Switch to: References

Citations of:

Sequential order and sequence structure: the case of incommensurable studies on mobile phone calls

Ilkka Arminen

Discourse Studies 7 (6):649-662 (2005)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.

Scientific and "radical" ethnomethodology: From incompatible paradigms to ethnomethodological sociology.Ilkka Arminen - 2008 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 38 (2):167-191.details Ethnomethodology has been torn between scientific and "radical" aspirations insofar as it moves discoursive practices from resources to the topic of the study. Scientific ethnomethodology, such as conversation analysis, studies discoursive praxis as its topic and resource. Standard scientific criteria are accepted to assess the merits of its findings. "Radical" ethnomethodology addresses mundane reasoning exclusively as its topic without recourse to standardized science. I will show that insofar as "radical" ethnomethodology succeeds in bracketing everyday resources, it loses its phenomenon with (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 11 citations
Environmentally coupled repairs and remedies in the airline cockpit: Repair practices of talk and action in interaction.Petra Auvinen & Ilkka Arminen - 2013 - Discourse Studies 15 (1):19-41.details Our article explores the repair practices pilots use to correct various troubles during flights. The intersubjective understanding of action is a salient part of the time-critical activities of aviation. Repairs solve troubles before any accident risk emerges, thus contributing to flight safety. In repair practices, the social and technical environment is interwoven. If remedies concern faulty lines of action, they target the techno-material condition of the aircraft. Such repair practices are not repairs of talk, but remedies of action in a (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 3 citations
‘Incommensurable’ studies of mobile phone conversation: a reply to Ilkka Arminen.Ian Hutchby - 2005 - Discourse Studies 7 (6):663-670.details Arminen claimsthattworecentstudiesof mobilephone conversation come up with incommensurate findings. He relates this to two distinct approaches to the methodology of conversation analysis. In this reply I show that the two studies in question are not incommensurate and argue that Arminen's account is based on a partial description of the findings in Hutchby and Barnett. I go on to show how the latter study presents an approach to the problematic relationship in CA between talk and extraneous contingencies that goes further than (...) Arminen's own proposals. (shrink) Download Export citation Bookmark

1