Table of Contents
Taxonomy Notation Systems Full Outline Traditional Treatments Format of a Report


Dr. Leon James
Dr. Diane Nahl
(c) 1978

Taxonomy of Microdescriptions (Ms)
on the Daily Round



[9.1] Definitional. [Ms] = the cataloging of the sequential units of noticings for any social occasion, viz., the report a person gives of any event and which is made up of expressions of reference, i.e., descriptions of what was noticed. Part of being socialized on the daily round is to know what to notice about a situation and what to ignore or keep on the periphery. This knowledge is shared by members of a community, hence the descriptions people give of events contain functionally equivalent units which we call orthographs. Thus, Ms are collections of orthographs, recognizable by others, and arranged sequentially into a larger unit called paragraph. The paragraph is the unit of social communication. Ms in paragraph form are empirical sources of data ("archives") for studying the noticings of members of a community.

Ms are reports. But in social psychology, Ms are reports that need to be transformed into data. To do this, we need a TAXONOMY of Ms so as to be able to identify orthographs (the units of Ms) and to classify them into a coherent system. Only then can Ms be treated empirically as an archival source of data about people's behavior.

The task of evolving a TAXONOMY of social occasions is to be the primary concern of what might be called micro-social psychology, though an argument can be made that that is what psychology is, or should be. The relation between a taxonomy of social occasions and _s is that of "title of paragraph" to "content of paragraph" (as in title of a book vs. contents of the book). Thus, a paragraph becomes mean ingful only when it has a title: this title identifies the background context of the situation, i.e., contains information concerning the circumstances surrounding the contents of the paragraph. For example:

TITLE: SITTING ON MY BED ALONE AT HOME, HOLDING MY STOMACH, AND FEELING DIZZY.

CONTENT: ["OH, I FEEL TERRIBLE!"]

Note that the same content can have an entirely different behavioral function when it is marked by different titles.

TITLE 2: SlTTING IN THE CAFETERIA, WIPING OFF SPILLED COFFEE ON A NEIGHBOR'S CLOTHES.

TITLE 3: ON THE PHONE, AT HOME, BEING INFORMED OF A FRIEND BEING IN AN ACCIDENT. etc. etc.

It is clear from the above that we understand people's acts only when we supply information about the situational circumstances surrounding these acts. The TAXONOMY of social occasions will allow us to document empirically, objectively, and systematically all the titles that exist in a community for referring to situational circumstances. In order to build such a system, we need to identify empirically how people notice things for it is these noticings that make up circumstances. In other words, situational circumstances are titles, and these titles belong to a taxonomy as evolved by social psychological research on what people notice, when, and where.

To do social psychological research, one must therefore possess two types of skills: literacy and heuristics.

Literacy skills refer to the ability of using conventionalized orthographs for referring to what one has noticed, i.e., to write or dictate a Ms paragraph when given a standard title. (see CHART T/12 for a discussion on the ambiguity of orthographs), For example, given the following paragraph title,

[THE CONTENTS OF YOUR WALLET WHEN YOU INSPECT IT]

one can then give the following Ms paragraph as a report:

[12/21/77; 2:30 P. M.; at home in the living room; making an inventory of the wallet I took from my pocket:
- Hawaii driver's license - 5 Gas cards
- 8 name cards (my own)
- a piece of tissue paper
- a $20 bill
- nothing else. ]

Another example: given the title,

[DESCRIBE WHAT RETINAL SENSATIONS YOU NOTICE WHEN CLOSING
YOUR EYES AND SITTING QUIETLY FOR AWHILE],

one can provide the following report:

[12/21/77. Sitting at my desk; at home; 2:45 P. M. I notice the noises around me as I settle down. I identify them. I try to hold still. I open my eyes and shut them. In between, I write down these sentences. The darkness is not black; it is yellowish grey, and in motion. The motion consists of streaks darting about. The movement or dynamism of the field varies; at times it is variegated, at times homogeneous. 2:48 P. M. ]

Note that literacy skills are learned as part of one's socialization and assimilation (parental language, school, mass media, discussions with others, reading, listening to recordings, etc. ). Literacy skills may be oral, written, or both. Every literate person thus has access to a repertoire of orthographs (oral or written) which one uses in social situations to construct a Ms paragraph, either in writing or through oral dictation (for recording and transcription).

