APPLIED PSYCHOLINGUISTICS
IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY:
AN ETHNOMETHODOLIGICAL APPROACH

Dr. Leon James
Department of Psychology
and
Dr. Diane Nahl
School of Library and Information Studies
University of Hawaii
1995 (originally written in 1977)

Contents:

Project "DRA"
Contents of the DRA and DRA Index
Uses of the DRA
Procedures for Contribution and Use
Theoretical and Methodological Significance
Preliminary Findings
Oral and Written Literacy
The Meaning of Conversational Environment
Aspects to the Theory of Talk
Notational Definitions for Prepared Transcript Data
The Syntax of Presentations: PMNS
Individual Differences and Cognitive Processes.

Project "DRA"

The Daily Round Archives or "DRA" are located in the Department of Psychology on the Manoa Campus of the University of Hawaii, Gartley 213. The materials in these Archives are mostly the contributions of the students of psychology 222, and consist of systematic data they collected on their own daily rounds.
In this first report of our educational experiment it is appropriate to state briefly the philosophy and orientation that motivates this intellectual undertaking. Our experience in teaching undergraduate Social Psychology to large class audiences (i.e., 200+), has convinced us of the enhancing value of involvement in the course topics as an important strategic tool available to the instructor. Involvement can be objectively defined in terms of participatory activity or its density. For instance, assignments, take home exams, and class reports are three commonly used methods for creating involvement through participatory activity.

During the past three semesters of our joint teaching and program developing efforts for Psychology 222, we have been developing, and continue to do so, a series of assignments which involve class members in the participatory activities of collecting materials for an archives that houses data on people's actions, noticings, and the thoughts in the course of their day-to-day existence. This growing collection is what we are calling the Daily Round Archives.

Contents of the DRA.

At this time of development, we cannot state explicitly the overall selection or restriction to be imposed on the content of the materials. Therefore, it would be best to describe the materials that are currently in the collection.

(a) daily logs kept on a hourly basis using a standard sheet format that specifies time of day, location of activity, and what it is (see Chapter 9, Section

[9.3.IV]);

(b) microdescriptions of a paragraph length on various selected topics and using the present indicative tense for reporting (e.g., sensory self-observations on aches, stretching, blushing, retinal, appetite, energy level, and smells; interior

dialog concerning the comments to the Self, value expressions, preparing

schedules, making plans, emotionalizing, rehearsal, memorizing,

unmentionables, feeling arguments, figuring out a conflict, making resolutions, fantasy episodes, meditations, and some others (see Chapter 9, Section

[9.3.III-V]);

(c) inventories of personal belongings and schedules (e.g., records, shopping lists, address book contents, personal effects and drawers, contents of closets, car

glove compartments, and some others (see Chapter 9, Section [9.3.V]);

(d) reports on relationship activities that are habitual (e.g., noticings about people, one's territoriality, and various transactional events such as gossiping, having

an argument, making arrangements, and doing something together, and

others (see Chapter 9);

(e) transcripts of segments of a dinner conversation or some other occasion of talk

which the student records, and some annotations he makes concerning the

events that occurs (see Chapter 9, Section [9.3.II]);

(f) other materials still to be catalogued and of heterogeneous nature (1xe

The data are in the form of typed pages. Materials contributed by the same person are kept together in one folder so as to permit easy accessibility for comparisons. For instance, data on categories (a) through (d) are available on over 200 individuals so that statistical treatments of correlation, regression, factor analysis, and analysis of variance are feasible on a very large number of single variables. As well, ethnographic contrasts are possible within the restrictions occurring in the format of the reported information. The following is a more detailed description of all materials thus far indexed.

The Daily Round Archives-DRA

(1.) The following Index describes the materials contained in the "DRA" which is a collection of social psychological data on this community's sociocultural resources-- the "daily round" of people living here.

(2.) The data covers many dimensions of socialized life: activities (as recorded through logs kept by people of their movements from getting-up time to going to sleep time); talk (as recorded on tape, transcribed, and annotated); interior dialogue (as reported in notes taken by people on their thinking processes in various situations); annotations (or comments, reactions, and interpretations of particular socially important "noticings" in the form of "microdescriptions" people offer and which reveal "community cataloguing practices, "i.e., beliefs, logic, and implicit theories (attribution of cause, ethnicity, stereotypes, reasoning, etc.); and others, as described in the Index.

(3.) The materials in the DRA are produced by undergraduate students who follow a special sequence in social Psychology with Leon A. James, Professor of Psychology, University of Hawaii, namely:

Psych 222 Section (2) Introduction to Social Psychology

9-12 Psych 397 Applied Psycholinguistics in Social Psychology

credits Psych 499 Individual Research in Applied Social Psychology

A student may keep his own work, as in any course, but most students choose to contribute to the DRA as they are interested in learning about naturalistic data gathering procedures, and see the value in objectifying the self (or, one's perceptions of data about the self). Student evaluations are uniformly high and their statements about the educational value of this approach detail the learning features that occur. (These materials may be examined upon request.)

(4.) The DRA collections are primarily educational; that is, they are essentially course work assignments produced and perused by the students enrolled in the above sequence as well as by graduate students following the Social-Personality Program leading to a Ph.D. in Applied Social Psychology, Psycholinguistics, and Ethnosemantics. The theoretical framework of this specialization is being described in a six-volume series called Community Cataloguing Practices, co-authored by L.A. James and D. Nahl. In this philosophy, educational experience is believed to be furthered by the excitement of "real research," as well as the opportunity to contribute to some on-going tradition that may have a very real value in the future: novels, T.V. serials, imaginings about a setting, or subjective assessments culled from memory and recorded as "answers" to "survey questions." Daily Round data thus rectify a major deficiency of social psychology today by providing objective data, recorded in the spot by cumulative records, and approximately annotated by the "Witness, "i.e., the person.

(5.) The analysis, indexing and classification of the DRA data is accomplished through a methodology called "ethnosemantics." The intent of this formalized theory is t achieve an empirically derived notation system for the description of a "social occasion." At the present, one can transcribe thoughts and utterances given the convenient and pragmatic notation system we know as writing. But no such notation exists for the transcription of social occasions. We have informal means such as narratives and microdescriptions, with which science and the community must somehow manage. In the meantime, its use remains chiefly educational.

(6.) Students and colleagues who are interested in collaborative teaching and research efforts based on the Daily Round approach may contact Prof. James (leave messages at 948-7614, Psychology Department Office, Gartley Hall). This project and approach tho methodology is deeply interdisciplinary with theoretical significance for clinical psychology, the psychology of individual variation, language teaching, literacy, psychohistory, ethnicity, sociolinguistics, ethnomethodology, communication theory, pedagogy, management science, environmental studies--in short, wherever there is a special and systematic interest in the ethnodynamics of social occasions.

DRA INDEX

TITLE: Transcript from TV or Movie

REFERENCE NUMBER: S76//(Q)

DESCRIPTION: Students recorded a TV program and transcribed a 10-minute section of

dialogue. The reports included an introduction, a description of the notation system used in transcribing, stage directions, an analysis (turntaking, transactional idioms, topical content, participant activities), and an

interpretation.

TITLE: Microdescription of Handshake Episode

REFERENCE NUMBER: F75//(R)

DESCRIPTION: Immediately after shaking hands with the person to them in class, students wrote a detailed description of the event.

TITLE: Paraphrase Outline of Erving Goffman's Frame Analysis

REFERENCE NUMBER: F75//(S)

DESCRIPTION: Working in groups of five each student paraphrased in outline form chapters of Frame Analysis and prepare revisions responsive to Dr. James' written comments.

TITLE: Objectifying Autobiographical Record

REFERENCE NUMBER: F75//(T)

DESCRIPTION: Students prepare an autobiographical analysis using the Social

Psychological concepts outlined in Erving Goffman's Frame Analysis. Students made revisions based on professor's comments.

TITLE: Glossary

REFERENCE NUMBER: S75//(U)

DESCRIPTION: Students compiled a glossary based on the lectures, including paragraphs

of definitions, examples, relationships of terms, and diagrams.

SEMESTER: Spring 1974

TITLE: IS (Instructional Statement) Pages

REFERENCE NUMBER: S74//V/W

DESCRIPTION: Students prepare 10 "IS" pages on Erving Goffman's "On face-work: An

Analysis of Ritual Elements," and Edward Sampson's Social Psychology.

IS pages refers to a method of obejctifying the perspective of a

writer.

SEMESTER: Fall 1976

TITLE: Interior Dialogues Accompanying a Talking Exchange

REFERENCE NUMBER: F76//E

DESCRIPTION: Students prepared from memory a brief transcript of a talking episode in

four columns: 1) transcript lines, 2) %wage directions, 3) interior dialogue of

the student, 4) interior dialogue of the other person.

TITLE: Outline of Textbook: Social Psychology of Contemporary Society

by Edward Sampson

REFERENCE NUMBER: F76//F

DESCRIPTION: Students prepare handwritten outline of the text using chapter titles, section

headings, and italicized terms.

TITLE: Transcript of a 10 Minute Segment of Conversation

REFERENCE NUMBER: F76//G

DESCRIPTION: Students record an hour-long conversation in which they participated, and

transcribed a 10-minute segment with annotations.

TITLE: Students' Transcript Analysis

REFERENCE NUMBER: F76//H

DESCRIPTION: Each student analyzed transcripts prepared by other students.

TITLE: Ocean School Report

REFERENCE NUMBER: F76//I

DESCRIPTION: Students were instructed to spend a half-hour daily in the ocean for two

weeks and to record their observations within the framework of the

Reacculturation Hexagram.

TITLE: Weekly Round of Activities

REFERENCE NUMBERS: F76//J

DESCRIPTION: Students prepare a 24-hour log of their daily conversations for a 7-day

period. Each entry specified the time of occurrence, duration, and

activity.

TITLE: Black Evaluation

REFERENCE NUMBER: F76//K

DESCRIPTION: At the end of the semester students prepared a list of assertions evaluating

the course.

SEMESTER: Spring 1976

TITLE: Impressions and Observations about the First Class and Corrections to Assignment

REFERENCE NUMBER: S76//L

DESCRIPTION: Students reported their impressions and observations of the first day of

class. Dr. James wrote comments on each paper, and students

prepared responsive "corrections."

TITLE: Disclosure Thinking Report

REFERENCE NUMBER: S76//M

DESCRIPTION: Students prepared a transcript with information arranged on four columns:

1) the transcript, 2) stage directions, 3) discourse thinking of the student,

4)discourse thinking of the other person.

TITLE: Comic Strip Interior Dialogue

REFERENCE NUMBER: S76//N

DESCRIPTION: Students prepared a transcript of a comic strip sequence with information

arranged in four columns: 1) the comic strip dialogue, 2) stage directions,

3) the imagined interior dialogue of one character, 4) the imagined

interior dialogue of the second character.

TITLE: a. Questions that Occurred to Oneself During the Class Period

b. Questions Asked Aloud During a Day

c. Discussion of Questions Asked Aloud During a Day

REFERENCE NUMBER: S76//O

DESCRIPTION: Students recorded the questions that occurred to them during the class

period, all the questions that they found themselves asking aloud during the

day, and added their comments.

TITLE: Transcript

REFERENCE NUMBER: S76//P

DESCRIPTION: Students recorded an hour-long conversation in which they participated

and transcribed a 10-minute segment. The reports included an introduction,

a description of the notation system used in transcribing, stage directions, an

analysis (turntaking, transactional idioms, topical content, participant

activities), and in interpretation.

SEMESTER: Spring 1977

TITLE: My Talk

REFERENCE NUMBER: S77//A

DESCRIPTION: Students prepared a transcript segment of a dinner table conversation in

which they were a participant, and annotated the transcript.

TITLE: My Daily Round

REFERENCE NUMBER: S77//B

DESCRIPTION: Students prepared a log of their activities during a 24-hour period, from

the time they got up in the morning till the following morning.

Each entry contained the following information: When? How long?

Where? Who? Occasion? Nature of activity?

TITLE: My Standardized Imaginings

REFERENCE NUMBER: S77//C

DESCRIPTION: This assignment is divided into the following five sections: 1) Interior

Dialogue, 2) Feeling Arguments, 3) Fantasy/Daydream Episodes, 4) The

Elevated Register, 5) Routine Concerns: Selected Inventories. Students prepared paragraph descriptions from events on their daily round.

(Cf. NO12 Instructions for Assignments, Psy 322, Spring 1977)

TITLE: My Community of Relationships

REFERENCE NUMBER: S77//D

DESCRIPTION: This assignment is comprised of the following four sections: 1) Noticing

Observations, 2) Descriptions of Transactions, 3) Reporting Joint

Activities, 4) Non-Joint Activities. Students prepare paragraph

descriptions of their activities on their daily round.

