analysis, poststructural discourse analysis, and analytic ethnography. A focus on participants’ contextualisation cues in face-to-face conversation, written text, embodied ritual practices, and mass media communication enables an analysis of how certain practices instantiate what participants consider macro-societal phenomena. Conversation Analysis dissects the ephemeral details of social and institutional interaction and shows how participants’ referencing, pointing, orientation, and attributing generate territories of knowledge. Discourse analysis unravels polyphonic and hierarchical mappings of societal subject positions in single utterances in written texts. Theory-oriented, multi-sited ethnography allows the researcher to experience and compare longer sequences of institutional work and ritual practices, and to follow mass media communication in order to distinguish cases of goal-oriented practice in their social, material, and cultural contexts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Drawing on van Dijk’s notion of ‘subject participant’s construct,’ according to which the context of the situation is not a given but cognitively constructed by subjects, does not mean we need to adopt his mental model approach. Instead, we can reformulate this notion in less cognitivist terms as done in work on mundane epistemics in discursive psychology (Potter and Hepburn 2008).

  2. 2.

    “By ‘recipient design’ we refer to a multitude of respects in which the talk by a party in a conversation is constructed or designed in ways which display an orientation and sensitivity to the particular other(s) who are the co-participants” (Sacks et al. 1974: 727).

  3. 3.

    ‘Turn taking’ concerns the allocation of rights and obligations of participants to participate in interaction. ‘Turn construction units’ (TCUs) can stretch over sentences, clauses, phrases, or lexical elements and constitute the building blocks of a turn of social action (one turn can therefore contain several TCUs). These in turn are used to constitute larger activities. TCUs give participants an idea when a turn is possibly meant to end. Possible, but not necessary, completion points of a turn are called ‘transition relevance places’ (TRPs), that is, a legitimate change of who is speaking could occur or the same speaker could continue with a new TCU. As a rule of thumb, they can be identified by asking whether a moment in an interaction could, first, potentially constitute a grammatically complete sentence, second, is a recognisable action, and third, comes to intonational completion (Sacks et al. 1974: 704; Schegloff 2007).

  4. 4.

    Although only relatively little of the duration of talk consists in gaps between talk and overlaps of speakers talking at the same time, overlaps of two (rarely more) participants are common. They are usually unproblematic and signal understanding or agreement, for example, continuers, agreeing assessments, or collaborative completion. In competitive cases, so-called ‘overlap-management/resolution’ devices end the overlap. If foreseen, the speaker might preemptively increase the volume of speech (Schegloff 2000).

  5. 5.

    Dausendschön-Gay and Krafft (2009: 249) explain that “[g]enerally speaking, there are two outcomes of projection that are highly relevant to the organization of interaction: Projection orients interlocutors’ structural interpretation of small and of large portions of talk, and in doing so it is a method for announcing completion and for avoiding gaps and overlaps in turn taking; but it is also a method for restricting the range of possible next actions, for current and for next speakers.”

  6. 6.

    In semiotics based on Pierce, the term ‘icon’ refers to a resemblance between a sign and an object it represents. In contrast, the link between a sign and an object in the case of a ‘symbol’ is arbitrary. An ‘index’ refers to an object by means of association that is based on causal relations (for example, a fire is indexed by smoke). According to Silverstein (2003), an ‘index,’ such as styles of speaking (cf. Irvine and Gal 2000; Irvine 2001), can transport ideology, which turns it into a second-order index.

  7. 7.

    Contextualisation cues are defined as “any linguistic sign which, when processed in co-occurrence with symbolic grammatical and lexical signs, serves as an indexical sign to construct the contextual presuppositions that underlie situated interpretation and thereby affects how constituent messages are understood. Code switching is one type of contextualization cue; others include phonetic enunciation, along with prosody (i.e. intonation and stress), rhythm, tempo and other such supra-segmental signs” (Gumperz and Cook-Gumperz 2009: 24; see also Gumperz 1982: 131, 1992). In a narrow definition of metapragmatic contextualisation cues, Gumperz and Cook-Gumperz distinguish them from other indexical signs like ‘here’ or ‘there’ that are not necessarily oral. Further, “[t]hey are pure indexicals in that they have no propositional content. That is, in contrast to other indexicals like pronouns or discourse markers, they signal only relationally and cannot be assigned context-free lexical meanings” (Gumperz in Prevignano and di Luzio 2003: 8).

  8. 8.

    For the use of ‘institution’ in CA and the present study, see footnote 19.

  9. 9.

    Presuppositions have also been dealt with in CA, for example, concerning question design in news interviews (Heritage and Clayman 2010: 231 f.). On implicatures, semantic and pragmatic presuppositions, implications, and logical entailments see Moeschler (2012) and Verschueren (2003: 33 f.). Levinson (1983: 179–185) provides a list of linguistic items that can trigger presuppositions: definite descriptions, factive verbs, implicative verbs, change of state verbs, iteratives, verbs of judging, temporal clauses, cleft sentences, implicit clefts with stressed constituents, comparisons, contrasts, and questions.

