Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository

such as laughter sequences. I also included line numbering and identification of
speakers. Each participant was represented in the transcripts and appendices
two letters (e. g. KP). These letters are not fictitious but represent the real
names of participants. A major reason for this was to avoid confusion for myself
which may arise out of entirely fictitious nomenclature. However, it is hoped
however that anonymity is maintained throughoutlo.
These rough transcripts were then printed out and read through. Again, I
focused on general conversational alignment to topic (e. g. what topics were
chosen, how deeply were they being developed, were they treated seriously or
lightly? ) and instances of solidaric and autonomous mobilisation of selves.
Finally, I selected and more precisely transcribed what I perceived as exemplar
excerpts, i. e., what I thought of from my own experience as the English being
English, and the Germans being German.
Two points of clarification need to be made about the nature of and
importance accorded transcriptions: First, a transcript does not constitute data
but rather represents it, and second, as scholars such as Tannen (in Straehle
1997,65) have noted, the transcription process is a transformative process,
taking conversation as it happens and turning it into conversation as it can be
written down. Although within sociological studies, certain sets of transcription
conventions are usually observed, the final 'product' as it were down differs
across studies. For example, those conducting sociological work under the
general rubric of 'conversation analysis' employ similar techniques of intricate
transcription necessary for the practical purposes of this particular type of
analysis (the sequential organisation of conversation per se) (see e. g. Button
and Lee 1987,9-17). Other sociologists employ less minutely detailed methods,
again, largely due to their specific research interest. For example, scholars such
as Blum-Kulka (1997), Malone (1997) and Tannen (1984) represent data to
demonstrate, amongst other things, conversational moves as a way of
mobilising selves. Others such as Goffman, equally successfully illustrate how
selves are presented in talk by drawing on simply transcribed data, showing
barely more than the propositional content of speaker turns.
1 OCI