On the empirical challenge to integrational studies in language

“What’s it called?” – Conventionalization, glossing practices, and linguistic (in)determinacy

“…2 Transcriptions of recorded conversations and other kinds of (re)textualized communication are the products of interpretational processes, and so are all subsequent analytical artefacts. This means that any analysis of this kind will unavoidably be based on second-order traces of prior communication recontextualized through an analytical temperament, and not on objective 'data' in the traditional sense (Duncker, 2011b). These interpretations are of course non-identical to the original episodes of communication, and the only sensible thing for the analyst to do on these conditions is to seek a level of transparency that makes it possible for readers to gain as detailed an insight as possible into the 1 The corpus consists of 76 transcribed conversations of a duration of1-2 h, among 2-5 participants (129 recorded hours, 1.3 mio running words).…”