A central step in the construction of a taxonomy of social circumstances is the isolation and classification of orthographs used in any particular community. Look at CHART R/2. Part A shows a Ms paragraph entry given by a student in a Psych 222 Research Report (from the DRA or Daily Round Archives). Note how each orthographic unit is enclosed in square brackets and marked by a simple algebraic notation system:

1/0. 0 = opening orthograph
2/0.2 = second orthograph of Sentence 2.
7/0.1 = first orthograph of Sentence 7. etc.

In this manner, lists of orthographs can be collected and cataloged according to the TITLES under which they occur in the archives. Further examples of orthographs bearing various titles can be seen in CHART R/9.

It can be appreciated from the above discussion on the nature and function of Ms that a very rich mine of information is available to social psychologists through the literacy skills of regular members of any community (see CHARTS T/9, T/11, and T/16). The second type of skill needed to do social psychological research is heuristics. This refers to any notation system devised to help an investigator represent information obtained when reclassifying data. Many heuristic devices and aids are familiar to us from the daily round:

- table of contents and index in books;
- tables, figures, and graphs for numbers;
- inventory lists for shopping;
- maps, drawings, and blueprints;
- instructions for putting together a store-bought item;
- writing systems;
- musical and choreographic notations;
- algebra;
- computer languages;
- proofreader's marks;
- formal logic;
- etc.

[9. 2] Notation Systems. In social psychology, we need a pragmatic notation system for representing the informational content of Ms. We will investigate a number of serviceable notation systems in this course. Some will be unfamiliar and complex; others you'll recognize and readily use. The following table will introduce you to the illustrations given in this Workbook.

The college student has been the principal source of data for most of traditional experimental psychology, including social psychology. This is not likely to change in the near future, it seems to us, as long as the gathering of detailed observations remains outside the scope of most community settings, and hence are tolerated only as "outside interruption" created by an "outside" investigator. We predict, however, that under the impact of a social psychology of the daily round, a wider spectrum of the community will incorporate social psychological data as part of its maintenance and growth activities.

For instance, we feel that the medical health services, including clinical psychological and counseling, are currently operating on psychodynamic models that don't find it essential to consult the daily round data of individuals under their care; instead, they rely on test score~ of standardized diagnostic procedures and in-office interviews of the client or patient. Home visits by social workers are prescribed by law in certain specific conditions. Neither such home visits nor extensive interviewing of clients can substitute for the need for empirical data dealing with the client's actual daily round. Such data can come only from systematic data gathering procedures carried out by the clients themselves [sic] and under the super vision of an Applied Social Psychologist familiar with these specialized techniques, and capable of training clients to execute the task.

By way of familiarizing you with the data gathering procedures for a social psychology of the daily round of a person, we present, next, instructions we have devised for students of Psychology 222 to guide them in the preparation of such data. These instructions were first used in Spring 1977 and yielded data which will be made available to you for reading and study, along with various other data in the Daily Round Archives ("DRA").

[9- 3] INSTRUCTIONS FOR A FULL OUTLINE OF A FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE DAILY ROUND

I. MAJOR CLASSIFICATION LEVEL:

Assignment 1: My Vita

Assignment 2: My Talk

Assignment 3: My Daily Round Setting

Assignment 4: My Standardized Imaginings

Assignment 5: My Community of Relationships

[Assignment 6: The Sociograph of My Environment. Not yet complete. ]

II. SUB-CLASSIFICATION LEVEL:

Assignment 1: My Vita
See CHART E/26 for sample entries from the DRA.