  10. 10.

    A variety of markers of textual cohesion indicate discourse deixis, for example conjunctions (for example, and), anaphora (for example, which); anticipatory references (for example, it will become apparent); examples; explanations; logical relations (for example, conclusions); emphasis by quotation marks or italics; comparisons; contrasts; substitutions, etc., as well as intertextual references. Verschueren (2000: 446) provides an overview of (overlapping) explicit and implicit meta-discursive markers that include “all of Jacobson’s ‘shifters,’ Gumperz’s ‘contextualization cues’ (such as instances of code switching), anything ever discussed under the labels ‘discourse markers/particles’ or ‘pragmatic markers/particles’ (such as anyway, actually, undoubtedly, I guess, you know, etc.), ‘sentence adverbs’ (such as frankly, regrettably), hedges (such as sort of, in a sense), instances of ‘mention’ vs. ‘use’ (again as already suggested by Jakobson), as well as direct quotations, reported speech, and more implicitly embedded ‘voices.’”

  11. 11.

    For this methodology, participatory observation should not, however, be understood in a culturalist sense, that is, the researcher does not go into and neutrally portrays a well demarcated, homogeneous, and entirely foreign culture, but explores concurring “partial truths” (Clifford 1986), unknown aspects of her “own” culture, or uses ethnographic techniques to alienate herself from the familiar everyday life.

  12. 12.

    ‘Field notes’ concern events in the field and ‘analytic notes’ concern reflexive and theoretical notes oriented towards subsequent interpretation.

