Linguistic ethnography and interdisciplinarity: Opening the discussion

Abstract

This Special Issue 1 focuses on an emerging area of work in the U.K. (with strong links in Europe and the U.S.) which calls itself 'linguistic ethnography'. The first article by Rampton takes stock of recent developments in this area and debate is then opened up with colleagues across the social sciences. The issue has a strong interdisciplinary flavour, deriving both from the nature of linguistic ethnography itself, which Rampton introduces as an 'interdisciplinary region', and from the range of disciplinary perspectives represented by the other contributors. Thus, Ron and Suzie Scollon write from long experience as U.S. linguistic anthropologists and Lukas Tsitsipis as a linguistic anthropologist in southern Europe, Alison Sealey from a background in applied linguistics and a close interest in sociological realism, and Margaret Wetherell from discursive psychology and ongoing research on identity. These are not a collection of linguistic ethnographies. Rather, contributors are responding to the linguistic ethnography initiative from their own disciplinary positions, making wider connections, drawing attention to neglected issues and often illustrating with data of their own. Some raise stringent questions about aspects of combining linguistics with ethnography. Finally, two discussants, Jan Blommaert and Martyn Hammersley, pick up and comment on particular themes in the papers from their respective perspectives in anthropology and sociology.

Bridging language barriers in multilingual care encounters

“…This methodological tension between a more closed focus on linguistic text and a more open sensitivity to context is an issue that is often centralised in linguistic ethnography (e.g. Tusting & Maybin 2007). My aim has been to negotiate the relative weight of the care workers' and my own perspectives as an analyst and linguist in producing analytical representations of the multilingual reality under study.…”

“…The design of the study is built upon the principles of linguistic ethnography (e.g. Tusting & Maybin 2007), which argue for a close analysis of situated language in order to gain a better understanding of the social and cultural mechanisms of everyday activity. In the present study, reports from interviews with the care workers and field notes from participant observations are used in combination with analyses of transcription excerpts from audio and video-recordings of the care workers' interaction with the Kurdish woman (approximately 90 minutes).…”

Uneven distribution of resources in the youth linguascapes of Mongolia

“…Their socioeconomic and regional backgrounds were diverse, varying from affluent to poor and from rural to urban, before they gained admission to university and came to live in Ulaanbaatar. Following linguistic ethnographic methods (Rampton et al 2004;Tusting and Maybin 2007), casual face-to-face conversations among students were recorded during classroom breaks, libraries, lecture halls and university coffee shops. Participants were provided with digital recorders and recorded their own conversations on their own terms whenever they spent time with their peers.…”

Reflexive language and ethnic minority activism in Hong Kong

“…LE is an interdisciplinary framework for the study of language and identity (Rampton et al 2004;Tusting & Maybin 2007;Creese 2008;Copland & Creese 2015, Pérez-Milans 2016 and offers a platform for analyzing the ways in which social actors negotiate meaning and identity through language use, in the context of large historical configurations that shape (and get shaped by) these local instances of language use. Thus, this platform helps overcome long-standing binaries in applied linguistics, such as that of 'micro/macro' or 'agency/structure', suitable to the approach to reflexivity that we have outlined in the previous section.…”