Assignment 2: My Talk
2A. THE ANALYSIS OF TOPIC
2B. THE ANALYSIS OF ARGUMENT LOGIC
2C. THE ANALYSIS OF SEQUENCE
2D. THE ANALYSIS OF RELATIONSHIP
2E. THE ANALYSIS OF SETTING

Assignment 3: My Daily Round Setting
3A. LOGGING ACTIVITIES IN SETTING
3B. MICRODESCRIPTIONS OF SENSORY OBSERVATIONS
3C. INVENTORIES OF OWNERSHIP

Assignment 4: My Standardized Imaginings
4A. INTERIOR DIALOGUE
4B. FEELING ARGUMENTS
4C. FANTASY/DAYDREAM EPISODES
4D. THE ELEVATED REGISTER
4E. ROUTINE CONCERNS: SELECTED INVENTORIES

Assignment 5: My Community of Relationships
5A. NOTICING OBSERVATIONS
5B. DESCRIPTION OF TRANSACTIONS
5C. RE PORTING JOINT ACTIVITIES
5D. NON-JOINT ACTIVITIES

III. MICRO-CLASSIFICATION LEVELS:

Assignment 1: My Vita
See CHART E/26 for sample entries from the DRA.

Assignment 2: My Talk 2A. THE ANALYSIS OF TOPIC
(2Ai) Breakdown of Topics Exchanged
(2A ii) Topical Chart of Transcript
(2Aiii) Topical Annotations
(2Aiv) Topicalization Dynamics

2B. THE ANALYSIS OF ARGUMENT LOGIC
(2Bi) Schema of Argument Structure
(2Bii) Description of Operational Talking Procedures
(2Biii) Schema of Behavioral Strategies in Talk

2C. THE ANALYSIS OF SEQUENCE
(2Ci) Tabulation of Adjacency Relations
(2Cii) Schema for Move Embeddings

2D. THE ANALYSIS OF RELATIONSHIP
(2Di) Tabulation of Role Types
(2Dii) Tabulation of Pair Types
(2Diii) Case History
(2Div) Relationship Dynamics

2E. THE ANALYSIS OF SETTING
(2Ei) Tabulation of Implicit Meaning
(2Eii) Tabulation of Derivative Relations
(2Eiii) Tabulation of the Rhythm of Exchange
(2Eiv) Transactional Engineering through Talk
(2Ev) Discourse Analysis

Assignment 3: My Daily Round Setting 3A . LOGGlNG ACTIVITIES IN SETTlNG
(3Ai) When?
(3Aii) How long?
(3Aiii) Where?
(3Aiv) Who?
(3Av) Occasion?
(3Avi) Nature of Activity?

3B. MICRODESCRIPTIONS OF SENSORY OBSERVATIONS
(3Bi) Aches and Pains
(3Bii) Stretchings and Exercises
(3Biii)Blushing
(3Biv) Retinal Sensations and Etc.
(3Bv) Appetite and Cooking
(3Bvi) Energy Level
(3Bvii)Smells and Odors

3C. INVENTORIES OF OWNERSHIP (3Ci) Subscriptions
(3Ci a) Periodicals, etc.
(3Ci b) Membership Dues, etc.
(3Ci c) Contributions, etc.

(3Cii) Documents and Mementos
(3Cii a) Official/Legal/Medical
(3Cii b) Personal-Biographical (Prizes, Letters, Gifts, Albums, Souvenirs, etc.)

(3Ciii)Personal Effects: Selected Inventories
(3Ciii a) Purse/Wallet
(3Ciii b) Car Glove Compartment
(3Ciii c) Your Own Drawer for Stuff
(3Ciii d) Clothes Closet

Assignment 4: My Standardized Imaginings
4A . INTERIOR DIALOGUE
(4Ai) Overlays of Comments to Self
(4Aii) Value Expressions
(4Aiii) Preparing Schedules
(4Aiv) Reviewing/Making Plans and Lists
(4Av) Emotionalizing Episodes
(4Avi) Rehearsals and Practicings
(4Avii) Annotations, Memorizings, Editings
(4Aviii) Unmentionables Within the Relationship

4B. FEELING ARGUMENTS
(4Bi) Figuring out a Conflict
(4Bii) Making Resolutions

4C. FANTASY/DAYDREAM EPISODES
(4Ci) Elaborations of Dramatized Scenarios
(4Cii) Construction of Catharsis Stories
(4Ciii) Re-contacting Nostalgic Memories
(4Civ) Working out Alternative Realities

4D. THE ELEVATED REGISTER
(4Di) Praying/Invocations
(4Dii) Altered States of Consciousness
(4Diii) Meditations/Readings of Scriptures
(4Div) Poetic Expressions