References

  • Angermüller, J. 2005. Macht und Subjekt. Gesellschaftstheoretische Anstöße im Anschluss an Foucault, Alth usser und Lacan. In Diskurse der Gewalt—Gewalt der Diskurse, ed. M. Schultze, J. Meyer, D. Fricke, and B. Krause, 73–84. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Wissenschaft zählen. Regieren im digitalen Panoptikum. In Berliner Zeitschrift für Sozialwissenschaft. Sonderheft 25: Sichtbarkeitsregime. Überwachung, Sicherheit und Privatheit im 21. Jahrhundert, 174–190. Leviathan.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Poststructuralist Discourse Analysis. Subjectivity in Enunciative Pragmatics. Basingstoke, Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arminen, I. 2005. Institutional Interaction. Studies of Talk at Work. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis. In 21st Century Sociology. A Reference Handbook, ed. C.D. Bryant and D.L. Peck, vol. 2, 8–16. Alabama: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auer, P. 1986. Kontextualisierung. Studium Linguistik 19: 22–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1992. Introduction: John Gumperz’ Approach to Contextualization. In The Contextualization of Language, ed. P. Auer and A. Di Luzio, 1–37. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Context and Contextualisation. In Key Notions for Pragmatics, ed. J. Verschueren and J.-O. Östman, 86–101. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J.L. 1962. How to do Things with Words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakhtin, M.M. 1979. Die Ästhetik des Wortes. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1984. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamberg, M. 1997. Positioning between Structure and Performance. Journal of Narrative and Life History 7 (1–4): 335–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. M. 2004. Form and Functions of ‘Slut Bashing’ in Male Identity Constructions in 15-Year-Olds. Human Development 47 (6): 331–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, C. 1992. Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benveniste, E. 1977. Probleme der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Syndikat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann, J.R. 1991. Über Erving Goffmans Soziologie des Gesprächs und seine ambivalente Beziehung zur Konversationsanalyse. In Erving Goffman – ein soziologischer Klassiker der zweiten Generation, ed. R. Hettlage and K. Lenz, 301–326. Bern and Stuttgart: UTB-Haupt.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Ethnomethodologie. In Qualitative Forschung. Ein Handbuch, ed. U. Flick, E. v. Kardoff, and I. Steinke, pp. 118–135. Rowohlt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. 1999. Whose Terms? Whose Ordinariness? Rhetoric and Ideology in Conversation Analysis. Discourse & Society 10: 543–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M., S. Condor, D. Edwards, M. Gane, D. Middleton, and A. Radley. 1988. Ideological Dilemmas. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blommaert, J. 2001. Context is/as Critique. Journal of Anthropology 21 (1): 13–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhme, G. 1995. Atmosphäre. Essays zur neuen Ästhetik. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohnsack, R. 2007. Dokumentarische Methode und praxeologische Wissenssoziologie. In Handbuch Wissenssoziologie und Wissensforschung, ed. R. Schützeichel, 180–190. Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonilla-Silva, E., and T.A. Forman. 2000. “I Am Not a Racist But …”: Mapping White College Students’ Racial Ideology in the USA. Discourse & Society 11 (1): 50–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brubaker, R., and F. Cooper. 2000. Beyond ‘Identity’. Theory and Society 29: 1–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Button, G. 1994. What’s Wrong with Speech-Act Theory. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 3 (1): 39–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Button, G., and W. Sharrock. 2009. Studies of Work and the Workplace in HCI: Concepts and Techniques. Morgan Claypool.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charaudeau, P., and D. Maingueneau. 2002. Dictionnaire d’analyse du discours. Paris: Éd. du Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H.H. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A., and D. Chalmers. 1998. The Extended Mind. Analysis 58 (1): 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, I., W. Kwon, and R. Wodak. 2012. A Context-sensitive Approach to Analysing Talk in Strategy Meetings. British Journal of Management 23 (4): 455–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, J. 1986. Introduction: Partial Truths. In Writing Culture. The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, ed. J. Clifford and G.E. Marcus, 1–26. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, R. 2004. Interaction Ritual Chains. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dant, T. 2006. Material Civilization: Things and Society. The British Journal of Sociology 57 (2): 289–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dausendschön-Gay, U., and U. Krafft. 2009. Preparing Next Actions in Routine Activities. Discourse Processes 46 (2): 247–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Stefani, E. 2010. Reference as an Interactively and Multimodally Accomplished Practice. Organizing Spatial Reorientation in Guided Tours. In Spoken Communication Between Symbolic and Deixis, ed. M. Pettorino, A. Giannini, I. Chiari, and F.M. Dovetto, 137–170. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Stefani, E., and L. Mondada. 2014. Reorganizing Mobile Formations: When “Guided” Participants Initiate Reorientations in Guided Tours. Space and Culture 17 (2): 157–175. Accessed May 1, 2014. http://sac.sagepub.com/content/17/2/157.abstract.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doering, H., and S. Hirschauer. 1997. Die Biographie der Dinge. Eine Ethnographie musealer Repräsentation. In Die Befremdung der eigenen Kultur, ed. S. Hirschauer and K. Amann, 267–297. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drew, P. 1997. ‘Open’ Class Repair Initiators in Response to Sequential Sources of Trouble in Conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 28 (1): 69–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drew, P., and J. Heritage. 1992. Analyzing Talk at Work: An Introduction. In Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. P. Drew and J. Heritage, 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ducrot, O. 1984. Le dire et le dit. Paris: Minuit.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. (1972) 1998. Dire et ne pas dire. Principes de sémantique linguistique. Paris: Hermann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ducrot, O., M.C. Barbault, and J. Depresle. 1974. La preuve et le dire: langage et logique. Paris: Mame.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duranti, A. 1993. Intentions, Self, and Responsibility: An Essay in Samoan Ethnopragmatics. In Responsibility and Evidence in Oral Discourse, ed. J. Hill and J. Irvine, 24–47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edley, N. 2001. Interpretative Repertoires, Ideological Dilemmas and Subject Positions. In Discourse as Data: A Guide for Analysis, ed. M. Wetherell and S.S. Yates, 189–229. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D. 1997. Discourse and Cognition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D., and J. Potter. 1992. Discursive Psychology. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egbert, M. 2004. Other-Initiated Repair and Membership Categorization—Some Conversational Events that Trigger Linguistic and Regional Membership Categorization. Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1467–1498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eglin, P., and S. Hester. 1997. Culture in Action. Studies in Membership Categorization Analysis. Washington, DC: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversational Analysis & University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fløttum, K. 2005. The Self and the Others: Polyphonic Visibility in Research Articles. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 15 (1): 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. 1971. L’ordre du discours: leçon inaugurale au Collège de France prononcée le 2 décembre 1970. Paris: Gallimard.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1980. Two Lectures. In Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972–1977, ed. C. Gordon, 78–108. Brighton: Harvester.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. (1976) 1983. Der Wille zum Wissen. Sexualität und Wahrheit 1. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. (1975) 1992. Überwachen und Strafen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. (1978) 2000. Dispositive der Macht. Über Sexualität, Wissen und Wahrheit. Berlin: Merve.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. (1973/74) 2005. Die Macht der Psychatrie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, B.A., and R. Jasperson. 1995. The Syntactic Organization of Repair. In Descriptive and Theoretical Modes in the New Linguistics, ed. P. Davis, 77–134. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, H. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geertz, C. 1973. Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture. In The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays, ed. C. Geertz, 3–30. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gennep, A.v. (1909) 1960. The Rites of Passage. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J.J. 1977. The Theory of Affordances. In Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing: Toward an Ecological Psychology, ed. R. Shaw and J. Bransford, 67–82. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. 1971. Interaktionsrituale. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1974. Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organisation of Experience. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1981a. Footing. In Forms of Talk, ed. E. Goffman, 124–159. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1981b. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: Philadelphia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1983. The Interaction Order. American Sociological Review 48: 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C. 1990. He Said She Said: Talk as Social Organization among Black Children. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1994. Professional Vision. American Anthropologist 96 (3): 606–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2000. Action and Embodiment Within Situated Human Interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32: 1489–1522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2003. Pointing as Situated Practice. In Pointing: Where Language, Culture and Cognition Meet, ed. S. Kita, 217–241. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. [draft version: 1–33].

