Kitzinger’s Feminist Conversation Analysis: Critical Observations

被引：0
作者：
Maria T. Wowk
机构：
[1] Manchester Metropolitan University,Department of Sociology
来源：
Human Studies | 2007年 / 30卷
关键词：
Conversation analysis; Ethnomethodology; Feminism; Incommensurability; Supplementation;
D O I：
暂无
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
This paper contributes to ongoing discussions on feminism and the analysis of discourse. In particular, I examine Celia Kitzinger’s [(2000), Doing feminist conversation analysis. Feminism and Psychology, 10, 163–193 and (2002) Doing feminist conversation analysis. In P. McIlvenny (Ed.), Talking gender and sexuality. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.] claims to be engaged in “feminist conversation analysis.” This paper identifies susceptibilities in her arguments at both the theoretical level and the level of data analysis. My argument is that Kitzinger fails to appreciate the fact that her enterprise is basically a formal analytic one and that as such it is both radically different from, and incommensurate with, ethnomethodology (EM) and conversation analysis (CA). Indeed her attempts to supplement feminism with EM/CA are unnecessary and counterproductive from an EM/CA position insofar as they crucially undermine its integrity.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]  
Anderson R. J.(1986)Methodological tokenism, or are good intentions enough? Semiotica 58 1-27
[2]  
Sharrock W. W.(1999)Whose terms? Whose ordinariness? Rhetoric and ideology in conversation analysis Discourse and Society 10 543-558
[3]  
Billig M.(2002)Members’ gendering work: “women”, “feminists” and membership categorization analysis Discourse and Society 13 819-825
[4]  
Eglin P.(1999)“You’re all a bunch of feminists:” categorization and the politics of terror in the Montreal massacre Human Studies 22 253-272
[5]  
Eglin P.(1994)Management of repair in human-computer interaction Human-Computer Interaction 9 385-425
[6]  
Hester S.(1996)Ethnomethodology’s program Social Psychology Quarterly 59 5-21
[7]  
Frohlich D.(2000)Ethnomethodology, conversation analysis and institutional talk Text 20 373-413
[8]  
Drew P.(2000)Doing feminist conversation analysis Feminism and psychology 10 163-193
[9]  
Monk A.(2005)Heteronormativity in action: Reproducing normative heterosexuality in ‘after hours’ calls to the doctor Social Problems 52 477-498
[10]  
Garfinkel H.(2005)Speaking as a heterosexual: (How) does sexuality matter for talk-in-interaction Research on Language and Social Interaction 38 221-265
1234