(Cf. NO12 Instructions for Assignments, Psy 322, Spring 1977)

SEMESTER: Fall 1977

TITLE: Research Report 1 - Recording Interior Dialogue

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//AA

DESCRIPTION: Students tape-recorded the thought that occurred to them in the course of a day and reported their observations about their recordings. A record

of their daily round accompanied their report. Types of thoughts recorded

were impressions, fantasies, judgements, decisions, conversations, etc.

TITLE: Research Report 2 - Diagram Your Knowledge

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//BB

DESCRIPTION: Students were instructed to diagram their knowledge--personal, social,

academic-- in several specific ways: by making lists, charts, diagrams,

geometric representations, analogies, tree diagrams, and conceptual progressions or series.

TITLE: Research Report 3 - Why Can't They Do It Another Way?

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//CC

DESCRIPTION: Students interviewed cohabitant, car-mates, and 'phone pals' for instances where people said to themselves "Why can't they do it another way?" and the

actions taken. They included descriptions of incidents and occasions, and of

the rationale for action taken. The analysis took the form of charts

which were discussed in the report.

TITLE: Research Report 4 - What Should Social Psychology Be?

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//DD

DESCRIPTION: Students answered the question by 1) scanning currents texts and professional journals in social psychology, 2) interviewing members of the

community, 3) reviewing their lecture notes and course work. The discussion

included tables and charts.

TITLE: Inventory Questionnaire

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//EE

DESCRIPTION: Students completed a personal opinion inventory questionnaire (prepared for

a pending Ph.D. dissertation) designed to measure the "positivity or negativity" with which a person views the world. The students commented on their reactions after completing the survey.

TITLE: Daily Feedback Sheets ("DFS")

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//FF

DESCRIPTION: After every class students completed a form reporting (1)% ratings for

a) Preparation, b) Comprehension, c) Satisfaction, and d) Intristic

Interest; and 2) their answers to questions asked by Dr. James during

the lectures; and (3) their comments and messages to the professor.

TITLE: Messages on Research Reports

REFERENCE NUMBERS: F77//GG

DESCRIPTION: Students read each others' research reports and wrote reactions and messages to the authors.

TITLE: Lecture Outlines

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//HH

DESCRIPTION: Students listened to tape recordings of class lectures, and outlined the

lectures.

TITLE: Extra Projects

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//II

DESCRIPTION: Miscellaneous projects planned jointly by professor and student.

SEMESTER: Fall 1977

TITLE: Research Report 1 - Daily Round Sociomap

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//JJ

DESCRIPTION: Students in Psychology 397 prepared a Daily Round Log and drew a map representing their comings and goings for the day.

TITLE: Research Report 2 and 3

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//KK

DESCRIPTION: Students in Psychology 397 surveyed several of their courses by filling out Daily Feedback Sheets (DFS) during five consecutive lectures. Data

include overall personal ratings (preparation, comprehension, satisfaction,

intrisic interest) and various comments on the lecture. Students analyzed and

discussed the data.

TITLE: Inventory Questionnaire (397)

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//LL

DESCRIPTION: (see ref. #F77//LL)

TITLE: Daily Feedback Sheets (DFS) (397)

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//MM

DESCRIPTION: (see ref. #F77//FF)

TITLE: Messages in Research Reports

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//NN

DESCRIPTION: (see ref. #F77//GG)

TITLE: Lecture Outlines

REFERENCE NUMBER: F77//OO

DESCRIPTION: (see ref. #F77//HH)

TITLE: Extra Projects

REFERENCE NUMBERS: F77//PP

DESCRIPTION: (see ref. #F77//II)

Uses of the DRA

We envisage two principal uses for these archives. One is educational and the other is research. The educational benefits fall in two categories: the collection of data, per se, and the analytic treatment thereof. At the present time these are to be considered experimental working hypotheses which we are attempting to document as we go along. We have plenty

of opportunity to hear favorable reactions (and in a minority of cases, unfavorable) but we feel that evaluative reactions or ratings represent but a small amount of the total variance in a student's actual contact in a course, and therefore, there is need for better and more behavioral measures than the averaging of subjective ratings of students. (See Chapter 2.)

The collection of data involving such materials is a standard feature of Psychology 222, and the majority of students contribute their data to the Archives. In either case, the collection per se is emphasized as important for the objective study of the Self in one's natural daily community environment. The requirements of following a standard and complex instructional assignment is a context for practicing and learning a writing register that is indispensable in many places in the community (e.g., science, management, communications, education, community action, and so on wherever educated literacy is a component skill to the person's activities.

As well, the content of the reports constitutes explicit facts about the person which are not usually exposed to one's deliberate view. Students have

reported that they were surprised at many of the facts that emerged. Also, looking at the content of data from classmates is often the first opportunity students have to see contrasts and similarities concerning ordinary day to day business. Even if anonymous, the data are illuminating in that they serve as a reference

point not unlike survey reports do. The student's awareness and understanding should therefore be enhanced, which is again a conclusion that needs documentation.

Finally, students are taught methods of systematic tabulation and data slicing, which are at the heart of learning, practicing, and gaining an understanding of the scientific research method of investigation. Students who wish to do more extensive analytic and experimental studies involving the Archives materials can do so by taking the follow up courses we are (e.g., Psych 397, 499, 661).

(See the Student Reports currently available online in the DRA Archives here.)

In connection with the second use of the Archives, namely research, the possibilities have not been fully worked out though it is obvious that such collections are of interest to several sectors of academic domains (viz., social psychology, individual differences, cross-cultural comparisons, psycholinguistics, ethnosemantics, ethnography, sociolinguistics, community psychology, clinical psychology, home economics, architecture, social engineering, anthropology, public administration, mental health, English as a Second Language, etc. --- in short, wherever information on the daily round as natural human habitat is needed).

Procedures for Contributions and Use

Besides the students of Psychology 222, other students we work with at the undergraduate and graduate level also make contributions from time to time inasmuch as we advise them of the value of performing the task of collection and analysis. As well, anyone may contribute whether or not they will be further involved with the project. All contributions must meet the format specifications which we provide in written instructions. (see Chapters 9 and 11.) These instructions specify the information to be collected and the exact details to be recorded. As well, the instructions discuss the issue of protection of privacy of the contributor and the people that may be mentioned in the reports, particularly the necessity of disguising identity information. All Archives data are anonymous and there is no way of recovering individual identities since this information is destroyed once the material is made an official part of the Archives.

Qualified researchers, investigator, and students, who are interested in examining the Archives materials may do so by permission. Please contact us at the Psychology Office, leaving your name, telephone number, and message for our return call.

Theoretical and Methodological Significance.

Though we have different disciplinary background and training, our professional careers have overlapped and resulted in what we judge to be a very useful collaboration. Dr. Barbara Gordon's doctoral dissertation at Columbia University (1962) had as its main objective, the discovery of hypothetically postulated correlations between cognitive processes and linguistic features; these she called "linguistic-cognitive correlates; they occupied the focus of research and attention of many educators in the 1960's involved in new and large scale federal programs for the so called "disadvantaged minorities" (see, e.g., Aarons, Gordon, and Stewart, 1969, which reviews this literature in depth).

The search for linguistic-cognitive correlates has mushroomed into such fields as educational linguistics, applied psycholinguistics, ethnolinguistics, and sociolinguistics, though it should be said that these fields have had more than one founding theme and, certainly, have evolved in the 1970's to include such well known current issues as bilingual education, language teaching, community linguistics, language planning, problems of dialect and Standard English as a Dialect, and possibly others.

These applied features of a specialized interest in language behavior have been variously discussed in the theoretical literature under such specific topics as discourse analysis, kinesics, ethnomethodology, cognitive processes, test and measurement, theory of programming, semantics, rhetoric, composition, artificial intelligence, and possibly others (see Clarke and Clark, 1977; Sudnow, 1972; Carr, 1972; Rosen and Rosen, 1973; Gumperz, 1972; Pawley, 1977; Carroll and Freedle, 1972; and many others). These theoretical interests share the common methodology which also unites them; this methodology consists of the attempt to reconstruct a natural sequence of behavior. Discourse analysis operates on natural social products, namely recorded streams of speech occurring in some social setting at some definite time and place. Kinesics reconstructs the formal representation of actual gestures performed in naturally occurring conversations. Discrete point testing of linguistic-cognitive correlates starts with the theoretically significant parameters of actual behavior in the form of skills whose parameters operationally define competence. In simpler form, we can say that tests are basically inventories of behavioral habits we may call "community practices."

This is particularly visible in the case of scholastic achievement tests where the achiever must conform to a fairly narrow (one might say, 'nationalistic' here) definition of knowledge and educational process skills.

Dr. Leon Jakobovits' (now Leon James) doctoral dissertation at McGill University (also in 1962) was an experimental exploration of experimental semantics, and therefore certainly theoretical enough and protected from pragmatic accountabilities. More particularly, his search for linguistic-cognitive correlates led him to take cognitive reactions literally and looked at the issue from the other end of the barrel; namely, do known physiological processes cause visible effects in language related behaviors? The answer was always positive, and after some period, the search was abandoned.

It dawned on me that we ought to switch our focus to naturally occurring units of language behavior. Our change of focus away from experimentally motivated units of analysis was considerably quickened upon our encounter with the already on-going work in ethnomethodology, especially, in our case, Harvey Sacks (1966) and Harold Garfinkel (1967). We should also include here as significant influences on us, the writings of Erving Goffman (1974). These three sociologists impressed upon us a methodological concern with the microdescription and cataloguing of language behavior occurring in natural social setting. It is to Goffman that we owe the most apt phrase of "the daily round" to refer to the objective delimitation of an individual's visible presence in the community. (See the discussion in Chapter 8.1 and 8.2)

Our own research focus in the past two years and since our previous publication (James and Nahl, 1975-77) has concentrated on operationalizing

the meaning of the daily round; that is, developing theoretical rationales for sampling naturally occurring units within specified situational contexts. In other words, we worked on methods for specifying (a) what natural units are, and (b) how to locate them within the stream of the daily round. Thus, categories (a) through (e) in the current version of the Daily Round Archives (see above, Section [8. 5.1]), constitute our solutions to the sampling problem, as far as it goes in the current version (see Jakobovits and Nahl, 1975-77).

Though we cannot detail the full account here--and we invite the interested student to consult our typed notes that run to over a thousand pages (see James and Nahl, 1975-77)--we ought nevertheless to present the main results of our undertaking. This we do in the next section with is both lengthy and technical, though hopefully, not obscure (available upon request). We invite the interested student and colleague to consult with us on further issues or elaborations relating to our ideas, and we welcome such contacts.

Preliminary Findings.

We have been fortunate enough to live and work on the Islands of Hawaii which besides being physically splendiferous are socioculturally variagated. We wonder whether Charles Darwin could have formulated his ideas on variability and natural selection had he not had the good fortune of exposure to the natural laboratories of nature in the form of isolated islands in the Atlantic and vast Pacific. Here, on the island of Oahu, we have a natural sociocultural laboratory, and our preliminary findings could not perhaps have occurred somewhere else.

Oral and Written Literacy.

There is considerable interest today in the issue of non-standard forms of English, in both scientific-educational and community circles. In education and in employment there exists a definite value which assigns various forms of stigma to variability in speech pattern. Thus, intelligence tests and scholastic achievement tests are almost always based on a narrow cultural reference point. For this reason. public school testing for intelligence has been sharply attacked by Blacks and other minority groups as being unfairly culture-specific, i.e., biased in favor of the national prototype of English as visible in the educated daily press and in federal operations. (For a perspective on this issue in Hawaii, see for example, Feldman, et al., 1977. )

Similarly, there exists a natural system of valuation of social signs in any community. Hence it is observable at once when entering a community that the people's practices on the daily round require them to use several distinct speech formats or registers. For instance, the language and speech attitudes we express may vary considerably on the daily round: to members of the family at home, to strangers in public places, to co-workers, in a letter to a company, in one's personal note keeping habits, in reading paperbacks, the newspaper and sections thereof, in our comments to the Self, and many others. That such differences in language pattern exist is now a well accepted axiom in the language disciplines, but there are few definite ideas as to how one might specify and catalogue the significant units. This problem of identifying the significant units of sociocultural environment is the principal motive behind the project on the Daily Round Archives.

What constitutes variability in personal behavior?

What sociocultural forces are responsible in its shaping?

We present samples from the data in categories (b), (d), and (e) by way of illustrating the format of the entries as well as to make a point about the function of variability in speech behavior. (Category TITLES refer to the schema described in Chapter 9.)

INDIVIDUAL A

Sample [5.C.i] A#5, My Community of Relationships C. Reporting Joint Activities (i) Doing Something With (dates, appointments, etc.)