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C., and M.H. Goodwin. 1992. Assessments and the Construction of Context. In Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, ed. A. Duranti and C. Goodwin, 147–189. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, M.H., and C. Goodwin. 1986. Gesture and Coparticipation in the Activity of Searching for a Word. Semiotica 62 (1–2): 51–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grésillon, A., and D. Maingueneau. 1984. Polyphonie, proverbe et détournement. Ou: Un proverbe peut en cacher un autre. Langages 73: 112–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gumperz, J.J. 1982. Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1992. Contextualisation & Understanding. In Rethinking Context: Language as an Interaction Phenomenon, ed. A. Duranti and C. Goodwin, 229–252. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001. Interactional Sociolinguistics: A Personal Perspective. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, and H.E. Hamilton, 215–228. Malden and Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gumperz, J.J., and J. Cook-Gumperz. 2009. Discourse, Cultural Diversity and Communication: A Linguistic Anthropological Perspective. In Handbook of Intercultural Communication, ed. H. Kotthoff and H. Spencer-Oatey, 13–29. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haddington, P., L. Mondada, and M. Nevile. 2013a. Being Mobile: Interaction on the Move. In Interaction and Mobility. Language and the Body in Motion, ed. P. Haddington, L. Mondada, and M. Nevile, 3–64. Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013b. Interaction and Mobility. Language and the Body in Motion. Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hajer, M.A. 2003. Argumentative Diskursanalyse. Auf der Suche nach Koalitionen, Praktiken und Bedeutung. In Handbuch Sozialwissenschaftliche Diskursanalyse. Band 2 Forschungspraxis, ed. R. Keller, A. Hirseland, W. Schneider, and W. Viehöver, 271–298. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Harré, R., and F. Moghaddam, eds. 2003. The Self and Others: Positioning Individuals and Groups in Personal, Political, and Cultural Contexts. Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harré, R., F.M. Moghaddam, T.P. Cairnie, D. Rothbart, and S.R. Sabat. 2009. Recent Advances in Positioning Theory. Theory & Psychology 19 (1): 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harré, R., and L. van Langenhove, eds. 1999. Positioning Theory: Moral Contexts of Intentional Action. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heath, C. 1984. Talk and Recipiency: Sequential Organization in Speech and Body Movement. In Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage, 247–265. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1992. Gesture’s Discreet Tasks: Multiple Relevancies in Visual Conduct and in the Contextualisation of Language. In The Contextualisation of Language, ed. P. Auer and A. Di Luzio, 101–127. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, C., and J. Hindmarsh. 2002. Analysing Interaction: Video, Ethnography and Situated Conduct. In Qualitative Research in Action, ed. T. May, 99–120. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heath, C., P. Luff, D. vom Lehn, J. Hindmarsh, and J. Cleverly. 2002. Crafting Participation: Designing Ecologies, Configuring Experience. Visual Communication 1 (1): 9–33. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/147035720200100102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, C., and D. vom Lehn. 2004. Configuring Reception. (dis-)Regarding the ‘Spectator’ in Museums and Galleries. Theory, Culture & Society 21 (6): 43–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, M. 1970. What is a Thing? Chicago: Regnery.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1996. Being and Time. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. 1984. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1997. Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk. In Qualitative Research. Theory, Method and Practice, ed. D. Silverman, 161–182. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012a. Beyond and Behind the Words: Some Reactions to My Commentators. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 76–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012b. The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 30–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012c. Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J., and S. Clayman. 2010. Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities, and Institutions. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hindmarsh, J., and C. Heath. 2000. Embodied Reference: A Study of Deixis in Workplace Interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32 (12): 1855–1878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2003. Transcending the Object in Embodied Interaction. In Discourse, the Body, and Identity, ed. J. Coupland and R. Gwyn, 43–69. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschauer, S. 1993. Die therapeutische Situation. In Die soziale Konstruktion der Transsexualität: über die Medizin und den Geschlechtswechel, ed. S. Hirschauer, 129–139. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001. Ethnographisches Schreiben und die Schweigsamkeit des Sozialen. Zu einer Methodologie der Beschreibung. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 30: 429–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004. Praktiken und ihre Körper. Über materielle Partizipanden des Tuns. In Doing Culture. Neue Positionen zum Verhältnis von Kultur und sozialer Praxis, ed. K.H. Hörning and J. Reuter, 73–91. Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschauer, S., and K. Amann. 1997. Die Befremdung der eigenen Kultur. Ein Programm. In Die Befremdung der eigenen Kultur: zur ethnographischen Herausforderung soziologischer Empirie, ed. S. Hirschauer and K. Amann, 7–52. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchby, I., and R. Wooffitt. 1998. Conversation Analysis. Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. 1995. Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge and London: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ihde, D. 2009. Postphenomenology and Technoscience: The Peking University Lectures. New York: State Univ of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irvine, J. 2001. Style as Distinctiveness: The Culture and Ideology of Linguistic Differentiation. In Stylistic Variation in Language, ed. P. Eckert and J. Rickford, 21–43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irvine, J.T., and S. Gal. 2000. Language Ideology and Linguistic Differentiation. In Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Polities, and Identities, ed. P.V. Kroskrity, 35–84. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, A., and N. Coupland. 1999. The Discourse Reader. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalthoff, H., S. Hirschauer, and G. Lindemann. 2008. Theoretische Empirie: zur Relevanz qualitativer Forschung. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamio, A. 1997. Territory of Information. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. 1980. L’Énonciation. De la subjectivité dans le langage. Paris: Armand Colin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knauth, B., and S. Wolff. 1991. Zur Fruchtbarkeit der Konversationsanalyse für die Untersuchung schriftlicher Texte – dargestellt am Fall der Präferenzorganisation in psychiatrischen Obergutachten. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 20: 36–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoblauch, H. 2001. Diskurs, Kommunikation und Wissenssoziologie. In Handbuch Sozialwissenschaftliche Diskursanalyse Band 1: Theorien und Methoden, ed. R. Keller, A. Hirseland, W. Schneider, and W. Viehöver, 207–224. Opladen: Leske & Budrich.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Knorr-Cetina, K. 2008. Theoretischer Konstruktivismus. Über die Einnistung von Wissenstrukturen in soziale Strukturen. In Theoretische Empirie, ed. H. Kalthoff, S. Hirschauer, and G. Lindemann, 35–78. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komter, A. 2001. Heirlooms, Nikes and Bribes: Towards a Sociology of Things. Sociology 35 (1): 59–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotthoff, H. 2009. Ritual and Style Across Cultures. In Handbook of Intercultural Communication, ed. H. Kotthoff and H. Spencer-Oatey, 173–198. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labov, W., and D. Fanshel. 1977. Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lash, S., and C. Lury. 2007. Global Culture Industry: The Mediation of Things. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. 1988. Mixing Humans and Nonhumans Together: The Sociology of a Door-closer. Social Problems 35 (3): 298–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1992. Sociology of a Few Mundane Artifacts. In Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, ed. W.E. Bijker and J. Law. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1994. Une sociologie sans object ? Remarques sur l’interobjectivité. Sociologie du travail 36 (4): 587–607.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1996. On Actor-network Theory. A Few Clarifications. Soziale Welt 47 (4): 369–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1997. Trains of Thought: Piaget, Formalism and the Fifth Dimension. Common Knowledge 3 (6): 173–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1999. Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2000. When Things Strike Back: A Possible Contribution of ‘Science Studies’ to the Social Sciences. British Journal of Sociology 51 (1): 107–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. Reassembling the Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leudar, I., and J. Nekvapil. 2004. Media Dialogical Networks and Political Argumentation. Journal of Language and Politics 3 (2): 247–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, S. 1998. Deixis. In Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics, ed. J. Mey, 200–205. Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, S.C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lofland, J. 1995. Analytic Ethnography Features, Failings, and Futures. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 24 (1): 30–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorenz, C. 1999. Atmosphäre. Eine praktische Annäherung an den ästhetischen Begriff Gernot Böhmes am Beispiel des Museums für Moderne Kunst Frankfurt am Main. Mitteilungen & Materialien. Zeitschrift für Museum und Bildung, 51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löw, M. 2008. The Constitution of Space. European Journal of Social Theory 11 (1): 25–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luff, P., C. Heath, and K. Pitsch. 2009. Indefinite Precision: Artefacts and Interaction in Design. In The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis, ed. C. Jewitt, 213–224. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, M., and D. Bogen. 1996. The Spectacle of History. Speech, Text, and Memory at the Iran-contra Hearings. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maeße, J. 2010. Die vielen Stimmen des Bologna-Prozesses. Zur diskursiven Logik eines bildungspolitischen Programms. Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Maingueneau, D. 1996. Les termes clés de l’analyse du discours. Paris: Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1997. Pragmatique pour le discours littéraire. Paris: Dunod.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayring, P. 1983. Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse : Grundlagen und Techniken. Weinheim: Beltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mersch, D. 2002. Ereignis und Aura: Untersuchungen zu einer Ästhetik des Performativen. Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, C., C. Meier zu Verl, and U. von Wedelstaedt. 2016. Zwischenleiblichkeit und Interkinästhetik. In Wissensforschung-Forschungswissen. Beiträge und Debatten zum 1. Sektionskongress der Wissenssoziologie, ed. J. Raab and R. Keller, 317–331. Basel: Beltz Juventa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moeschler, J. 2012. Conversational and Conventional Implicatures. In Cognitive Pragmatics, ed. Hans-Jörg Schmid, 407–434. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohn, B.E. 2002. Filming Culture. Spielarten des Dokumentierens nach der Repräsentationskrise. Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. Kamera-Ethnografie: Vom Blickentwurf zur Denkbewegung. In Methoden der Tanzwissenschaft. Modellanalysen zu Pina Bauschs “Sacre du Printemps”. Tanz Scripte, ed. G. Brandstetter and G. Klein, 173–194. Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohn, B.E., and K. Amann. 1998. Forschung mit der Kamera. Anthropolitan: Visuelle Anthropologie. Mitteilungsblatt der GeFKA 6: 4–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mondada, L. 2007. Multimodal Resources for Turn-taking: Pointing and the Emergence of Possible Next Speakers. Discourse Studies 9 (2): 194–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Emergent Focused Interactions in Public Places: A Systematic Analysis of the Multimodal Achievement of a Common Interactional Space. Journal of Pragmatics 41 (10): 1977–1997. Accessed October. <Go to ISI>://WOS:000269467000007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Projections, organisation syntaxique, séquentielle et multimodale: le tour comme construction émergente dans l’interaction. In Du système linguistique aux actions langagières. Mélanges en l’honneur d’Alain Berrendonner, ed. G. Corminboeuf and M.J. Béguelin, 191–208. Bruxelles: De Broeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012a. Descriptions en mouvement: l’organisation dystématique du déplacement dans une visite guidée. In Les visites guidées. Discours, interaction, multimodalité, ed. J.-P. Dufiet, 154–206. Trento: Università degli Studi di Trento, Dipartimento di Studi Letterari, Linguistici e Filologici.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012b. Garden Lessons: Embodied Action and Joint Attention in Extended Sequences. In Interaction and Everyday Life: Phenomenological and Ethnomethodological Essays in Honor of George Psathas, ed. H. Nasu and F.C. Waksler. New York: Lexington.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012c. Organisation multimodale de la parole-en-interaction: pratiques incarnées d’introduction des référents. Langue Française 3: 129–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nekvapil, J., and I. Leudar. 2006. Sequencing in Media Dialogical Networks. Ethnographic Studies 8: 30–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nølke, H., K. Fløttum, and C. Norén. 2004. ScaPoLine. La théorie scandinave de la polyphonie linguistique. Paris: Kimé.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, S. 2011. Three Hierarchical Positions of Deictic Gesture in Relation to Spoken Language: A Multimodal Interaction Analysis. Visual Communication 10 (2): 129–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oevermann, U., T. Allert, E. Konau, and J. Krambeck. 1979. Die Methodologie einer ‘objektiven Hermeneutik’ und ihre allgemeine forschungslogische Bedeutung in den Sozialwissenschaften. In Interpretative Verfahren in den Sozial- und Textwissenschaften, ed. H.-G. Soeffner, 352–434. Stuttgart: Metzler.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, I. 2008. Die diskursanalytische Methode. In Qualitative Forschung – Ein Handbuch, ed. Uwe Flick, Ernst von Kardoff, and I. Steinke, 546–555. Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peräkylä, A. 2004. Reliability and Validity in Research Based on Naturally Occuring Social Interaction. In Qualitative Research, ed. D. Silverman, 283–304. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérennec, M.-H. 2004. Das Polyphonie-Konzept als Instrument der stilistischen Analyse. LYLIA 2. Accessed July 21, 2014. http://langues.univ-lyon2.fr/sites/langues/IMG/pdf/doc-190.pdf