4E. ROUTINE CONCERNS: SELECTED INVENTORIES
(4Ei) Privacy
(4Ei a) from the EYES of particular Others
(4Ei b) from the NOSE of particular Others
(4Ei c) from the EARS of particular Others
(4Ei d) from the KNOWLEDGE of particular Others
(4Ei d) [1] involving your ACTIVITIES (Places, People, Purchases, Bills, etc. ) [2] involving your IDEAS (Memories, Attitudes, Opinions)

(4Eii) Information: Record Keeping
(4Eii a) Schedules
(4Eii b) Shopping Lists
(4Eii c) Dates and Address Book
(4Eii d) Biographical (diary, resolutions, notes, etc. )

Assignment 5: My Community of Relationships
5A. NOTICING OBSERVATIONS
(5Ai) Visual Sightings
(5Ai a) Physical State/Appearance of Things in Places
(5Ai b) Change in Normalcy Signs
(5Ai c) Weather, etc. (5Ai d) People in Public Places (5Aii) Relationship Events
(5Aii a) Noticeables About People You Know (physical appearance, mood, etc. ) [1l Unmentionables Within the Relationship [2] Disoccasioned Mentionables
(5Aii b) Territoriality (hang outs, rights and privileges, reputation, etc. )
(5Aiii) Auditory Pickings-up
(5Aiii a) Overheard Snatches of Talk
(5Aiii b) Sounds, Noises, etc.

5B. DESCRIPTION OF TRANSACTIONS (5Bi) Gossiping
(5Bii) Catching up on News
(5Biii) Having an Assignment
(5Biv) Joking
(5Bv) Exchanging Information
(5Bvi) Making Arrangements
(5 Bvii) Working out a Problem
(5Bviii) Sharing Secrets/Confessions
(5 Bix) Routine Reviews/News of the Day

5C . REPORTING JOINT ACTIVITIES
(5ci) Doing Something With (dates, appointments, etc. )
(5Cii) Telephone Calls
(5ciii) Writing/Receiving Notes, Letters, Memos, Ads, etc.
(5Civ) Paying Bills

5D. NON-JOINT ACTIVITIES
(5Di) Doing a Task for Another Person
(5Dii) Buying a Gift for Another Person
(5Diii) Mentioning a Person to Someone
(5Div) Avoiding a Person (5Dv) Going to See/Looking for a Person
(5Dvi) Having a Mental Exchange with Someone

The above classification serves as an outline of a TAXONOMY of social occasions; obviously it does not cover the full dimensionality of the daily round Possibilities. It is meant to serve as a phase to be improve through further research.

At this point, we present more detailed explanatory notes concerning the Outline Categories, as well as some background information concerning the litera ture context for viewing these data.

[9. 3. I] Explanatory Notes for Assignment 1: My Vita. [to be completed]

[9. 3. II] Explanatory Notes for Assignment 2: My Talk

[9. 3. II. 1] Introductory Remarks. The focus in this assignment is on talk, the kind that can be heard on your daily round. Talk is a key factor in under standing the setting, any setting. Your awareness of what's going on is given by either or both of these factors: (a) your interior dialogues with yourself, and (b) your public dialogues with others. In either case, talk is involved. Either you talk to someone, or you talk to yourself: most of people's waking and sleeping time is marked by a complete involvement with talk. In talk, we find the following five elements:

(a) topic, i.e., what's being talked about;
(b) argument, i. e., what's being asserted or predicated;
(c) sequence, i.e., talkers take turns talking and listening (speaker vs. audience role); as well, topical references and predication~ are time bound, viz., they mark and order events sequentially with reference to a time line (pa~t, present, future);
(d) relationship, i. e., all acts of talking occur only in (are occasioned by) a context (or frame) of a dyad or multiples there; (a dyad is a pair of persons, i. e, two people who form a relationship; = relate to each other = act and react to each other; implies dependency or functional relationship; etc. );
(e) setting, i. e., the location of the talking activity; location may imply "physical" (as in "He said it in the car") or "historical" (as in "She said it at the wedding, " or "They talked about their parents before broaching the subject of where to go for the weekend"), or "ambient" (as in "They talked in an ambience of tension, " or "He said it with feeling, not coldly" or "My words fell on deaf ears").