"Last night, I tried to get the old gang together for some fun. I picked them up; we fit in one big car. Then we went riding into town and back. By the time we got back everyone was wasted from smoking dope. It was fun but not the same. Everyone has gone a different direction--different states of mind. "

Sample [5.A.i.c] A#5, My Community of Relationships, A. Noticing Observations,(i) Visual Sightings, (c) Weather, etc.

"The weather is supposed to be getting drier. It seems the axis of the world is shifting, making Hawaii warmer and drier and other parts of the world colder and wetter. "

Sample [4.A.v] A#4, My Standardized Imaginings, A. Interior Dialogue, (v) Emotionalizing Episodes

"One day, while in high school, I arrived home and found my dog lying on the ground in front of his doghouse. He was dead. This was the first time I really touched death. It was a cold, lost, and lonely feeling. Cold because there was no life in my dog. He was dead. Lost, because I had lost him forever. Lonely, because a gap had formed in my heart. I began to remember the old days with my dog. Now he was gone, and I was left cold, lost, and lonely."

Sample [3. B.v] A#3, My Daily Round Setting, B. Microdescriptions of Sensory Observations, (v) Appetite and Cooking

"I decided to bake some chicken for dinner. It took about two hours. The satisfaction of creating this meal gave me pride in what I was doing and it made me want to do a good job. It also gave me an appetite to finish the terrific meal I created. "

These four samples contributed by one individual may be compared with the entries contributed by a second individual, picking from the same categories as above.

INDIVIDUAL B

Sample [5.C.i]

"I have just come from an appointment with my advisor. I just wanted to ask some routine questions about graduation. She also told me what to do in the event I decide to come back to graduate school. We discuss school only for a few minutes and she asks me what my plans are for the summer. I tell her that I'm going to Europe and she reacts favorably. She has already been there and tells me what to see and what to avoid.

Sample [5.A.i.c]

"As I am writing this, it is pouring rain outside. It is 10:30 p. m., and it has been raining for eight minutes steadily. I am lying in bed smiling because I like the rain when I can relax and enjoy it. "

Sample [4.A.v]

"My mother is telling me that she has asked my sister to move out of the house. I am slightly perturbed but I feel nothing else. My mother is ashen-faced and her voice is quivering slightly. She says to me: "I am so disgusted and upset that I just don't care anymore !' I tell her that I don't want to hear about it and this upsets her more. The emotions are so intense in the room that I get up and leave. I go up to my own room and turn on the radio. Strangely, the blaring music soothes me and I feel released again."

Sample [3.B.v]

"I am at home writing a paper for one of my classes. I am constantly being disturbed by the incessant rumblings in my stomach. I have not yet eaten dinner and I am becoming increasingly aware of a gnawing in my stomach that makes it extremely difficult to concentrate on the work at hand. I think about the steak the rest of my family ate for dinner and can feel myself anticipating eating. My mouth waters a little and I go downstairs to get something to eat and quell my hunger pains. I heat up the steak and steam some fresh broccoli to go with it. I pour myself a glass of sugar-free 7-Up and begin eating."

These two samples appear on the surface to be standard products of the level of writing of the students of Psychology 222, though this needs of course to be documented. As can be judged, the literacy attained appears standard and adequate, and not unlike what we have experienced with students at the University of Illinois and Florida. At this point we present sample segments from the transcript prepared by the above two individuals. Individual A's transcript runs to 102 talking turns and involves a section of an episode in which the person meets with friends in a game room. Individual B's transcript runs to 104 talking turns and involves a section of a recorded dinner conversation in a restaurant.

INDIVIDUAL A

1. AY: Come inside

2. RT: Hey.

3. AY: Hey long time no see.

4 RT: (background) Cough, cough

5. AY: Sit down

6. EK: Ay, da kind.

7. RT: Where you was?

8. LT: Where they going?

9. EK: I don't know, they just told me, they told me for come inside here and see whats happening and then go back out there, they just, they just, they just came to pick us up too hea.

10. RT: Oh you came with somebody?

11. EK: Yeah, the van hea.

12. AY: One Van!!! (laughing)

13. RT: Humm.

14. LT: Brand new "77" van

15. AY: We playing cards.

16. EK: (laughing) No lie.

17. RT: You bought one van?

18. EK: No, my friend, you know Denis, Denis Ho.

19. LT: Ay, Bobo pay me.

20. EK: Dis one?

etc.

INDIVIDUAL B

1. T: Like when we were at that Waikiki Hotel?

2. L: What Waikiki Ho...

3. T: Third Floor or... (interrupting)

4. L: I've never been to the Third Floor. (interrupting)

5. T: The Point After... not the Third Floor but the restaurant on the bottom Summit House, Summery...

6. L: Oh, Summery?

7. T: Summery. God, those people!

8. L: Tourist, tourists... tourists are all like that.

9. T: We should have brought Dennis. (interrupting)

10. L: Here? He works! (3.5 sec. pause) No, I couldn't transcribe anything like that!

11. T: So salad comes with the meal? We go to the salad bar.

12. L: Or you can just go to the salad bar for four-fifty.

13. T: Do they have meats up there?

14. L: Yeah, cold cuts.. very nice.

15. T: Forget it. (interrupting)

16. L: Turkey, ham...

17. T: I want real meat.

18. L: You're so carnivorous.

(space of 13 seconds)

19. T: That guy can't go out a lot, he's near poverty he told me.

20. L: Who? Paul? (pause) That's why he calls you up so late, so he has an excuse not to stay out all evening. (laugh)

It is evident from the above samples that the oral literacy patterns are contrastive between individuals A and B, yet their written pattern are quite similar. Thus,

there is an independence between oral and written patterns of literacy --a finding which needs to be documented but which we already know is true for the samples we've inspected. (For support on this, see the data in Feldman, 1977. )

This finding may startle those whose experience with non-standard forms of oral literacy has been in a context where they are attributed to the individual's "cognitive processes." Dr. Gordon's initial educational efforts in teaching linguistic-cognitive correlates to grade schoolers of minority groups (Cubans, Blacks) had been motivated by the standard view of a "deficiency" by reference to

the arbitrary but conventionalized forms of educated standard English. It is clear from the finding above of an independence between these two systems of language behavior that rather than being a function of cognitive skill or competence, literacy both oral and written, are accountable in terms of the sociocultural practices of the community. Thus, our students use whatever pattern they deem appropriate of presentation within the context of the assignment, showing that language behavior is a function of the sociocultural environment rather than of internal processes of modes of thinking, etc. (For a controversial contrastive view, see Bernstein, 1974, and Rosen & Rosen, 1976.)

The Meaning of Conversational Environment.

Social psychologists tend to define the social environment by reference to demographic institutional, and personality factors. For instance, conformity in conduct is attributed to the institutions of child rearing, socialization, and mass media influences. Similarly, intergroup conflict is viewed as behavioral consequences attributable to socioeconomic, ethnic, and other traits that mark the person's habits and appearance. When treating the issue of language behavior, social psychologists similarly define variation as socioliguistic, i.e., as attributable to ethnic, socioeconomic, and contextual features pertaining to the conversation (e.g., role relationship between participants, place of the conversation, background of participants, etc.) (See Gumperz, 1976; Hymes, 1974; Among others.)

Note that the above methodological strategy requires the identification of units of language behavior that are functionally related to independently defined social factors: e.g., accent is related to region, grammar is related to socioeconomic class or education, complexity of structures and arguments are related to intelligence or special training, and so on. Thus, the units to be identified are drawn from a special pool, i.e., those language behavior units that are functionally related to the social parameters already identified and researched extensively in connection with social behavior generally.

While the above traditional methodology serves the useful purpose of integrating language behavior into the framework that serves for behavior in general, one disadvantage has been that it excludes the possibility of characterizing a particular community independently of social parameters found significant in another community. The latter is however the very purpose which we wish to achieve, namely, the cataloging of units of behavior such that the units correspond functionally to those in actual use in the community. Another way of saying this is that there are reasons for wanting to identify cataloguing practices of a community, i.e., practices or habits relating exclusively to what's being noticed in any particular setting or situation. In doing this, the social psychologist is attempting to identify not the laws of behavior in terms of psychological concepts of theory and dynamics, but rather the definitions participants have for events in an episode, vis., what they see, what they react to, what they remember or note for later telling, and so on. For this kind of investigation, the internal evidence itself is made use of without requiring personal background information as to the ethnicity, etc. of the participants. (For a contrastive view see Jakobovits, 1966; Osgood, May and Miron, 1975.)

We are raising an important methodological issue which requires full and adequate treatment. This cannot be done here, but we want to illustrate some of the issues involved with a concrete example: the problem of defining the notion of "conversational environment" objectively. Intuitively, it is clear that saying something in the course of a conversation is an adequate device for introducing a change in the sociocultural environment of the participants, i.e., saying something can arouse reactions on the part of hearers in the same way that altering the physical or physiological environment can produce reactions. In fact, saying thing in the course of verbal exchanges constitutes the most prominent method use in human communities for affecting the sociocultural environment, especially when we include saying things to one's Self.

Despite this prominence of verbal exchanges in the community the objective definition of what constitutes a functional conversational spot is difficult to obtain in the most ordinary of situations. As Goffman has argued, few verbal exchanges can be explained, even in crude terms, using such devices as Question/Answer, Request/Legitimization, Attack/Defense, Mover/Reply Move, and the like, for it is quickly discovered that most of talk in natural situations is totally spontaneous and reactive. This means that talk, like other behavior, is responsive to contingencies in the environment rather than to deliberate or conscious strategies of moving and responding to moves, and therefore, the functional units are to be discovered independently of conscious strategies. We intend to show that the functional units of talk in conversation are occasioned by parameters that are independent of conscious awareness, hence inaccessible by methods that average subjective reports as in survey research or experimental data dependent on instructions. The latter issue is of very importance in

H6

contemporary social psychology which relies heavily on an experimental strategy that attempts to control and set the "real" environment of subjects through manipulating conscious features by means of verbal or written instructions. (See the discussion in Chapter *, Section [8.2].)

The objective definition of conversational environment can be approached through the delimitation of segments of conversation which are independently defined from such subjective features as topic or content of talk. We shall illustrate this possibility using the transcript already discussed above and attributed to individual A.

Note that the episode involves four persons identified in terms of their appearance as follows:

Figure 1:

The FORM of a Transcript.

1. AY

2. RT

3. EK

4. LT

It should be remarked that the transformation of a conversational episode into successive linked chains of talking turns identified by an ordinal number is a natural and obvious solution though it does not constitute a logical necessity, and other possibilities would seem to us to exist. Harvey Sacks (1966), in his unpublished lectures at UCLA, Davis (and mimeographed verbatim) has treated this issue extensively and ably. It is clear form the collections in the Daily Round Archives that our students regard the transcripting task in terms of talking turns as normal, thus suggesting that it is also a community cataloguing practice. (See Section [8.5.5.3] below for further treatment of this issue.)

The second step in transformation consists of listing the ordinal number associated with each talking turn for every participant, thus:

Figure 2a:

The STRUCTURE of a Transcript

1. AY 2. RT 3. EK 4. LT

1 2 6 8

3 4 9 14

5 7 11 19

12 10 16 21

15 13 18 23

35 17 20 24

39 29 22 27

49 30 25 31

51 33 26 32

52 34 28 37

54 36 41 38

55 42 43 40

57 45 46 44

59 48 50 47

61 76 58 53

64 79 63 60

67 89 65 62

69 95 73 66

71 81 68

75 83 70

77 86 72

82 90 74

85 92 78

87 94 80

91 97 84

93 99 88

96 101

98

100

102 Tabulating the talking turns in the above manner (Figure 2a) more nearly brings out the consequences of the first transformation, i.e., of treating a conversation as a sequence of interactive links. For example, it shows that the transformation is topological, viz., the four-dimensional phenomenon known as conversational episode (place-time specifications) receives a topographic projection whose mathematical or geometric properties can be exploited for describing less visible features of verbal interactional activities. For example, counting the number of interventions or measuring the length of the line five a characterization of each participant's behavior: this too is a major theoretical step that needs careful treatment. In other words, merely counting the number of interventions does not constitute a characterization; instead, it constitutes a measure of participation for this particular observed event. We are proposing, however, to upgrade the significance of the count into a measure of role type, or some such term denoting characteristic behavior. (See Chapter 9, Section [9.3.II.2.1 - 2D].)

We must stress the fact that we are not saying that a single conversational episode is sufficient to characterize the habitual behavior of an individual. In fact, we do not believe that it is possible at this stage to say how many observations would be needed to characterize the habitual talking behavior of an individual. This issue remains to receive a solution. Therefore, it is best to reserve the notion of characterization of individuals until other problems have been solved first. In particular, the issue of characterizing role behavior is much easier since we are then dealing with the problem of how to catalogue community practices in conversations, -- a much simpler task for the present.

