|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Reply: variability in transcribers
Mary Bucholtz
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA BARBARA, USA
Variation in transcription is due in large part to variability in transcribers' theoretical and methodological commitments and goals. This reply addresses issues raised in the commentaries on the article `Variation in Transcription' concerning problems of representing different discourse genres in transcripts, the question of how research relationships shape the transcription process, the intellectual and institutional contexts in which transcription occurs and circulates, and the injunction to consider the practices as opposed to the products of transcription.
Key Words: context genre practice research relationship technology
References
- Blommaert, J. (1997) `Workshopping: Notes on Professional Vision in Discourse Analysis', Antwerp Papers in Linguistics 91.
- Drew, P. and Heritage, J. (eds) (1992) Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Duranti, A. (2007) `Transcripts, like Shadows on a Wall', Mind, Culture, and Activity 13(4): 301—10.[CrossRef]
- Haviland, J.B. (1996) `Text from Talk in Tzotzil', in M. Silverstein and G. Urban (eds) Natural Histories of Discourse, pp. 45—78. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
- Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A. and Jefferson, G. (1974) `A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-taking for Conversation', Language 50(4): 696—735.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Vigouroux, C.B. (2007) `Trans-scription as a Social Activity: An Ethnographic Approach', Ethnography 8(1): 61—97.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Discourse Studies, Vol. 9, No. 6,
837-842 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1461445607082585

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?
|
|