To recapitulate our observations on talk, we can say that talking or discourse occurs during much of a person's life, and that it has five basic elements; there are: topic, argument, sequence, relationship, and setting (physical, historical, ambient).

Traditional Treatments of Talk: .

- In philology, talk is treated as usage (e. g., dictionaries document definitions by quoting notable writers employing the word in the sense defined there);
- In linguistics, talk i8 treated as sentences (e.g., the difference between patterns like "I put it on the table" vs. "She's putting it on the chair");
- In psycholinguistics, talk is treated as a "communication act, " as well as a "symbolic language for problem solving";
- In traditional social Psychology, talk is treated as "a variable to be manipulated or observed in an experiment" (e.g., attitudes people express verbally or instructions to affect a subject's set or goal);
- In anthropology and the ethno-sciences, talk is treated as "one of the things people do when they get together"; (hence, in their field work, ethnoscientists record talk, transcribe it, and tabulate its components in various ways);
- In literary criticism, talk is treated as "a dramatic medium of presentation"; (hence, literary critics are always evaluative in terms of how well the writer or composer of talk achieves some discernible goal with an audience or in a subject matter);
- In rhetoric, talk is treated as "a dialectical process; (hence, the "art" and "science" of talk among professional talkers--e.g., poets, comedians, minstrels, prophets, conmen, etc.);
- In oral history, talk is treated as "a documentation interview"; (hence, oral history projects store and analyze taped interviews with participants to events the investigator is studying);
- In drama, talk is treated as "a staged performance"; (hence, people who are 'into drama' and theater can be noticed to talk with carefully developed and practiced styles and evolved thematic elaborations thereof; all people, however, treat talk as a staged performance, in the sense that habits and styles of nonmorphemic contour features of standard display acts characterize individual identity--which in simpler language means that the way you talk characterizes your style, and that means, that you see talk as a staged performance;
- In jurisprudence, talk is treated as "the primary mode of documentation, investigation, and interpretation"; (hence, all legal evidence is in the form of a deposition by a witness that something x or y is the case--a situation no doubt necessitated by the fact that courts of law or judicial committees "sit" in a room and everything about the matter being judged must be deposited in the room in the form of reports by witnesses, oral or written; these reports are always signed, i. e., they are made of talk uttered by a particular person;
- In folk psychology, talk is treated as "an achievement"; hence, to good or "fast" talkers are attribute(i all sorts of power, magic and charm; in actual practice, we can easily imagine that talk can be anything or everything: in talk, we can work off steam or bend someone's resist ance; we can wound or caress with a look, a touch, or a remark; when two people talk to each other, they are animated and their emotions are triggered by comments: through talk, we can trigger physiological reactions in the body and biochemical discharges in the brain; through talk we can manage people and programs; talk is thus the hub of civilization as well as the content of a person's consciousness. )

For further ideas and summaries on the function of talk, see CHARTS T/2, T/7, T/8, T/9, T/11, T/16, T/18, T/20.

[9. 3. II. 2] The Functional Analysis of Talk: In the contemporary scientific literature, talk is only now becoming a subject of study. In the past, linguists, psychologists, and sociolinguists have studied "language" rather than talk. An easy method of distinguishing between language and talk is to remember the rule that talk is an act while language is a system. For example, if you write a note to your friend which says "Let's have coffee after. " (or if you gesture, whisper, or say, the same thing), you have committed an act of talk and it actually occurred at a given time in a given place; now if you write the sentence " have coffee after. " in a book on the English language, or if you analyze it as a response a subject gave in an experiment, then you are treating it as part of a system known as "language. "

This distinction is fundamental to an understanding of talk as a standardized social activity. The study of talk as a system of language can be called structuralism (as in linguistics, language teaching, sociolinguistics, philosophy, cognitive psychology); functionalism refers to the study of talk as a situated act (as in ethno semantics, law, psychiatry, public speaking, behaviorism).

