No abstract

According to the interactional form of the professional dominance (PD) thesis professional service encounters, especially of the medical sort, are arenas of negotiation, conflict or struggle in which professional service providers attempt to dominate lay service seekers through various verbal strategies for controlling the definition of the situation, the interactional agenda and the time and resources expended in the encounter. Prominent among these purported linguistic strategies are the use of interruptions, questions (and particular types of questions) and silences. Service seekers are correspondingly said to resist such attempts at control. In this paper we criticize the PD thesis as it applies to interruptions and questions through a brief re-examination of some of the analyses by C. West and by Scheff of medical and psychiatric encounters, and through a longer scrutiny of a corpus of calls to the police. Not finding any evidence of these verbal control strategies we propose an alternative ethnomethodological (conversation-analytic) account of the occurrence of overlaps (in West’s data) and of the so-called ‘abruptness’, ‘constraining influence’ and ‘asymmetry’ of questions in calls to the police. We locate these apparent features in a general account of the interactional shape of the calls, an account which sees that shape as a concerted accomplishment of the parties to them. That accomplishment, we claim, derives from the parties’ mutual orientation to (a) the occasion of the call as one directed to the performance of a set of tasks, which establish (b) the relevance of co-identification in terms of a particular set of identities and (c) a characteristic distribution of speakers’ rights to turns at talk. While not disputing (here) the structural version of the PD thesis we wish to replace the interactional version of it by an approach which begins to address how the institutional interaction reproducing that structure is produced as such in the first place.

No abstract

In contradistinction to the commonplace sociological position that gender is an omni-relevant aspect of social interaction and social organization, ethnomethodology (EM) requires that analysts be able to demonstrate in the data at hand that, for the members of society whose interaction such data record, gender is a relevant operational consideration for the course of their conduct (Edwards, 1998;Hester, 2000;Schegloff, 1997;Stokoe and Smithson, 2001). How members accomplish gender as an accountable -that is, 'observable-reportable' -feature of their settinged conduct would then be the apposite topic of inquiry for EM. In what follows I present abbreviated and amended versions of two studies (Eglin, 2001;Eglin and Hester, 1999b) of members' gendering work to show what membership categorization analysis (MCA) may contribute to studies of gender and feminism, if not feminist studies of gender (see Stokoe, forthcoming;Wowk, 1984). The data fragments are drawn from the corpus used by Eglin and Hester (1999a) in our studies of media coverage of the 'Montreal massacre'. I endeavour to make two simple points -that to invoke the gender of adult females may require more than calling them women, and that 'women' may be used to mean, on occasion and programmatically, 'feminists'. Because the conceptual framework of MCA has been set out now numerous times (Sacks, 1992; see also, e.g. Hester and Eglin, 1997;Jayyusi, 1984) I do not review it again here, but introduce terminology as relevant in the course of presenting the cases. Making 'women' mean women by separating them from men and denouncing them as feministsEM studies the world exclusively as a members' phenomenon. It is concerned with what members find there and what members do with what they find, with members' problems then, and members' solutions. Marc Lepine had a problem when he contemplated killing women engineering students at l'ecole

No abstract