In terms of the notion of role type, then, we can say that number of interventions, and their distribution, are indices of a person's habitual conduct in social situations, while at the same time we are to stress that "social situations" must not for our purposes be defined in terms of an arbitrary set of variables chosen by an investigator, whatever the variables may be. Instead, we'd like the leeway, for the present, not to have to define it for the sake of a more valid and appropriate attempt later, when further issues have been examined.

To illustrate these matters more concretely, we can present some analyses of the distribution shown above (Figure 2a) and discuss the important theoretical and methodological issues involved in our solutions:

(a) density can be take to refer to the number of interventions per unit time or place. Thus, for the episode as a whole, AY has the densest role type with 30 out of the total share of 102. The mathematical allocation of equal likelihood would lead to 25 as the average density. In these terms, RT is the least dense with 18; LT and EK register a similar role type with 27 and 26, respectively.

(b) distributional patterns can be taken to represent the group's interactional contingencies with each other. For instance, looking at AY's scores, one can note a break between 39 and 49. This is a most interesting transition point given the fact that it is the only one when logically several may be possible. Looking at the profiles in Figure 2a, we can summarize the breaks as follows:

Figure 2b:

The STRUCTURE of a Transcript

1. AY 1 through 15 ... [16-34] ... 35 through 39 ... [40-48] ... 49 through 102

2. RT 2 through 17 ... [18-28] ... 29 through 48 ... [49-75] ... 76 through 79 ...

[80-88] ... 89 through 95

3. EK 6 through 28 ... [29-40] ... 41 through 99

4. LT 8 through 88

[89-100] ... 101

The above representation constitutes the third step in the theoretical transformation of the phenomenon of conversation. Here, too, the issues involved are to be more fully elaborated. Note the consequences of this third transformation. Reading the tabulation , we can say that AY, for instance, exhibits five distinct distributional environments: three of these are characterizable as conditional of talking participation, namely talking turns 1 through 15, 35 through 39 and 49 through 102. The tow remaining zones represent conditions of non-talking participation, namely talking turns [16-34] and [40-48]. Note that, in these terms, RT and LT contrast interestingly, in that RT's role type involves smaller zones of participation as talker than LT's. The problem remains to be worked out as to the mathematics that is best suitable for typifying distributional patterns of this order of abstraction.

Note that it would seem to be difficult for an individual to deliberately affect these distributions in the course of the conversation; it would be much easier to control density of intervention by either talking a lot through frequent turn taking or not taking any turns at all. Of course, such deliberate efforts would upset the natural dynamics of the interaction and would thus be noticed and dealt with by the others. However, the control of distribution requires skilled and appropriately timed interventions, much more likely to occur with role type enactment, i.e., automatically, spontaneously, and unreflectively. As well, hearers cannot ordinarily judge accurately objective factors that undergo mathematical transformation (e.g., distributional parameters).

To illustrate the use of data distribution, we will present two different methods, each suitable for different investigative purposes.

(a) The method of group structures. This method involves the assumption that a conversation is a linear process marked off into distinct zones by reference to which the possible sub-grouping are actualized. For example, the conversation we are considering has four participants, which allows for a

number of possible zones:

[AY + RT + EK + LT]

is a formal expression that designates one possible zone, i.e., where all four individuals are talking participants at the same time. Thus, by looking at the

representation in Figure 2b, we can determine that talking turns 8 through 15 is the only zone in the transcript that satisfies this condition, a stretch of only eight talking turns out of the 102.

This is once again a most interesting finding, though of course it needs further documentation. It is interesting because it shows that apparent participation is different from functional participation. The importance of this may be seen when viewing the distribution that is established by taking "vertical slices" of the distribution data given above (in Figure 2b):

Figure 3:

Functional Zones in a Transcript

talking turns functional zones span size

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

2 through 7 [AY + RT ] 4

8 through 15 [AY + RT + EK + LT] 8

16 through 28 [ EK + LT] 11

29 through 34 [ RT + LT] 6

35 through 39 [AY + RT + LT] 5

41 through 48 [ RT + EK + LT] 8

50 through 75 [AY + EK + LT] 25

79 through 88 [AY + EK + LT] 10

89 through 95 [AY + RT + EK ] 7

96 through 99 [AY + EK ] 4

Reading this table reveals important features of the phenomenon of conversation. For example, it may be noted that the above distribution projects a process flow that defines ten conversational zones for the episode we are discussing. Each zone is defined in terms of a formal expression that identifies the role type of each individual in terms of talking participant vs. non-talking participants. Note, too, that this zonal delimitation is independent of topic or density intervention, hence it is both objective and ordinarily free from conscious control in spontaneous exchanges.

The distribution in Figure 3 can be taken as a matrix that objectively defines the conversation under study. This is an important theoretical development analogous to the "S" of linguistics, where it stands for the top or highest element in a derivational tree of a Sentence. Here, we are proposing a notation system whereby every Conversation is associated with a tree structure having as its highest ordered element "C," which is fully defined by the matrix type such as the one above.

There are several possible rules that can be followed in the generation of the matrix type for a conversation. For instance, the rule we've applied to generate the above matrix type can be stated as follows:

I. Delineate the longest possible zone in which a group of individuals maintain a joint status throughout the zone;

II. Try maximizing the size of the group.

Rule I is applied before Rule II. The first object generated by this notation is [AY + EK + LT] which is shown in the matrix above as the section 50 through 75, i.e., a zonal span of 25 talking turns. The second object is [ EK + LT], which is given as talking turns 16 through 28, i.e., eleven turns. In the same manner the other objects defining the matrix are derived.

H10

Further work remains, in particular, theoretical issues as to whether notations should maximize length rather than group size, and whether the requirement of "joint status throughout" can be relaxed at the ends.

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

Aspects to the Theory of Talk.

We use for this title a parallel form to Noam Chomsky's classic Standard 1964 Version of generative linguistics, Aspects to the Theory of Syntax (Chomsly, 1964). We hope to convey by this famous parallel our belief that we are treating here some of the most basic principles that need to be treated if the study of talk is to take off the ground so to speak and be able to claim a methodology and a data bank. We speak of course from the perspective of a social psychology, and within that, of a method that yields functional relationships between individual behavior and setting variables.

We have delineated in the previous Section [8. 5. 5. 2] a notational procedure for formally defining object "C, " called a conversation, using third order derived data independent of topic or meaning. We shall now present a theoretical rationale that would link formal objects like "C" and its components (like [AY + RT ]) to features of a social episode that are directly marked in the displays of the conversationalists. Directly marked displays are the visible products of the phenomenon of conversational episode. For instance, referring to some object or event is a conversational behavior that is visible on a transcript through identifying the words that were spoken at any particular time during the episode. We call these collectivities of words used to refer to something topic nominals. For instance, looking at the transcript segment presented in Section [8.5.5.1], one can list the topic nominals to be found in every talking turn; e. g.,

INDIVIDUAL A

1. [ Come inside], [.]

2. [Hey], [.]

3. [Hey], [long time no see]

4. [stage direction], [Cough, cough]

5. [Sit down], [.]

6. [Ay] [,], [da kind],[.]

7. [Where you was], [?]

8. [Where they going], [?]

9. [I don't know], [,], [they just told me], [,], [they told me for come inside here], [,], [and see what's happening], [,], [and then go back out there], [,], [they just], [,], [they just came to pick us up too hea], [.]

10. [Oh], [,] [you came with somebody], [?]

etc.

INDIVIDUAL B

1. [Like], [when we were at that Waikiki Hotel], [?]

2. [What Waikiki Ho], [...]

3. [Third Floor], [ or], [...], [ stage direction]

4. [I've never been to the Third Floor], [.], [stage direction]

5. [The Point After], [...], [not the Third Floor], [but the restaurant on the bottom], [.], [Summit House], [,], [Summery], [...]

Note that topic nominal covers a designation that includes word groupings and their boundary markers; the latter are ordinarily marked by orthographic symbols (e.g., the period, the comma, the question mark, the three dots, etc.). Thus, talking turn 7 for Individual A's transcript segment contains two visible topic nominals: one, the word collectivity recognized as [Where you was], and the other, the punctuation mark [?] . (See also the discussion on orthographs in Workbook.)

Here again, we are confronted with a very basic issue concerning the nature of a conversation: what are the visible units that constitute it? This problem has remained stubbornly resistant to objective analysis as a whole, though we wish to recognize the efforts of others which continue to be motivated by largely independent propositions or sub-theories. We believe that the reason for this difficulty has been the idee fixe or fixated idea that a transcript is an incomplete or impoverished record of the conversation.

We too, were quite naturally biased in favor of that reductionistic (if not disparaging) notion of a transcript, and along with others in this field, have looked to videotape recordings for saving some of the important visible features of the conversation that were not included in the audiotape, and hence, in the transcript. However, at some point it became apparent to us that we were dealing here with two different and separate technical issues.

One issue was indeed properly seen as "hardware" technique, namely the physical recording of visible and audible information that constitute the display modalities of conversational behavior. However, when faced with a videotape of a conversational exchange one does not, as an investigator, escape any of the software problems of transcription and analysis that one was faced with the audiotape. If anything, the investigator's task becomes more technically complex, requiring more complex notation systems for their analysis. Thus, what we came to realize was that the technical limitation imposed by the available notation system was equally, if not more crucial than the physical recording. While the latter was improving by an order of magnitude, the "software" notation difficulties imposed limiting factors on the power of analysis.

We shall try to show that the study of talk is not currently being retarded by technical hardware, but rather by the unavailability of a full blown notation system methodology. This situation, as we sense it, is analogous to the case of linguistics, which prior to the formalism of generative grammar, did not have a notation system for referring to linguistic phenomena; instead, there existed a notation system called "the tree structure," which was made of elements that were fixed in number, and hence, taxonomically available. There was no question of researching them since they were given by definition. In 1957, following the work of Harris and others, Noam Chomsky first proposed a notation system that contained non-taxonomic symbols called transformations. These new markers did for linguistics what the zero did for mathematics; at this point, linguistics became an experimentally researchable field. This research, as it rapidly and very successfully evolved during its first two decades, centers around issues that are called notational;

this means that the investigator proposes various specific representations of linguistic phenomena and then examines their empirical validity by finding corresponding facts in sentences, phrases, and relations between them. (For a useful review of that literature, consult Steinberg and Jakobovits, 1971.)

We feel that the study of talk also needs an empirical notation system that would allow theoretical objects and processes to be validated against visible facts. This much is no doubt agreed upon by all. But now, the alternative we propose to the current trend in the study of conversation as social behavior contains the notion that a transcript is not an incomplete record but rather a theory specifying a notation system.

This definition would thus relegate the purely technical issues of physical recording to another arena, perhaps the applied arena of "interpretive evidence" as practiced in legal and literary investigations of just what did happen? For such purposes, it is clear that technical improvements in the recording of data is a key factor. However, we must recognize that even such purely applied issues would benefit from a more general, less particularistic, methodology for investigating the basic phenomena of talk, as they manifest in their visible features. This issue is what we have designated as the notational issue in the study of talk.

The concept of topic nominal, as introduced above, illustrates some of the issues that are to be empirically investigated in the continued improvement of notational solutions to the problem of representing and identifying the facts of talk. In other words, the notational solutions in the form of Rules or Procedures for transforming data about talk constitute explanations of visible information. For example, the common practice of writing down spoken utterances makes use of a functional notation system that insures a demonstrable correspondence between what witnesses can hear auditorily and what they can read visually. This correspondence is a functional identity; the written version is not seen as a degraded form of the spoken, but rather a representative of it. This ambassadorial function is full ledged: thus, if we need to know the time, we can rely equally well on a person's writing it down for us as saying it out loud, perhaps even more!

Of course, if we had to know the tone of voice or style of delivery or momentary situational factors of an implied nature, we would be helped perhaps even in crucial ways by the availability of such additional information. Undoubtedly the nature of talk allows great leeway, i.e., works within very broad informational limits. We typically make something sensible, i.e., interpret, even if the available information is fragmentary. Furthermore, we do so equally well whether or not we know the size of the fragments or the number of missing parts. In other words, it is part of ordinary behavioral competence on the daily round to reintegrate and to reconstruct situations on the basis of data that are fragmentary and fragmentary to an unknown extent. Thus, a transcript or notational transcription of discourse is fragmentary rather than incomplete or degraded.