The functional analysis of talk demands two criteria:

(1) that there be pre-defined units of talk which can be observed to occur, and
(2) that the setting be known wherein the talking occurs.

These are the necessary and sufficient criteria for any behavioral act, talk or non-talk, in a functional analysis.

Pre-defined units of talk are always available to individuals whose cultural backgrounds overlap to some sufficient pragmatic degree (left undefined, for now): for instance, when you talk to members of your family in the course of eating dinner at home, you have available the following:

(1) An indefinitely large number of topics, either old or new;
(2) An inexhaustible string of possible arguments (=comment--reaction --comment) which you may shortcut, elaborate, or interrupt;
(3) A repeatable cycle of exchanges in a sequence that depends on an agreed upon operational procedure among the talkers, e.g., request--acceptance--acknowledgment--etc.
(4) A prior history of episodes in relationship which involves mutual expectations and provides a dynamics of accounting through claims, moves, and strategic counter moves in a context of a developing or evolving interactional case history or biography.
(5) Shared versions of reality, which may be called standardized imaginings--a process which allows each listener to reconstruct the setting for every act of talk, and thereby to give it "meaning" or "interpretation. "

Armed with these five conditions, your dinner table conversation proceeds auto- matically, spontaneously, effortlessly (and no doubt, noisily!). Why ~ That is the question which the assignment will ultimately have to come to grips with. In order to answer it in a scientific manner you need to follow the following general steps:

(1) Prepare a written record of some exchange of talk, with annotated stage directions (i.e., details that allow the reader of the record to reconstruct the physical, historical, and ambient features of the setting).

(2) Use the written record of talk to document the functional relation ship between a particular move or exchange of moves and the setting (e.g., "John said 'No' to Steve after Steve laughed at John" or 'Mary's reference to her accident did not occur until Jane told her about her operation").

(3) Tabulate the relationships you are documenting 90 as to indicate general properties of talk (e.g., how the talkers behave and how those behaviors at the dinner table fit in the larger context of the day, the family, the neighborhood, the culture.

(4) Write up a report presenting your findings, interpretations, and discussion; the report is to be in an objective register and a scientific format.

Throughout this process of writing up the assignment, students should keep in mind why they are doing what they are doing all along the way. This is why it is essential that you read these instructions. study them until everything about this Project is completely clear, then proceed with the necessary and logical steps. Use the following specific sections in the preparation of your report.

[9. 3. II. 2. 1] Format of Report.

[-2A] The analysis of topic: Example from the DRA:

(-2Ai) Breakdown of Topic Exchanged. Use ordinary way of titling exchanges (e. g., "talking about the food, " "saying something about his feelings during the war, " etc. ).

(-2Aii) Topical Chart of Transcript. Make a chart or figure showing how and when one topic leads into another; localize people's utterances by numbering the lines in the written record of the talk.

(-2Aiii) Topical Annotations. Develop rationales to account for the structure of the topic over time; contextu alize the topical exchanges in terms of your under standing, i.e., give information that places the topical exchanges into their real life context: e.g., why does John bring up the topic of going bowling rather than golfing ? Why does Mary ask who Robert is ? Why does Ted ask Jane about the broom handle and not Doris ?

(-2A1v) Topicalization Dynamics. State some general laws about topic in talk that are derivable from your find ings: e. g., that when a person switches the conver sation to another topic, there is a longer pause than usual just before he starts his turn (this is documented by timing pauses on the tape with a stopwatch and con trasting the length of silent periods before different remarks or topics); or, a second example: that when John switches topics he says "Yeah, but . . . " 90% of the time when he is talking to brother Robert but only 10% of the time when he is talking to Father; or, a third example: that Jane's answers to questions are occasions for telling a story along with the answer; etc. These general laws you'll be expressing about your talk at the dinner table are in fact a listing of the cataloguing practices of your community in the area of topic. They represent objective, scientific data about you and your community.

