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]>