首页> 外文期刊>Human Studies >Kitzinger’s Feminist Conversation Analysis: Critical Observations
【24h】

Kitzinger’s Feminist Conversation Analysis: Critical Observations

机译:基辛格的女权主义对话分析:批判性观察

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This paper contributes to ongoing discussions on feminism and the analysis of discourse. In particular, I examine Celia Kitzinger’s [(2000), Doing feminist conversation analysis. Feminism and Psychology, 10, 163–193 and (2002) Doing feminist conversation analysis. In P. McIlvenny (Ed.), Talking gender and sexuality. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.] claims to be engaged in “feminist conversation analysis.” This paper identifies susceptibilities in her arguments at both the theoretical level and the level of data analysis. My argument is that Kitzinger fails to appreciate the fact that her enterprise is basically a formal analytic one and that as such it is both radically different from, and incommensurate with, ethnomethodology (EM) and conversation analysis (CA). Indeed her attempts to supplement feminism with EM/CA are unnecessary and counterproductive from an EM/CA position insofar as they crucially undermine its integrity.
机译:本文为有关女权主义和话语分析的持续讨论做出了贡献。特别是,我研究了Celia Kitzinger的[(2000),做女性主义对话分析。女权主义与心理学,第10卷,第163-193页,以及(2002)做女权主义对话分析。在P. McIlvenny(主编)中,《谈论性别与性行为》。阿姆斯特丹:约翰·本杰明斯出版公司。]声称从事“女权主义对话分析”。本文从理论层面和数据分析层面确定了她的论点的敏感性。我的论点是,Kitzinger不能理解这样一个事实,即她的企业基本上是一个正式的分析企业,因此它既与民族方法论(EM)和对话分析(CA)完全不同,又不相称。确实,她尝试用EM / CA来补充女权主义是不必要的,并且从EM / CA职位起反作用,因为它们严重破坏了妇女的正直。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号