  • Pomerantz, A. 1984. Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes. In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1980. Telling My Side: “Limited Access” as a “Fishing” Device. Sociological Inquiry 50: 186–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porsché, Y. 2012. Public Representations of Immigrants in Museums. Towards a Microsociological Contextualisation Analysis. COLLeGIUM—Studies Across Disciplines in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Language, Space and Power: Urban Entanglements 13: 45–72. Accessed July 21, 2014. http://www.helsinki.fi/collegium/journal/volumes/volume_13/

  • ———. 2013. Multimodale Marker in Museen. In Was machen Marker? Logik, Materialität und Politik von Differenzierungsprozessen, ed. E. Bonn, C. Knöppler, and M. Souza, 113–151. Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. Contextualising Culture: From Transcultural Theory to the Empirical Analysis of Participants’ Practices. In Downscaling Culture: Revisiting Intercultural Communication, ed. J. Singh, A. Kantara, and D. Cserzö, 311–336. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. The ‘Bologna Process’ as a Territory of Knowledge: A Contextualisation Analysis. In New Studies in Multimodality: Conceptual and Methodological Elaborations, ed. O. Seizov and J. Wildfeuer, S247–S276. London and New York: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porsche, Y. in preparation. Polizeiliche Projektarbeit mit Jugendlichen. Verantwortungsübertragung im Kontext einer Großdemonstration.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porsché, Y., and E. Kiefer. 2017. Projekt: Jugendlichen Verantwortung übertragen. In Polizeilicher Kommunitarismus. Eine Praxisforschung urbaner Kriminalprävention, ed. T. Scheffer, C. Howe, E. Kiefer, D. Negnal, and Y. Porsché, 55–76. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porsché, Y., and D. Negnal. 2017a. Bildungsveranstaltung: Bürgererziehung in der Gewaltprävention. In Polizeilicher Kommunitarismus. Eine Praxisforschung urbaner Kriminalprävention, ed. T. Scheffer, C. Howe, E. Kiefer, D. Negnal, and Y. Porsché, 37–54. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017b. Die Erziehung zu gewaltlosen Bürgern. Rituelle Praktiken in polizeilicher Gewaltprävention. Soziale Probleme 28 (1): 101–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J. 1996. Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2002. Two Kinds of Natural. Discourse Studies 4: 539–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Naturalistic Data. In The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, ed. L. Given, 548. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., and A. Hepburn. 2005. Qualitative Interviews in Psychology: Problems and Possibilities. Qualitative Research in Psychology 2: 38–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Discursive Constructionism. In Handbook of Constructionist Research, ed. J.A. Holstein and J.E. Gubrium, 275–293. New York: Guildford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., and M. Wetherell. 1987. Discourse and Social Psychology. Beyond Attitudes and Behaviour. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., M. Wetherell, R. Gill, and D. Edwards. 1990. Discourse: Noun, Verb or Social Practice? Philosophical Psychology 3 (2): 205–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preda, A. 1999. The Turn to Things: Arguments for a Sociological Theory of Things. The Sociological Quarterly 40 (2): 347–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prevignano, C., and A. di Luzio. 2003. A Discussion with John J. Gumperz by Carlo Prevignano and Aldo Di Luzio. In Language and Interaction: Discussions with John J. Gumperz, ed. S.L. Eerdmans, C.L. Prevignano, and P.J. Thibault, 7–29. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Psathas, G. 1995. Conversation Analysis. The Study of Talk-in-Interaction. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond, G., and J. Heritage. 2006. The Epistemics of Social Relations: Owning Grandchildren. Language in Society 35: 677–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reckwitz, A. 2008. Praktiken und Diskurse. Eine sozialtheoretische und methodologische Relation. In Theoretische Empirie. Zur Relevanz qualitativer Forschung, ed. H. Kalthoff, S. Hirschauer, and G. Lindemann, 188–209. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisigl, M. 2008. Analyzing Political Rhetoric. In Qualitiative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences, ed. R. Wodak and M. Krzyzanowski, 96–120. London: Palgrave.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Renn, J. 2006. Übersetzungsverhältnisse. Perspektiven einer pragmatistischen Gesellschaftstheorie. Weilerswist: Velbrück.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H. 1992a. Lecture 1 The Baby Cried. The Mommy Picked It Up. In Lectures on Conversation, ed. G. Jefferson, vol. 1, 236–242. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1992b. Lecture 6 The MIR Membership Categorization Device. In Lectures on Conversation, ed. G. Jefferson, vol. 1, 40–48. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1992c. Lecture 7 ‘Hotrodders’ as a Revolutionary Category. In Lectures on Conversation, ed. G. Jefferson, vol. 1, 169–174. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1992d. Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H., E.A. Schegloff, and G. Jefferson. 1974. A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation. Language 50: 696–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheffer, T. 1998. Jenseits der Konversation – Zur Konzeptualisierung von Asylanhörungen anhand der ethnographischen Analyse ihrer Eröffnung. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Soziologie 24 (2): 291–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001. Asylgewährung: Eine ethnographische Analyse des deutschen Asylverfahrens. Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2002. Das Beobachten als sozialwissenschaftliche Methode – von den Grenzen der Beobachtbarkeit und ihrer methodischen Bearbeitung. In Qualitative Gesundheits- und Pflegeforschung, ed. D. Schaeffer and G. Müller-Mundt, 351–374. Bern: Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. Event and Process. An Exercise in Analytical Ethnography. Human Studies 30 (3): 167–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Zug-um-Zug und Schritt-für-Schritt. Annäherungen an eine trans-sequentielle Analytik. In Theoretische Empirie. Zur Relevanz qualitativer Forschung, ed. H. Kalthoff, S. Hirschauer, and G. Lindemann, 368–398. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Adversarial Case-Making. An Ethnography of the English Crown Court. Amsterdam: Brill.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. Die trans-sequentielle Analyse – und ihre formativen Objekte. In Grenzobjekte. Soziale Welten und ihre Übergänge, ed. R. Hörster, S. Köngeter, and B. Müller, 89–114. Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Das Bohren der Bretter – Zur trans-sequentiellen Analyse des Politikbetriebs. In Formationen des Politischen. Anthropologie politischer Felder, ed. J. Adam and A. Vonderau, 333–361. Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheffer, T., C. Howe, E. Kiefer, D. Negnal, and Y. Porsché. 