In:Enabling Human Conduct: Studies of talk-in-interaction in honor of Emanuel A. Schegloff
Edited by Geoffrey Raymond, Gene H. Lerner and John Heritage
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 273] 2017
► pp. 327–349
Living with Manny’s dangerous idea
Published online: 24 May 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.273.17lev
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.273.17lev
Daniel Dennett, in Darwin’s Dangerous Idea, argues that natural selection is a universal acid that eats through other theories, because it can explain just about everything, even the structure of the mind. Emanuel (Manny) Schegloff (1987) in ‘Between Micro and Macro: Context and Other Connections’ opposes the importation of ‘macro’ (sociological/sociolinguistic) factors into the ‘micro’ (interaction analysis), suggesting that one might reverse the strategy instead. Like Darwin, he is coy about whether he just wants his own turf, but the idea opens up the possibility of interactional reductionism. I will argue against interactional reductionism on methodological grounds: Don’t bite off more than you can chew! Instead I’ll support the good old Durkheimian strategy of looking for intermediate variables between systems of different orders. I try and make the case with data from Rossel Island, Papua New Guinea.
Article outline
- 1.Universal acid
- 2.Some working presumptions about the interplay between language, culture and interaction
- 3.Rossel Island, Papua New Guinea – the ramifications of kinship
- 4.A mysterious genre of joke
- 5.Culture and naming: The interplay between cultural systems and interactional systematics
- 6.Models for the interaction of language, culture and interaction
- 7.Conclusion
Acknowledgement Notes References
References (26)
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dixon, R.M.W. (1971). ‘A Method of Semantic Description’, in D. Steinberg and L. Jakobovits (eds) Semantics, pp. 436–71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ford, C., Fox, B. and Thompson, S. (2002). ‘Social Interaction and Grammar’, in M. Tomasello (ed.) The New Psychology of Language, vol. II, pp. 119–44. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kendon, A. (1988). Sign Languages of Aboriginal Australia: Cultural, Semiotic and Communicative Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. (1987). ‘Minimization and Conversational Inference’, in M. Pappi and J. Verschueren (eds) The Pragmatic Perspective, pp. 61–129. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
. (1992). ‘Activity Types and Language’, in P. Drew and J. Heritage (eds) Talk at Work, pp. 66–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. (2004). ‘On the “Human Interactional Engine”’, paper prepared for
Wenner Gren Conference
, Octobe.
Lounsbury, F. (1969). ‘A Formal Account of the Crow- and Omaka-Type Kinship Terminologies’, in S. Tyler (ed.) Cognitive Anthropology, pp. 212–54. New York: Holt.
Meyer Fortes, W.W. (1969). Kinship and the Social Order: The Legacy of Lewis Henry Morgan. Chicago: Aldine.
Ochs, E., Schegloff, E. and Thompson, S. (eds) (1996). Interaction and Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sacks, H. (1972). ‘On the Analyzability of Stories by Children’, in J. Gumperz and D. Hymes (eds) Directions in Sociolinguistics, pp. 346–80. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Sacks, H. and Schegloff, E.A. (1979). ‘Two Preferences in the Organization of Reference to Persons in Conversation and their Interaction’, in G. Psathas (ed.) Everyday Language, pp. 15–21. New York: Irvington.
Schegloff, E.A. (1987). ‘Between Micro and Macro’, in J. Alexander (ed.) The Micro–Macro Link, pp. 207–34. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
. (1995). ‘Some Practices for Referring to Persons in Talk-in-Interaction: A Partial Sketch of a Systematics’, in B. Fox (ed.) Studies in Anaphora, pp. 437–85. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