-2B] The analysis of argument logic: Examples from the DRA:

(-2Bi) Schema of Argument Structure. Give a breakdown, in schematic form, of the argument logic as it unfolds dramatically on the written record of the talk

(-2Bii) Description of Operational Talking Procedures. Correlate the argument Moves as per your breakdown with the appropriate lines on your written record: are the utterances spoken visibly related to the argu ment Moves? They ought to be. Those correspon dences, as they appear in your tabulation, are valu able as scientific data. They are objective descrip tions of the operational talking procedures of you and your community. They show the exact characteristics of the standardized argument practices of your ethnicity: they define you and your group within the context of others and their groups on your daily round.

(-2Biii) Schema of Behavioral Strategies in Talk. Derive abstract patterns for the arguments in your sample record: are there recurrent types ? e. g.,

Now see if there are correspondences between argu ment types, schematically expressed, and other features of the talk: e.g., who uses which type of argument when ? Why ? Or with what effects or con sequences upon others ? Etc. Your listings showing these correspondences are valuable pieces of scientific data. They are objective descriptions of behavioral strategies practiced in your community and define the range and dimensionality of ordinary behavior in social settings: the type of exchanges that take place, their characteristic rhythm, etc.

[-2C] The analysis of sequence:

(-2Ci) Tabulation of Adjacency Relations. Note and tabulate the sequential features of the talk as documented by the transcript; e.g., the adjacency-pairs (whenever one participant's move is visibly a reply to another move, then the two moves are adjacency-pairs (see CHART R/5).

(-2Cii) Schema for Move Embeddings. Tabulate conditional correspondences between members of adjacency-pairs as "probable" vs. "necessary"; e.g., question-answer adjacency-pair is probable, not necessary under some conditions, but necessary under others; are there different practices you can note in the hierarchical sequence of adjacency-pairs ? Note the sequence from the examples.

These are examples of exchange sequences. They document and map out the nature and character of the transactional exchanges in your group; they are objective indices of the behavioral or transactional engineering techniques practiced by members of your group. To identify and to know these is to know yourself in your natural social context. They are like photographs you show and stories you tell: these inform the listener of your background, of you, and opens or closes the doors of interaction, the mutual involvements that allow two participants in talk to focus and refocus on a constantly changing topic, a constantly flowing argument sequence. For further examples, see CHARTS R/4, R/11, R/25, R/28.

[-2D] The analysis of relationship:

(-2Di) Tabulation of Role Types. Tabulate the role types evidenced in your transcript record.

(-2Dii) Tabulation of Pair Types. Tabulate pair types evidenced in your transcript.

(-2Diii) Case History. Select a particular exchange or a case history; chart its development: who initiates it? How? What does it imply about their intentions ? How is it answered? What happens next? Is that an expected outcome? Why? Etc.

(-2Div) Relationship Dynamics. Discuss the evidence you've presented on relationship; contextualize it, place it in relation to the rest of your day, your life, your peers, your future.

[-2E] The analysis of setting:

(-2Ei) Tabulation of Implicit Meaning. Tabulate correspond ences between physical setting conditions and utterances (e. g., eating, passing things around, etc. ); what do you note about them? Are they regular? Predictable? Familiar ?

(-2Eii) Tabulation of Derivative Relations. Tabulate cor respondences between historical position in episode and utterances (e. g., what's being said and talked about is different at the beginning of dinner than at the en~; further such correspondences may exist between place or time in conversation and the content of the interactions between the participants; e. g., the role type of a participant may change with time or, even, oscillate depending on energy level, or whatever. Relational ties across talking turns are viewed as derivative facts about an annotated transcript. Index.

(-2Eiii) Tabulation of the Rhythm of Exchange. Tabulate cor respondences between features of the ambient context and the rhythm of exchange; e g., John act~ interested by asking further questions and making additional comments on the point brought up by the other person, but he does this only when he talks about his favorite subject of surfing; at other times, he acts unsociable or disinterested, answering by grunts, not volunteer ing any ideas.

(-2Eiv) Transactional Engineering through Talk. Discuss your findings by relating them to the context of your daily round; how is your talk affected by the physical, his torical, and ambient context of the setting? What have you noticed about the talk of your parents ? Teachers ? Favorite characters ?

(-2Ev) Discourse Analysis. How is discourse in oral talk different from discourse in writing? See CHARTS R/9, R/11, R/12, R/13, R/15, for sample analyses of discourse.

Go to Part Two

Dr. James' Homepage