{"title":"会话分析与维特根斯坦","authors":"Ariel Vázquez Carranza","doi":"10.1515/text-2021-0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the present paper I discuss the affinities between conversation analysis and Wittgenstein’s later ordinary language philosophy. Although both paradigms differ in purpose, they share some similarities: they both conceive language as an instrument for action, understanding as a manifestation of behaviour, and meaning as something generated in situ. I suggest that the concepts of adjacency pair, positionally sensitive grammar, and action ascription particularise, in some ways, Wittgenstein’s notion of context. Both paradigms share similarities and differences in terms of method and in terms of their conception of rules; for example, both are inductive approaches but for Wittgenstein rules are normative in principle whereas for conversation analysts like Sacks they are primarily practical.","PeriodicalId":46455,"journal":{"name":"Text & Talk","volume":"43 1","pages":"523 - 542"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conversation analysis and Wittgenstein\",\"authors\":\"Ariel Vázquez Carranza\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/text-2021-0017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In the present paper I discuss the affinities between conversation analysis and Wittgenstein’s later ordinary language philosophy. Although both paradigms differ in purpose, they share some similarities: they both conceive language as an instrument for action, understanding as a manifestation of behaviour, and meaning as something generated in situ. I suggest that the concepts of adjacency pair, positionally sensitive grammar, and action ascription particularise, in some ways, Wittgenstein’s notion of context. Both paradigms share similarities and differences in terms of method and in terms of their conception of rules; for example, both are inductive approaches but for Wittgenstein rules are normative in principle whereas for conversation analysts like Sacks they are primarily practical.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Text & Talk\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"523 - 542\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Text & Talk\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2021-0017\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Text & Talk","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2021-0017","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In the present paper I discuss the affinities between conversation analysis and Wittgenstein’s later ordinary language philosophy. Although both paradigms differ in purpose, they share some similarities: they both conceive language as an instrument for action, understanding as a manifestation of behaviour, and meaning as something generated in situ. I suggest that the concepts of adjacency pair, positionally sensitive grammar, and action ascription particularise, in some ways, Wittgenstein’s notion of context. Both paradigms share similarities and differences in terms of method and in terms of their conception of rules; for example, both are inductive approaches but for Wittgenstein rules are normative in principle whereas for conversation analysts like Sacks they are primarily practical.
期刊介绍:
Text & Talk (founded as TEXT in 1981) is an internationally recognized forum for interdisciplinary research in language, discourse, and communication studies, focusing, among other things, on the situational and historical nature of text/talk production; the cognitive and sociocultural processes of language practice/action; and participant-based structures of meaning negotiation and multimodal alignment. Text & Talk encourages critical debates on these and other relevant issues, spanning not only the theoretical and methodological dimensions of discourse but also their practical and socially relevant outcomes.