³ ~interact.01 º UP: < ³
³ Interactionist approaches of º NEXT: open ³
³ Goffman, Frake, and others º <[LINK] - ³
Hook into Gemperz somewhere from <[LINK]> down
{<[LINK]> Need to refer to Frake, Goffman --esp 1965. This section
is from Gumperz, Intro, Gumperz and Hymes eds, _Directions in
Sociolinguistics_ 15.}
The interactionist approach grants that "most individuals in
everday situations have considerable freedom in choosing which of
several role relationsahips to enact." Such an approach denies
that there is any "parallel between social and physical
measurement" because of the observer's paradox--The person doing
the measuring cannot factor out his or her own social identity
from the process. The researcher's categories of analysis are as
societally determined as the object of analysis. The
structuralist division between "the linguistic" and "the social"
does not exist in this model because there are no clear
boundaries between social and linguistic interactions.
<[LINK] for the problems of a "boundary-centered" approach>
This concern for clear boundaries is somewhat of a red
herring: The structuralist division is essentially between emic
and etic approaches, <[LINK]> a distinction reinforced
rather than disintegrated by Hymes and other interactionists.
<[LINK]> While issues of boundaries are crucial to etic
analysis, they are not essential or necessary for emic
approaches. <[LINK]>