2017. Polizeilicher Kommunitarismus. Eine Praxisforschung urbaner Kriminalprävention. New York and Frankfurt am Main: Campus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E.A. 1988. Presequence and Indirection. Applying Speech Act Theory to Ordinary Conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 12: 55–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1990. On the Organization of Sequences as a Source of ‘Coherence’ in Talk-in-Interaction. In Conversational Organization and its Development, ed. B. Dorval, 51–77. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1992. Repair after Next Turn: The Last Structurally Provided Defense of Intersubjectivity in Conversation. The American Journal of Sociology 97 (5): 1295–1345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1997a. Third Turn Repair. In Towards a Social Science of Language: Papers in honor of William Labov. Volume 2: Social Interaction and Discourse Structures, ed. G.R. Guy, C. Feagin, D. Schiffrin, and J. Baugh, 31–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1997b. Whose Text? Whose Context? Discourse & Society 8 (2): 165–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1998. Reply to Wetherell. Discourse & Society 9 (3): 457–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1999. “Schegloff’s Texts” as “Billig’s Data”: A Critical Reply. Discourse & Society 10: 558–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2000. Overlapping Talk and Turn-taking. Language in Society 29 (1): 1–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E.A., G. Jefferson, and H. Sacks. 1977. The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organisation of Repair in Conversation. Language 53: 361–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiffrin, D. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, R., and J. Volbers. 2011. Öffentlichkeit als methodologisches Prinzip. Zur Tragweite einer praxistheoretischen Grundannahme. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 40 (1): 24–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J.R. 1969. Speech Acts. An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. London: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Serres, M., and B. Latour. 1995. Conversations on Science, Culture, and Time. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, R.E., M.T. Turvey, and W.M. Mace. 1982. Ecological Psychology. The Consequence of a Commitment to Realism. In Cognition and the Symbolic Processes, ed. W. Weimer and D. Palermo, 159–226. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverstein, M. 2003. Indexical Order and the Dialectics of Sociolinguistic Life. Language & Communication 23 (3–4): 193–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D.E. 2005. Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Altamira.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, D.A., C. Morrill, and L. Anderson. 2003. Elaborating Analytic Ethnography Linking Fieldwork and Theory. Ethnography 4 (2): 181–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stivers, T., and F. Rossano. 2010. Mobilizing Response. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43: 3–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, J. 1980. Speech Acts in Interaction: A Critique of Searle. Discourse Processes 3 (2): 133–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, J., and S. Mehus. 2005. Microethnography: The Study of Practices. In Handbook of Language and Social Interaction, ed. K.L. Fitch and R.E. Sanders, 381–406. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • ten Have, P. 1999. Doing Conversation Analysis. A Practical Guide. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. Conversation Analysis Versus Other Approaches to Discourse. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung 7 (2): 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, V. 1974. Liminal to Liminoid, Play, Flow, and Ritual: An Essay in Comparative Symbology. Rice University Studies 60: 53–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, T.A. 2006. Discourse, Context and Cognition. Discourse Studies 8 (1): 159–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Discourse and Context: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Society and Discourse: How Social Contexts Influence Text and Talk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Verschueren, J. 2000. Notes on the Role of Metapragmatic Awareness in Language Use. Pragmatics 10 (4): 439–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2003 (1999). Understanding Pragmatics. London: Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • vom Lehn, D. 2013. Withdrawing from Exhibits: The Interactional Organisation of Museum Visits. In Interaction and Mobility. Language and the Body in Motion, ed. P. Haddington, L. Mondada, and M. Nevile, 65–90. Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • vom Lehn, D., C. Heath, and J. Hindmarsh. 2001. Exhibiting Interaction: Conduct and Collaboration in Museums and Galleries. Symbolic Interaction 24 (2): 189–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wetherell, M. 1998. Positioning and Interpretative Repertoires: Conversation Analysis and Post-Structuralism in Dialogue. Discourse and Society 9 (3): 387–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. A Step Too Far: Discursive Psychology, Linguistic Ethnography and Questions of Identity. Journal of SocioLinguistics 11 (5): 661–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wetherell, M., and N. Edley. 1999. Negotiating Hegemonic Masculinity: Imaginary Positions and Psycho-Discursive Practices. Feminism & Psychology 9 (3): 335–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Masculinity Manoeuvres: Critical Discourse Psychology and the Analysis of Identity Strategies. In The New Sociolinguistics Reader, ed. N. Coupland and A. Jaworski, 201–214. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wetherell, M., and J. Potter. 1988. Discourse Analysis and the Identification of Interpretative Repertoires. In Analysing Everyday Explanation, ed. C. Antaki, 168–183. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, S., and J. Potter. 2008. Discursive Psychology. In The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology, ed. S.-R. Willig, 73–90. London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Willig, C. 2008. Introducing Qualitative Research Methods IN PSYCHology: Adventures in Theory and Method. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wodak, R., W. Kwon, and I. Clarke. 2012. Handout: The Discursive Construction of Consensus Around Strategic Issues—Building Salience, Urgency and Feasibility on 21–23 March 2012 in Loughborough University (conference paper).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wrana, D. 2015. Zur Methodik einer Analyse diskursiver Praktiken. In Methoden einer Soziologie der Praxis, ed. F. Schäfer, A. Daniel, and F. Hillebrandt, 121–144. Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zienkowski, J. 2017. Articulations of Self and Politics in Activist Discourse. A Discourse Analysis of Critical Subjectivities in Minority Debates. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Sociology, Bundeswehr University Munich, Neubiberg, Germany

    Yannik Porsché

Authors
  1. Yannik Porsché
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Porsché, Y. (2018). Microsociological Contextualisation Analysis. In: Public Representations of Immigrants in Museums . Postdisciplinary Studies in Discourse. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66357-9_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66357-9_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66356-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66357-9

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation