turn to discourse and discourse analysis what did we learn? that we make interpretations about...
Post on 21-Dec-2015
212 views
TRANSCRIPT
Turn to Discourse and DISCOURSE ANALYSIS <last class>
• What did we learn?• That we make interpretations about
speakers• we fell judgments about poor guys like ‘Broken
Glass’ - on the basis of very little data - “demeaning” “condescending”
• Being descriptive - not critical!• But we have to back them up!!!
Last Class -- on Discourseand Discourse Analysis
New York TimesSunday, Feb 5, 2005
Turn to NARRATIVE and NARRATIVE ANALYSIS
• What is Narrative?• Why is Narrative central
to Psychology?• Exercises
Second Class on DiscourseNarrative and Narrative Analysis
What is NARRATIVE?BEING Human Requires Telling Stories
Understanding Humans Requires Understanding Stories
• Bochner’s approach to Story Telling• Our approach to the Analysis of Narratives
• How is the story TOLD?
• Why these particular words?
• Why this particular structure?
BEING DESCRIPTIVE Versus
JUST listening to or collecting others’ stories
Building on Potter’s Discursive Psychology
• Action Orientation• What is this story supposed to accomplish
• Situation– sequential arrangement (what happened before + after?)– institutional arrangements (classroom vs campfire)
• rhetorical organization (what is countered and/or aligned with?)
• Construction– A version of the world in the story-world– versions of others (and of SELF)
action orientation +SELF-CONSTRUCTION in story-telling
• When I tell a story (whether it is about MYSELF or about OTHERS) I reveal the PERSPECTIVE from which I view the world
• This will be taken as “speaking about myself” (=making a statement as to who I am – as how I want to ‘come across’)
QuickTime™ and aDV/DVCPRO - NTSC decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
What is the Story about?• A boy <a fat boy - Davie Hogan>
• A fat boy who always gets teased• A pie-eating contest• A huge barforama• A revenge• Davie’s revenge for always getting teased• A kid taking on an adversary environment• A kid taking on the adult world• Teengae fantasies (in America)• Growing up in the American culture (the 60ties?)• Coming of age
The STORY stands for something
• Something MORE than just what happened• It’s more than ‘look at that’
• The story reveals aspects of ‘my self’ - of how I make sense of myself
• The story reveals aspects of how I want to come across to others
Who ARE these four boys?
• We make assumptions about the participants:– How do they <want to?> come across by their
contributions to the story?– How do they arrange themselves sequentially?– How do they accomplish ‘a sense of who they
are’?
• How do we arrive at OUR interpretations?
What is Narrative Analysis?and
what can we learn from it
• How does the speaker position him-/herself?– Vis-à-vis characters in the story (e.g., Davie Hogan, the
folks at the pie-eating contest, etc.)
– Vis-à-vis those being addressed as audience: the other three around the campfire
– Vis-à-vis him-/herself: what these events MEAN to me
• Story as co-produced– All 4 participants take part in self-constructions
Narrative Analysis
• To figure out their ‘sense of self’– How THEY make sense of who they are
• How they want to be understood– situated in context (here: campfire talk)
• IDENTITY– How participants configure a sense of self
• Claim their “identities” in talk <in story-talk>
• We are DESCRIBING <<“felling judgments” on “very
little data”>> these claims by use of their stories --- from THEIR POINT OF VIEW <ethnography>
• Relate back to Fish, Maracek, Shank + Goldenberg