Thus, it became clear to us, that our search need not be hampered by fragmentary records of conversational behavior. This realization also told us of a basic feature of conversational phenomena; namely, that they ordinarily and naturally get transformed as they occur. In other words, conversation is a performative or presentational phenomenon (see Austin, 1962). This means that the facts to be recorded and represented (i.e., notational issues), lie in strictly derivative considerations rather than being interpretive. In other words, what counts in a conversation is not so much what physically happened as what happened to be noticed! In still other words. the noticeability of conversational events is the likely arena for finding the explanations for the observed behaviors rather than in the arena of physical recordings. In fact, it is theoretically possible to devise a purely notational system usable by a single investigator to record symbolically the interesting features of any transactional exchange--a theoretical position that justifies the existence of engineering. In day to day practice, such things as notes, instructions, and letters, can simulate such a notation system, though the simulation is quickly uncovered when a foreigner or non-regular is interposed as a medium; one discovers then that much more is implicit and understood through "background information" than can be stated (see Garfinkel's 1967 definitive discussion of this very basic issue).

Needed, then, is a notation system that is sufficiently sensitive to precisely those second-order facts that are not on the audio- or video-tape! We call these derivative facts and obtain them through a process of formal transformation of data. We shall now describe some of these methods and discuss their theoretical implications.

Notational Definitions for Prepared Transcript Data.

For theoretical considerations outlined elsewhere in some detail (Jakobovits and Nahl, 1975; 1976; 1977), we are led to propose the following universal or general features of talk, i.e., features that are applicable to talk in its several modalities, namely, conversation, discourse thinking or interior dialogue, annotation, standardized imaginings, microdescription, notation system, and others to be fully defined as research uncovers their existence. The following schematic figure indicates all the components of the system we propose:

A Hexagrammatic Notation System for the Study of Talk

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

I. Objective Pre-topical Trigram.

Formally Designated Label[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

TRANSFORMATION A

or

FORM

TRANSFORMATION B

or

STRUCTURE

TRANSFORMATION C

or

FUNCTION

Operational Definition of Parameters[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

I. D. of Talking Participants and Non-talking participants counted as talking turn interventions and arranged in serial order. (For example, see Figure 1, p. 24. )

Alignments or groupings of participants having a special shape designated "C" and fully represented by a matrix. (&e Figure 2a, 2b, pp. 25, 27.)

Zones identified through distributional features of talking turn interventions; zones must contain constant membership, i. e., the same I. D. of talking participants throughout the zone. (See Figure 3, p. 28.)

II. Objective Topical Trigram.

TRANSFORMATION D

or

MEDIUM

TRANSFORMATION E

or

FRAME

TRANSFORMATION F

or

DISPLAY PRESENTATION

Topic nominal constructions that are empirically identified and catalogued as noticeables; all entries drawn from preestablished practices in the community for referring to what is noticeable (see Community Cataloguing Practices, 1977) (see Figure 4, p . 38 ) .

Officially designated labels for specifying the location of activities or events on the daily round, e. g., see daily round logs in Archives [(a) and (c)]; labels are conventionalized in each community and used for referring, keeping track, noticing; (see Figure 5,p.41).

Quotation and annotations or stage directions correspondent to or representing a prepared transcript or graph thereof (not necessarily relevant to what happened in a single case);

Procedures for deriving the Pre-topical Trigram have already been discussed in [8.5.5.2]. It will be recalled that [1.AY] or [20. L] identify the place of a talking event and who the participant doing the talking is; they are instances of TRANSFORMATION TYPE A and define the FORMS of conversational phenomena, i.e., taking a turn at talk. In linguistics, FORM designates elementary particles of the compound ["S"l such as [NP] or "noun phrase" or [A] for "article" and so on. Included in the definition for FORM are microdescriptions of atomic elements or components; in linguistics such objects as phoneme, inflection, suprasegmental, morpheme, and so on. In the Notation System of ESNOSYS (see 1977), we designate microfeatures of talk using forms such as punctuation marks, topic nominals, transactional idioms, argument syntax, and others, in addition to talking turn location and participant I. D.

TRANSFORMATION TYPE B has been illustrated in Figure 2a on p. 25 and Figure 2b on p. 27. Every conversation has a STRUCTURE whose separate components are given by the groupings that

H11

actually occurred in the course of the talking turns from beginning to end of the transcript record. Thus far, only structures of three or more participants have been investigated. Additional refinements to our proposal is needed to include dyadic conversational structures. Of course, dyadic structures occur between talking participants since one or more may be non-talking participants. (E. g., [T + L + W] is a triadic structure designating all three members as talking participants, while [ L + W] is a component thereof designating L and W as talking participants and T as non-talking participant.)

For TRANSFORMATION TYPE C we have already presented procedures for marking off zones of varying span (see Figure 3, p. 28). Functional zones are delimited through talking turn locations, e.g.,

[AY + RT + EK ] 89 --> 95=7

designates a functional zone of a span size of 7, located between talking turns 89 through 95 and consisting of AY, RT, and EK as talking participants and one other as a non-talking participant (LT).

TRANSFORMATION TYPE D has already been illustrated in the two modalities of oral and written literacy discussed in [8.5.5.1] above. For instance, from the entries presented on pp. 19-20 for Individual A, we derive such topic nominals as [GETTING THE OLD GANG TOGETHER FOR SOME FUN] and [I BEGAN TO REMEMBER THE OLD DAYS], [I BEGAN TO REMEMBER THE OLD DAYS WITH MY DOG], or more derivative transformations such as [I DECIDED TO COOK SOMETHING] for "I decided to bake some chicken for dinner." as well as for "I think about the stake... and I go downstairs... I heat up the steak," which is a derived topic nominal from entry A#3 B. (v), shown on p. 20. Further work is needed to specify the rules for deriving general class labels like [I DECIDED TO COOK SOMETHING]

Hl2

and the paraphrastic set of topic nominals that fully define it (see Jakobovits and Nahl, 1975-77 for further discussion on topic morphology)

TRANSFORMATION TYPE D is the first of the Topical Trigram, i.e., the first parameter that includes content and meaning. This is the theoretical significance of the "double line" in Figure 4. Further work is needed to develop the

H13

notational issues that are involved here, and this task constitutes the chief focus of our work in ethnosemantics (James and Nahl, 1975-77). However, empirical work can proceed even if the theoretical status of the double line is left unspecified, so long as the parameters specified for each transformation type in the derivation of transcript data are operationally defined in objective terms.

On this account, the objectivity of TRANSFORMATION TYPE D rests on the availability of a community index which we have called "CCP" or Community Cataloguing Practices. We have already discussed above in several places the nature or format of the entries in such a taxonomic inventory. The current format specifications used as written instructions to students for reporting their daily round biography represents our current understanding of what such a taxonomy or cataloguing system ought to look like (for more detailed discussion on this, see "ethnosemantic outlines" in James and Nahl, 1975-77).

In the meantime, an adequate pragmatic approach to the objectification of TRANSFORMATION TYPE D would seem to us to be the use of what we call labeled topic nominals. For example,

[EXHIBITS SOME APPREHENSION]

[WONDERING OUT LOUD]

[GETTING THE OLD GANG TOGETHER FOR SOME FUN]

[I DECIDED TO COOK SOMETHING]

etc.

These represent category labels for sets of topic nominals. The structure of the labels correspond to the structure of other topic nominals but they are marked in addition for the function of category designation; they serve that function by virtue of their status in the community; in other words, they are so recognized given the community's practices in recording or keeping track of things. These accounting practices, as Garfinkel calls them, are of major theoretical significance to a social psychology that looks for functional dependencies between individual display behavior and setting defined in terms of reinforcement contingencies, i.e., psychosocial practices that matter or make a difference to the individual. Only within such a system of explanation does the notion of community-cataloguing-practices assume a causal status; that is, we must assume that an inventory of what is being noticed or kept track of in a particular community or group constitutes an objective representation or map of the actual contingencies of reinforcement operative there.

The above issue is fundamental and constitutes in our view the major significance of the new methodological paradigm known as ethnomethodology. Harvey

Sacks, in his unpublished mimeographed lectures (ca. 1966?), presents a most remarkable treatment of this basic issue, all of his lectures being dedicated to this one theme and varying it in prodigious proportions, all of them illuminating

as to the real nature of conversation. He continually points to organizational features, i.e., STRUCTURE, of talk that are mechanical (i.e., algorhythmic, formal, exact) consequences of blind (i.e., pre-topical) parameters. For instance, he points out that the problem of when to intervene in a conversation as a talker, i.e., the problem of deciding when to talk, is, in the majority of cases, a mechanical consequence of the Talking Turn Rule: the latter can be stated as follows:

Rule 1a. Only one participant talks at a time.

Rule 1b. The current talker may select the next one.

Applying these two contingency rules represents the ordinary practice in many setting in this community, though significantly, they do not represent ordinary practice in some settings (e.g., as we go down the age groups from old to young, we have observed that the rule is applied or practiced less and less, thus making mixed adult-child conversations quite divergent in pattern).

TRANSFORMATION TYPE D, as here proposed, has further theoretical significance which ought to be briefly mentioned. In particular, we wish to draw attention to its relevance to the problem of speech modality, or as we call it, register modalities (see James and Nahl, 1975-77). The format specifications we use for the Daily Round Archives includes the following samplings from the many modalities of talk (i.e., MEDIUM):

- recitation, e. g., quotations and annotations or comments thereon (see annotated transcripts (e)).

- framing, e. g., daily logs specifying what happens when where (see (a)) and inventories of territoriality (see (c)).

- reference, e . g., the labeled topic nominal s habitually used in microdescriptions, and in reports of what one keeps track of (b and d).

These three modalities of TRANSFORMATION TYPE D thus account for the current structure of the Daily Round Archives. Future

H14

research needs to determine further refinements and developmental directions. Indeed, we see the problem of indexing the materials in the Daily Round Archives as the chief goal of ethnosemantic investigations .

One final issue to be mentioned here concerning the theoretical significance of TRANSFORMATION TYPE D is the notational issue involved in interrelating the modalities of talk. This problem is encountered in linguistics in the definitional status of grammar as syntax, i. e., grammar viewed through the register of formal relationships, hence "syntactic patterns" and "morphophonemic constituents,"

which are used to talk about the apparent order of word collectivities and their interrelationships. That is another way of saying meaning, or alternately we can say that the study of meaning is operationally defined as the study of syntactic patterns and their functional relationships. It is most significant that current as

well as past work in linguistics has defined "functional" in the previous sentence by reference to understanding language or comprehension of sentences. We can say therefore that allowable syntactic patterns are constrained by functional relationships to community cataloguing practices ("comprehension" or "comprehensibility" which etymologically implies "grasping together or in common," cf. "common sense" and "sensible"). In linguistic terminology current today, one would say that meaning sound relations constitute the research work of linguists and that they are prosecuting that task through the intermediary of a syntactic notation system (called "generative") which is pre-topical, though not pre-semantic (see the interesting and thoughtful article by Maclay, in Steinberg and Jakobovits, 1971).

In our situation, we encounter in the study of talk methodological issues that have been debated and researched in linguistics at various times and in various ways. We are planning to reconstruct the relationships implied here, both historically and morphologically, though not here (see Jakobovits and Nahl, 1975-77). In this instance, the linguist's problem of meaning is encountered in the social psychologist's problem of reference. We use reference in the sense of behavior, which is to say that the data represent situated displays, i.e., records of a sequence of behavior that occurred in some place and time. In this sense, we can assert that reference is the problem of cataloguing topic nominals used habitually in a particular community. Thus, the problem of reference is located theoretically at the level of TRANSFORMATION TYPE D.

Consider now the issues that are involved in inter-relating the three modalities of talk sampled in the Daily Round Archives, i.e., recitation, framing, and reference. Suppose the occurrence of the identical labeled topic nominal in two register modalities, e.g., transcript and microdescriptions of interior dialogue:

Figure 4:

The MEDIUM of Transcripts

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

[TALKING ABOUT THE SALAD BAR]

9. 3. II. 2.1 - 2A]/Breakdown of Topics

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

T asks me about the salad bar and I explain it to her because of my previous experience there. T is not very fond of salad and exhibits some apprehension as to what is being offered by way of meats.

[9. 3.II]/My Talk: Transcript

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

(19 secs. space)

The labeled topic nominal [TALKING ABOUT THE SALAD BAR] is a habitual and recognized conventional reference on the daily round in this, and no doubt other communities. It can therefore serve as a category label that includes a set of items, and the more probably, sets of items in each register modality of talk. Thus, one variation of this topic nominal used for reference occurs in the register modality of microdescriptions of paragraph length on breakdown of topics, (as shown on the left of Figure 4, "T asks me about the salad bar...", and on the right" 11.T: So salad comes with the meal?...",). This alternate version occurs in the register modality of preparing a transcript.

Figure 4 represents the definition of the MEDIUM of talk. No attempt is made for the present to account for the obvious relationship between the two events pictured namely conversational discourse and written descriptive or expository discourse. The relationship is most visible in the juxtaposition notation adopted in Figure 4, i.e., the experimental correlation between selected segments and one can see that the organization of the Archives catalogue is a theory about social organization and individual behavior.

Note as well in the sample in Figure 4, the occurrence of other topic nominals such as:

[...AND I EXPLAIN IT TO HER BECAUSE OF MY PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE THERE]

[EXHIBITS SOME APPREHENSION]

Note the relationship between description or expository elements as in the topic nominal on the left in Figure 4-- such as the above two--and the topic nominal on the right, namely,

[12.L: Or you can just go to the salad bar for four-fifty]

[13.T: Do they have meats up there?]

It is clear that there is a relationship between these two paris, such that the elements from the right (in Figure 4) are referents for the elements on the left. Another way os saying this is that descriptive reference constructions are occasioned by transcripted data, a common situation on the daily round where talking about other people's talking is a major occupation in the community.

TRANSFORMATIONS TYPE E yields conventionalized topic nominal constructions that map the frames of what's being noticed, kept track of, or referred to. Composition teachers, writers, and editors are explicitly aware of the complementary relationship between what's being said and how it's being introduced. Title and headline are two common techniques used for framing content. Other common techniques include Table of contents, Preface, Introduction, Introductory paragraph, Introductory or "lead in" sentence, marginal or parenthetical comment or note, footnote, italics, Epilogue, Appendix, Index--all of these being publication frames for written discourse.

Goffman (1974) uses the title Frame Analysis for his most recent, and perhaps most ambitious undertaking: namely, the attempted disentanglement of frame/content in transactional exchanges on the social and institutional rounds --if not literally the daily round. The Goffmanesque Mystique is fully alive in "Frame Analysis" but the attempt leaves the social psychologist unconvinced and somewhat confused (see our review of the book, in preparation). The reason for this, we argue, is that no independent rationale is given for distinguishing frame from content; instead, it is reconstructed given a prior situational understanding or familiarity. As a result, Goffman's wealth of observations remain, in the eyes of the social psychologist, anecdotal--which is certainly an undeserved and unintended status. To remedy this, it is necessary for Goffman to offer in the future an independent, objectively derived rationale for the frame/content distinction. We propose that our notation for TRANSFORMATION TYPE E may be suitable for this.

Our solution is obvious to a social psychologist (even if it might strike the sociologist or social philosopher as simpleminded as well): "Why not look it up ?"

The "it" refers to the identification of the frame/content distinction and the "looking up" procedure involves the Index of the Daily Round Archives. That presumes that every community develops and maintains such a catalogue, but we would like to suggest that that is not an unreasonable proposition, and we'll try to show it in concrete terms. We'd like to show that the keeping of objectified records of one's daily round biography is both a valuable scientific contribution as well as a personally illuminating experience; we call this double-barrelled cornucopia ethnopractice, basing it on the already familiar "ethnoscience. " (see CHART T/2.) However, we recognize that our project is experimental and our claims for it, unproven. To that task we are constantly devoted. (For additional comments and further readings on ethnopractice, see James and Nahl, 1975-77.)

TRANSFORMATION TYPE E thus provides us with an objective definition of the frame/content distinction: in both cases the answer lies in finding the item in an "index." One such index, the Daily Round Archives Index, identifies the physical, temporal, and incidental or circumstantial "places" (viz., pertaining to the circumstances surrounding the incident) in which the event or referent talked about is located: e.g., "in bed before getting up at 7:15 A.M. ", or "While talking to Mother in the department store about my sister's conduct in connection with her boyfriend's father's illness." In each of these two examples, the "content" can then be specified: e.g., respectively, "thinking about how the semester was almost over and feeling panic about my work at school" and "I upset her and she cried. "

The relationship between TRANSFORMATION TYPES D and E, i.e., the frame/content distinction may be seen in ordinary discourse productions. We can illustrate this by inspecting a sample entry in the DRA:

Sample DRA [9. 3. 3. B.iv] Retinal Sensations.

"I am sitting in the living room, studying, without any warning I feel the muscles under my right eye twitching very rapidly and uncontrollably, I put my finger on the area lightly and close my eyes, after sitting there for some time, the twitching stops. "

Figure 5b. The frame/content Distinction in talk.

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

TRANSFORMATION TYPE E: FRAME

a. [I AM SITTING IN THE LIVING

ROOM,

b. [STUDYING,]

c . [WITHOUT ANY WARNING]

f. [AFTER SITTING THERE FOR

SOME TIME, ]

TRANSFORMATION TYPE 1x CONTENT

d. [I FEEL THE MUSCLES UNDER MY RIGHT EYE TWITCHING VERY RAPIDLY AND UNCONTROLLABLY,]

el. [I PUT MY FINGER ON THE AREA LIGHTLY]

e2. [AND]

e3. [CLOSE MY EYES,]

g. [THE TWITCHING STOPS .

Note that we have retained the punctuation marks so that the theoretical objects which are the by-products generated by the transformations, and enclosed in square brackets, retain information concerning the usage of the item in the community practices. In other words, the punctuated items or orthographs are indexical entries in the "Catalogue" of community cataloguing practices (CCP's). This entry defines their function: any regular community member understands or recognizes orthographs as possible individual behavior. This fact of universal standardization, or virtually universal if one prefers to be very cautious, is ordinarily and nicely exploited on the daily round, e.g., in public entertainment (TV Drama and Paper Back Fiction, for instance, and in Magazine Ads and Labels, see CHART R/7, E/23) in self-psychologizing (Neuroses and Anxieties, for instance, see CHART R/20), in sectarianism (Legends and Gynaeology, for instance; see CHART R/16, E/3), in law (Depositions and Transcripts, for instance), in industry (Patent Specifications and Packaged Merchandise Instructions, for instance; see CHART R/13), and so on. All of these cases mentioned, and many more, indicate the ordinariness of the community contingency practices that occasion the recognition of orthographs. (See CHARTS T/7 through T/17 for an analysis of this issue. )

The reader may have already guessed the fact that putting these theoretical objects together into a recognizable presentation unit is the task to be assigned to the last of the transformations, namely, TRANSFORMATION TYPE F or situated display. We are referring to the ordinary fact that behavior on the daily round is a sequence of discrete units or micro-units. To each unit or micro-unit there corresponds an appropriate or possible orthograph (ortho=straight, right, appropriate,

conventional, etc.; graph=notation, symbol, chart, representation, etc.). It can now be appreciated that social psychology has a very deep interest in what we'd like to call the "syntax of presentations." As social psychologists, we view the functional analysis of behavior as consisting of the identification of the theoretical parameters that account for the occurrence of particular combinations of orthographs as obtainable from records, observations, archives.

It is necessary to expound on the reasons for isolating this issue as theoretically important for a functional social psychology. In our readings of l9th century literature (e.g., Darwin, W. James, Coleridge, in particular, and secondary sources in Cassirer, Lovejoy), there is a keen demonstration of awareness involving the issue of what we would call in contemporary terms "individual differences. " It was this issue that led Darwin to the principle of natural selection; it was also the principle that preoccupied the limaginative poets' like Coleridge(and his 20th century counterpart, T.S. Eliot, for instance) and led them to a justification (each on their own, to be sure) of both uniqueness and style. In this very synthesis of the universal and the singular (particular, unique, personal), which the poet arrives at with beautiful consequences in recognition (i.e., the appreciative reader), we must find the scientist's solution of the synthesis between individual behavior and universal principle. We suggest that this synthesis maybe achieved by investigating the syntactic properties of framed presentations. Vive Goffman!

The reader will already appreciate the fact that TRANSFORMATION TYPE F generates such presentational units as transcription segments (i.e., annotated transcripts), log entries on the daily round, and paragraph entries relating to descriptions and micro-descriptions of daily round activities. Further examples include conversational episodes, letters, social occasions, activity periods, paragraphs, pages, acts, scenes, stories, songs, skits, transactions, and so on to the multitude of familiar, recognizable units within which behavior on the daily round is organized and channeled.

Our preliminary findings concerning the analysability of the DRA data shows promise with respect to several areas of interest to social psychology: e.g., Cognitive Processes and Individual Differences (style, competence), Culture Training and Communication (attribution theory, cross-cultural homogeneity and heterogeneity), Language Teaching and PsychoLinguistics (oral and written literacy, discourse analysis). We shall treat each of these areas and show the specific import of particular methodological solutions to their empirical investigation.

The Syntax of Presentations: PMNS

We shall illustrate some procedures that are possible with the data on paragraph unit entries involving reports of emotionalizing episodes on the daily round. We should perhaps discuss the significance of data of this sort for social psychology. Reports of conscious experiences and feelings are indicative of at least two sorts of information that is valuable to a scientist. One is information concerning events that are independent of the reporter's observations: e.g., physical symptoms as reported by a patient to a doctor are indicative of underlying physiological activities that are independent of the client's observations). Similarly, in the determination of what happened in an accident, the parties involved in the attribution of fault or Witnesses, make depositions or reports that are independent of the physical events in the incident (hence: the need to evaluate the report). The other sort of information available to a scientist from a report deals with events that are traceable directly to the reporter, namely, his style of presentation, the particular content of the assertions, their sequence, their punctuation, and perhaps others to be specified. The first sort of information--reports as anecdotal factualities--is classified by social psychologists as subjective. The second sort of information--reports as behavioral presentations--are ethnographic, and hence objective.

Thus, the presentation of a paragraph entry in the DRA Assignment Questionnaire yields objective data on presentations. This tautolofical statement is necessary to emphasize the importance for a functional social psychology of presentations as framed behavioral sequences. In one sense, this is implicitly recognized in the practices of contemporary social psychologists: the vast literature on "subjects" (college students, volunteers, captive audiences, survey households, etc.) in the social sciences depends largely on the verbal report and the written instructions. Much of contemporary social theory on interpersonal behavior, group conflict, attitude change, communication, seeking behavior, are based directly on subjects' oral or written report, and/or involving subjects' comprehension of the experimental conditions set-up in the instructions given them by the experimenter. In this sense, framed presentations given by subjects constitute the principal data of experimental social psychology.

In the case of experimental set-ups, the subjectivity of subjects' reports is counteracted by the objectivity of the analyses and the replicability of the experimental conditions. Hopefully, replicability will more often than not, covary with validity, though of course there is no guarantee to this, as is well known in the experimental literature. As an antidote to vacuousness, social psychologists rely on traditional past knowledge and up to date theories for selecting important and valid parameters for investigation. As well, subjects' reports are crossreferenced with non-verbal behavioral measures, some of which depend on verbal instructions while some do not, or do so minimally. Ultimately, however, the subjects' interpretations of the situation itself cannot be and need not be avoided. This is so because subjects' reports are spontaneous behaviors. What accounts for the regularities, the dependencies on replicable conditions of observation, are the functional contingencies of social settings. In this sense, all observable behaviors are indicative of situational contingencies: this is so in a functional account by definition since behavior is viewed as the outcome of situational forces. Thus, presentations are appropriate units for social psychology.

The syntax of presentations refers to an account of the structure of social behaviors and their appropriateness given a situational frame. Since presentations are spontaneous both in their verbal and non-verbal modalities, paragraph presentations on emotionalizing episodes (among other things) are to be viewed as containing structural units of behavior strung together in a sequence according to principles or rules that characterize the practices of a particular community. In this, we follow the usual functional analytic techniques to be found in linguistic and anthropological work of such pioneers as Boas, Bloomfield, Fries, Timberger, Zipf, piaget, Freud, Osgood, Barker, Sacks, and others who used contrastive methods for analyzing naturally occurring distributions of behavior, verbal and non-verbal. In this work, and in the work of our predecessors, the premise is that the particular regularities observed in the data preparations or corpus, is part of another, more general activity: it is this larger pattern that operates or routinizes the smaller patterns observed in the detailed descriptions of presentations treated as analyzable data.

We would like to present a notation system called Paragraph Matrix Notation System (PMNS) for the preparation of data involving paragraph presentations within the context of DRA depositions. We shall first present five samples of the entry Emotionalizing Episodes, which is entry number five within the category of Interior Dialogue, which itself is part of the general entry of My Standardized Imaginings. Following this, we shall derive a table corresponding to each of the presentations; this table presents a formal matrix which defines the paragraph in terms of the PMNS or the special notation system we propose.

TABLE [8.5.5.4.1]

Sample One [9.3.4.A.v] Emotionalizing Episodes

"I am at work running the press machine. All of a sudden something goes wrong and the copies I am printing come out all black. I say to myself, "Oh No! Why me?" I try to adjust and fix the press so it will work right. I spend about one hour trying to fix it then I finally remember I forgot to do something before running the press. The thing I forgot to do, caused the press to run junk. I say to myself, "You dumb, stupid idiot. You wasted one nerve racking hour trying to fix the press, plus all that wasted paper, just because you forgot to do one little thing, I feel really pissed off."

TABLE [8.5.5.4.2]

Sample Two [9.3.4.A.v] Emotionalizing Episodes

"I'm at the airport waiting to pick up my folks. While waiting, I see a family who just saw a loved one go. I feel sad for them. I know how it feels to miss someone deeply. My eyes get teary, too. "

TABLE [8.5.5.4.3]

Sample Three [9.3.4.A.v] Emotionalizing Episodes

"Once as I was telling my friends about the accident we saw, I got carried away and started using my arms and making noises that were similar to the cars in the accident. My friends saw that my emotions were getting carried away so they calmed me down before I made a fool out of myself. "

TABLE [8.5.5.4.4]

Sample Four [9.3.4.A.v] Emotionalizing Episodes

"My mother is telling me that she has asked my sister to move out of the house. I am slightly perturbed but I feel nothing else. My mother is ashen-faced and her voice is quivering slightly. She says to me: "I am so disgusted and upset that I just don't care any more!" I tell her that I don't want to hear about it and this upsets her more. The emotions are so intense in the room that I get up and leave. I go up to my own room and turn on the radio. Strangely, the blaring music soothes me and I feel relaxed again. "

TABLE [8.5.5.4.5]

Sample Five (9.3.4.A.v] Emotionalizing Episodes

"The water is very clear off Black Point, and I am spear fishing with my friend Albert. The fish swim away quickly as I approach them, and my friend is far away. I hear someone yelling! I look above the water and hear him. The whole school of fish is headed towards me! Wow! ! Now's my chance to spear a huge Uhu! Quick, dive down to the bottom. Stay still now, gotta hold my breath. Over there to the left, to the right, wow, there's so many fish. They're corning right at me ! ! I don't know what to spear, they're darting around too fast. A big blue one, right in front of me, it stopped! Shoot, shoot now, quick! ! Oh you ass hole, you missed. Shit they're gone now. "

It will be recalled that orthographs are topic nominal constructions enclosed in square brackets, including punctuation marks as contained in the original presentation of the transcription data deposited to the DRA. Applying the same procedure to the five entries above generates a definite number of items which catalogue the paragraph exhaustively. A simple instance would be to itemize the sentences of the paragraph by numbering them successively with the first sentence receiving the number 1 and the second sentence receiving the number two, and so on. It can be noted that the five paragraphs above have the following number of sentences in them: 7, 5, 2, 8, and 16, respectively. Though a sentence is a presentational

unit at one level of paragraphic structure, other structural levels are more nearly of interest in any cataloguing goal. This is obvious when one considers the likelihood of encountering identical sentences in samples of discourse. Except for expletives, ellipticized utterances, and recitations the probabilities are extremely low as one may convince oneself by trying to find two identical sentences in any presentation unit: conversation, book, paragraph, etc. (For examples showing the PMNS technique applied to sentences and paragraphs, see CHARTS R/2, R/9, R/12, R/13, R/24.)

Since sentences are virtually unique in construction they cannot provide us with a unit of analysis that is germaine to a functional social psychology. Instead, we propose a unit that is contained within sentences. We have already referred to such units as topic nominals and as orthographs enclosed within square brackets. These smaller units have a number of characteristics which are consequences of their selection from the data corpus. Though this requires further theoretical work, we can present some preliminary solutions which seem to us to show a lot of

H17

promise. We present the following four operational conditions for the PMNS:

Condition A. Each item selected from the data corpus must have a formally defined status; in this case, we propose a matrix location for each item, where each paragraph has a uniquely specifying matrix.

Condition B. Each item must be a combinatorial unit, which means that it can combine with other units, though which ones are not specified; suffice it to say that combinatorial capacity of items is given by usage or occurrence of the items in the corpus.

Condition C. Each item must be a referable activity or behavior sequence; referal capacity of items is again given by usage and occurrence within the corpus.

Condition D. Each item must have a location on the Index of Community Cataloguing Practices; otherwise the items are to be added to the Index following the prescribed procedures.

Applying these four conditional rules to the first of the five paragraphs given above, we obtain the following exhaustive catalogue of orthographs:

DRA/Sample One

[I AM AT WORK] 1/0; [RUNNING THE PRESS MACHINE] 1/a1; [ALL OF A SUDDEN,] 2/0; [SOMETHING GOES WRONG] 2/a1; [AND] 2/a2; [THE COPIES I AM PRINTING] 2/a3; [COME OUT ALL BLACK. ] 2/a3bl; [I SAY TO MYSELF,] 3/0; ["OH NO! WHY ME?"] 3/a1; [I TRY TO ADJUST AND FIX THE PRESS] 4/0; [SO] 4/a1; [IT WILL WORK RIGHT.] 4/a2; [I SPEND ABOUT ONE HOUR TRYING TO FIX IT] 5/0; [THEN] 5/a1; [I FINALLY REMEMBER] S/a2; [I FOR GOT TO DO SOMETHING] 5/a3; [BEFORE RUNNING THE PRESS.] 5/a3b1; [I SAY TO MYSELF,] 6/0; [YOU DUMB, STUPID IDIOT."] 6/a1; ["YOU WASTED ONE NERVE RACKING HOUR"] 7/0; ["TRYING TO FIX THE PRESS,"] 7/a1; ["PLUS"] 7/a2; ["ALL THAT WASTED PAPER,"] 7/a3; ["JUST"] 7/a4; ["BECAUSE"] 7/aS; ["YOU FORGOT"] 7/a6; ["TO DO ONE LITTLE THING,"] 7/a7; ["I FEEL''] 7/a8; ["REALLY PISSED OFF."] 7/a9//

The reader may note that each item selected from the corpus has been given a notation identiflcation in accordance with Condition A. Note that the items selected fall into three categories as defined by the sequential operation that generates them. For instance, the first item [I AM AT WORK] is the paragraph opener, i.e., the first part of the first sentence of the paragraph. It always receives the notation I.D. "1/0" which may be read as "Sentence 1, Zero Order Element. "The next item in sequence, [RUNNING THE PRESS MACHINE.], receives the notation I.D. of "1/a1" which may be read "Sentence 1, first item of First Order Element x" or "Sentence 1, Item 1 of First Order Element a. "Note the period within this orthograph: it indicates a restrictive usage for it, i.e., it may occur only at the end of a sentence. The third item, [ALL OF A SUDDEN,] is identified as "2/0" which is read "Sentence 2, Zero Order Element. " Again, the designation "Zero Order" indicates that it is the first or initial part of a sentence, in this case, the second sentence, and therefore not a paragraph opener. Hence item 2/0 may not appear at the beginning of a paragraph. Note that sentence 2 has five sub-components, namely, 2/0; 2/a1; 2/a2; 2/a3; 2/a3b1. This means that there are three morphological units making up the sentence: one Zero Order unit, three units of Element a which is a First Order unit, and one unit of Element ab which is a Second Order unit. The latter can be viewed as a sub-unit of Element 2/a3. Theoretically, there is no known limit to these constituents; however, practically, there undoubtedly is, and we expect that the structural order of presentations units follow definite lawful limits as defined by Community

H18

Cataloguing Practices.

The notational identifications given in the above paragraph may be tabulated as a matrix; in that case, the paragraph in question will now have a corresponding "paragraph matrix" as follows:

TABLE [8.5.5.4.6]

Paragraph Matrix for DRA Sample One

1/0 l/al... O O ...O

2/0 2/a1... 2/a3 2/a3b1 ...0

3/0 3/a1... 0 0 ...0

4/0 4/a1... 4/a2 0 ...0

5/0 5/a1... 5/a3 5/a3b1 ...0

6/0 6/a1... 0 0 ...0

7/0 7/a1... 7/a9 0 ...0

This matrix can now be readily read off, giving an exact specificaion of all the formally defined components of the paragraph. Thus, it may be seen for instance, that the paragraph in question has 7 Zero Order Elements, 26 First Order Elements. (= a), and 2 Second Order Elements ( = ab). Furthermore, the matrix specifies the location of each orthographic element. Note that both second order elements in this matrix (i.e., 2/a3b1 and 5/a3b1) are restricted to terminal positions in the sentence through the inclusion of a "final" period within the orthograph ([COME OUT

ALL BLACK.] and [BEFORE RUNNING THE PRESS.]). There is of course a practical limit to the number of elements in a presentation unit or sub-unit. This is known as the information capacity of the channels in use and there has been much speculation in the literature on the information capacity limits of the human organism. George Miller, a Psycholinguist of repute at Rockefeller University and the man who, as President of the American Psychological Association, coined the motto that imbues the profession today--Let's Give Psychology Away--, away to the people, and thus referring to our accountability to the community, has argued with interesting and baffling numbers about the information capacity of man, and has come up with what's known in the literature as "the magic number 7, plus or minus two," which is the title of G.A. Miller's famous article on the matter (Miller, 1956). Whether or not social presentations on the daily round contain as many as 7 ordered elements remains to be

H19

seen. It is possible that this may be a feature of individual differences and variation, in which case it needs appropriate theoretical treatment.

Applying the four Conditions stated above for the PMNS system to the remaining four paragraphs presented above generates the following four paragraph matrices, each being a unique and exact representation of its referent paragraph.

TABLE [8.5.5.4.7]

Paragraph Matrix for DRA Sample Two

Part I: Selected elements and their tags

[I'M AT THE AIRPORT] 1/0; [WAITING] 1/a1; [TO PICK UP MY FOLKS.] 1/a1b1; [WHILE WAITING,] 2/0; [I SEE] 2/a1; [A FAMILY WHO JUST SAW A LOVED ONE GO.] 2/a2; [I FEEL SAD FOR THEM.] 3/0; [I KNOW HOW IT FEELS] 4/0; [TO MISS SOMEONE DEEPLY. ] 4/a1; [MY EYES GET TEARY,] 5/0; [TOO. ] 5/a1//

Part II: Paragraph Matrix derived

1/0 1/a1... 0 1/a1b1 ...0

2/0 2/a1... 2/a2 0 ...0

3/0 0 ... 0 0 ...0

4/0 4/al... 0 0 ...0

5/0 5/al... 0 0 ...0

TABLE [8.5.5.4.8]

Paragraph Matrix for DRA Sample Three

Part I: Selected elements and their tags

[ONCE AS I WAS TELLING MY FRIENDS ABOUT THE ACCIDENT WE SAW,] 1/0; [I GOT CARRIED AWAY AND STARTED USING MY ARMS AND MAKING NOISES] 1/a1; [THAT WERE SIMILAR TO THE CARS IN THE ACCIDENT.] 1/a1b1; [MY FRIENDS SAW THAT] 2/0;

[8.5.5.4]

[MY EMOTIONS WERE GETTING CARRIED AWAY] 2/a1; [SO] 2/a2;[THEY CALMED ME DOWNl 2/a3; [BEFORE] 2/a3b1; [I MADE A FOOL OUT OF MYSELF.] 2/a3b2 //

Part II: Paragraph Matrix derived

1/0 l/al... O l/albl... O

2/0 2/al... 2/a3 2/a2bl... 2/a2b2

TABLE [8.5.5.4.9]

Paragraph Matrix for DRA Sample Four

Part I: Selected elements and their tags

[MY MOTHER IS TELLING ME] 1/0; [THAT SHE HAS ASKED MY SISTER] 1/a1; [TO MOVE OUT OF THE HOUSE.] 1/a1b1; [I AM SLIGHTLY PERTURBED] 2/0; [BUT] 2/a1; [I FEEL NOTHING ELSE.] 2/a2; [MY MOTHER IS ASHEN-FACED] 3/0; [AND] 3/a1; [HER VOICE IS QUIVERING SLIGHTLY.] 3/a2; [SHE SAYS TO ME:] 4/0; ["I AM SO DISGUSTED AND UPSET"] 4/a1; [THATl 4/a2; ["I JUST DON'T CARE ANYMORE!''l 4/a3; [I TELL HER THAT] 5/0; [I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT IT] 5/a1; [AND] 5/a2; [THIS UPSETS HER MORE.] 5/a3; [THE EMOTIONS ARE SO INTENSE IN THE ROOM THAT] 6/0; [I GET UP AND LEAVE. ] 6/a1; [I GO UP TO MY ROOM] 7/0; [AND] 7/a1; [TURN ON THE RADIO] 7/a2; [STRANGELY,] 8/0; [THE BLARING MUSIC SOOTHES ME] 8/a1; [AND] 8/a2; [I FEEL RELAXED AGAIN.] 8/a3; //

Part II: Paragraph Matrix derived

1/0 l/al... 0 l/albl ...0

2/0 2/al... 2/a2 0 ...0

3/0 3/al... 3/a2 0 ...0

4/0 4/al... 4/a3 0 ...0

5/0 5/al... 5/a3 0 ...0

6/0 6/al... 0 0 ...0

7/0 7/al... 7/a2 0 ...0

8/0 8/al... 8/a3 0 ...0

TABLE [8.5.5.4.10]

Paragraph Matrix for DRA Sample Five

Part I: Selected elements and their tags

[THE WATER IS VERY CLEAR OFF BLACK POINT,] 1/0; [AND] 1/a1; [I AM SPEAR FISHING] 1/a2; [WITH MY FRIEND ALBERT. ] 1/a2b1; [THE FISH SWIM AWAY] 2/0; [QUICKLY] 2/a1; [AS I APPROACH THEM,] 2/a1b1; [AND MY FRIEND IS FARAWAY.]

2/a1b2; [I HEAR SOMEONE YELLING!l 3/0; [I LOOK ABOVE THE WATER] 4/0; [AND] 4/a1; [HEAR HIM.] 4/a2; [THE WHOLE SCHOOL OF FISH IS HEADED TOWARDS ME!] 5/0; [WOW! !] 6/0; [NOW'S MY CHANCE] 7/0; [TO SPEAR A HUGE UHU!] 7/a1; [QUICK,] 8/0; [DIVE DOWN TO THE BOTTOM.] 8/a1; [STAY STILL NOW,] 9/0; [GOTTA HOLD MY BREATH.] 9/a1; [OVER THERE] 10/0; [TO THE LEFT,] 10/a1; [TO THE RIGHT,] 10/a2; [WOW,] 10/a3; [THERE'S SO MANY FISH. ] 10/a4; [THEY'RE COMING RIGHT AT ME ! !] 11/0; [I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SPEAR,] 12/0; [THEY'RE DARTING AROUND TOO FAST.] 12/a1; [A BIG BLUE ONE,] 13/0; [SHOOT NOW,] 14/a1; [QUICK!!] 14/a2; [OH YOU ASS HOLE,] 15/0; [YOU MISSED.] 15/a1; [SHIT] 16/0; [THEY'RE GONE NOW.] 16/a1 //

Part II: Paragraph Matrix derived

1/0 1/a1 1/a2 1/a2b1 0

2/0 2/a1 0 2/a1b1 2/a1b2

3/0 0 0 0 0

4/0 4/a1 4/a2 0 0

5/0 0 0 0 0

6/0 0 0 0 0

7/0 7/a1 0 0 0

8/0 8/a1 0 0 0

9/0 9/a1 0 0 0

10/0 10/a1 10/a4 0 0

11/0 0 0 0 0

12/0 12/a1 0 0 0

13/0 13/a1 13/a2 0 0

14/0 14/a1 14/a2 0 0

15/0 15/a1 0 0 0

16/0 16/a1 0 0 0

The data for the five sample paragraphs we are analyzing may be summarized as follows:

PM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 5

Number of Sentences 7 5 2 8 16

Number of Elements 29 11 9 26 38

Number of Zero Order Elements 7 5 2 8 16

(= 0)

Number of First Order Elements 20 5 4 17 19

(= a)

Number of Second Order Elements 2 1 3 1 3

(= ab)

The immediate work ahead of us consists in the analysis of a sufficient sample of data so as to determine the properties of these three components of paragraphic organization. If later data support our preliminary findings, we can then go on to study the syntax of the presentational trigram: namely,

[ZERO ORDER COMPONENTS]

[FIRST ORDER COMPONENTS]

[SECOND ORDER COMPONENTS] TRIGRAM

Appropriate contrasts in the corpus available from the Daily Round Archives would generate data matrices that specify the interrelationships across the various modalities of presentation or areas of topic. Some examples will be discussed.

It will be recalled that though the units of a paragraph or other presentational format are pre-established and catalogued in the community practices, the connectivities between the units are individual and unpredictable on the daily round. The identifying characteristic of what constitutes 'variability' (variation, individual differences) or "style" lies precisely in these connectivities: viz., one can interconnect the components of a catalogue of orthographs and arrive at novel, surprising re1xlts. The re-connectibility of orthographic elements is their most interesting property from the theoretical point of view. %w this variability of reconnections we find the objective measures of individual behavior, i. e., the units of performance, skill, and competence. The difference between a successful person or a successful enterprise and an unsuccessful one can be traced to decisions or selections that were made in the reconnections of standard elements (see CHART R/26).

Selections and decisions about behavioral sequencings on the daily round are seen in a functional social psychology as being motivated and requiring prior learning. It follows that presentational behavior is motivated and learned. In that case, we can treat paragraph entries as indexical measures of motivational dynamics and acculturation dynamics (ethnodynamics). In other words, by treating a person's deposition as a framed presentation, we obtain objective evidence about the individual's presentational selections and reconnections, and therefore, about the motivational factors that influenced him as well as the socialization factors that operate in his current behavior. We will discuss below some of the applications that are possible in the use of DRA data for the study of psycho-dynamics and ethno-dynamics (see CHARTS T/2, T/18, T/21, T/23, T/24, and T/25 for more advanced morphotopological proposals based on the ESNOSYS notation system developed in our work on ethnosemantics (James and Nahl, 1975-77).

To illustrate the psychodynamic issue more concretely, consider what happens if one attempted to reconnect the elements of paragraphs. This task may be given to various categories of subjects and their solutions tabulated according to demographic variables of interest. For example, are there differences between:

male and female subjects x sex dimension

younger and older people the age dimension

parents vs. their children the reciprocal role dimension

Blacks vs. Whites vs. Jews vs. Japanese the ethnic variable

older Black females vs. young er Black females the interactional

demographic dimension

mixed college students who were given

Instructions vs. Control Groups the experimental dimension

and so on

Whatever differences that are found would presumably be attributable to the variation in the dimensions specified in the investigation. They would thus be treated as significant in the formulation of accounts or explanations. These are then the psychodynamic forces that are said to shape the behaviors observed.

We use the term psychomechanics (borrowed from Guillaume) to refer to the ethnodynamic forces in the shaping of what we have already referred to as standardized imaginings (products of TRANSFORMATION TYPE D. In other words, we note that the elements such as Zero, a, and ab, are catalogued items, indexed topic nominal constructions. They are pooled in the community's display repertoire. The fruits of the philologist's labor of classification of word usage in published presentations are enjoyed by all of us in the form of dictionaries. Dictionaries are summary matrices for large corpus collections of orthographs. No one person knows all the words nor can read the whole corpus, but objective search and selection methods using taxonomic frames allow a group of editors and sub-subeditors to pool their observations into a single listing known as the dictionary.

Now the example. If we splice the data matrix given in Tables [8. 5. 5. 4. 6] through [8. 5. 5. 4.10] according to their morphotopological (or: morphotopical) elements, we obtain the following listing:

TABLE [8.5.5.4.11]

Ordered Paragraph Matrix Elements from Five DRA Entries

Zero Order Elements: ( 1/0 ) (Paragraph Openers only)

[I AM AT WORK] (from Table [8. 5. 5. 4. 6] or ''T1'')

[I'M AT THE AIRPORT] (T2)

[THE WATER IS VERY CLEAR OFF BLACK POINT,l (T5)

[ONCE AS I WAS TELLING MY FRIENDS ABOUT THE ACCIDENT WE SAW,] (T3)

[MY MOTHER IS TELLING ME] (T4)

Zero Order Elements: ( 2/0 to ?/0 ) (Sentence Openers)

[I AM SLIGHTLY PERTURBED] (2/T4)

[THE FISH SWIM AWAY] (2/T5)

[I FEEL SAD FOR THEM] (3/T2)

[MY MOTHER IS ASHEN-FACED] (3/T4)

[I HEAR SOMEONE YELLING] (3/T5)

[I TRY TO ADJUST AND FIX THE PRESS] (4/T1)

[I KNOW HOW IT FEELS] (4/T2)

[I LOOK ABOVE THE WATER] (4/T5)

[I SPEND ABOUT ONE HOUR TRYING TO FIX IT] (5/T1)

[MY EYES GET TEARY,] (5/T2)

[THE WHOLE SCHOOL OF FISH IS HEADED TOWARDS ME!] (5/T5)

[WOW!!] (6/T5)

[ALL OF A SUDDEN] (2/T1)

[WHILE WAITING] (2/T2)

[MY FRIENDS SAW THAT] (2/T3)

[I SAY TO MYSELF,] (3/T1)

[SHE SAYS TO ME:] (4/T4)

[I SHALL TELL HER THAT] (5/T4)

[I SAY TO MYSELF,] (6/T1)

[THE EMOTIONS ARE SO INTENSE IN THE ROOM THAT] (6/T4)

[STRANGELY,] (8/T4)

[A BIG BLUE ONE,] (13/T5)

["YOU WASTED ONE NERVE RACKING HOUR"] (7/T1)

[I GO UP TO MY ROOM] (7/T4)

[NOW'S MY CHANCE] (7/T5)

[QUICK,] (8/T5)

[STAY STILL NOW,] (9/T5 )

[OVER THERE] (10/T5)

[THEY'RE COMING RIGHT AT ME!!] (11/T5)

[I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SPEAR,] (12/T5)

[SHOOT,] (14/T5)

[OH YOU ASS HOLE,] (15/T5)

[SHIT] (16/ T5)

First Order Elements: (a1)

[SOMETHING GOES WRONG] (2/T1)

["OH NO! WHY ME?"] (3/T1)

["YOU DUMB, STUPID IDIOT. "] (6/T1)

[I GOT CARRIED AWAY AND STARTED USING MY ARMS AND MAKING NOISES] (1/T3)

[MY EMOTIONS WERE GETTING CARRIED AWAY] (2/T3)

["I AM SO DISGUSTED AND UPSET"] (4/T4)

[I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT IT] (5/T4)

[I GET UP AND LEAVE. ] (6/T4)

[THE BLARING MUSIC SOOTHES ME] (8/T4)

[DIVE DOWN TO THE BOTTOM.] (8/T5)

[GOTTA HOLD MY BREATH.] (9/T5)

[THEY'RE DARTING AROUND TOO FAST.] (12/T5)

[SHOOT NOW,] (14/T5)

[YOU MISSED.] (15/T5)

[THEY'RE GONE NOW.] (16/T5)

[AND] (4/T5); (1/T5); (7/T4); (3/T4)

[BUT] (2/T4)

[TOO.] (5/T2)

[THEN] (5/T1)

[SO] (4/T1)

[RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME,] (13/T5)

[TO THE LEFT,] (10/T5)

[QUICKLY] (2/T5)

[I SEE] (2/T2)

[WAITING] (1/T1)

[TO SPEAR A HUGE UHU!] (7/T5)

[RUNNING THE PRESS MACHINE] (1/T1)

["TRYING TO FIX THE PRESS,"] (7/T1)

[TO MISS SOMEONE DEEPLY.] (4/T2)

[THAT SHE HAS ASKED MY SISTER] (1/T4)

First Order Elements: (a2)

[IT STOPPED!] (13/T5)

[IT WILL WORK RIGHT.] (4/T1)

[I FEEL NOTHING ELSE.] (2/T4)

[HER VOICE IS QUIVERING SLIGHTLY.] (3/T4)

[TURN ON THE RADIO.] (7/T4)

[I AM SPEAR FISHING] (1/T5)

[QUICK ! ! ] (14/T5)

[AND] (8/T4); (5/T4); (2/T1)

[ THAT] (4/T4)

[SO] (2/T3)

["PLUS"] (7/T1)

[TO THE RIGHT] (10/T5)

[HEAR HIM. ] (4/T5)

[A FAMILY WHO JUST SAW A LOVED ONE GO. ] (2/T2)

[I FINALLY REMEMBER] (5/T1)

First Order Elements: (a3 through ax)

[I FORGOT TO DO SOMETHING] (5/a3 T1)

["ALL THAT WASTED PAPER,"] (7/a3 T1)

[THEY CALMED ME DOWN] (2/a3 T3)

["I JUST DON'T CARE ANY MORE!"] (4/a3 T4)

[THIS UPSET HER MORE.] (5/a3 T4)

[I FEEL RELAXED AGAIN. ] (8/a3 T4)

[WOW,] (10/a3 T5)

[THERE'S SO MANY FISH.] (10/a4 T5)

["YOU FORGOT''] (7/a6 T1)

[THE COPIES I AM PRINTING] (2/a3 T1)

["REALLY PISSED OFF. "] (7/a9 T1)

["I FEEL"] (7/a8 T1)

["TO DO ONE LITTLE THING,"] (7/a7 T1)

["BECAUSE"] (7/a5 T1)

["JUST"] (7/a4 T1)

Second Order Elements: ( b1 through bx )

[I MADE A FOOL OUT OF MYSELF.] (2/a2b2 T3)

[TO PICK UP MY FOLKS.] (1/a1b1 T2)

[THAT WERE SIMILAR TO THE CARS IN THE ACCIDENT.] (1/a1b1 T3)

[TO MOVE OUT OF THE HOUSE.] (1/a1b1 T4)

[AS I APPROACH THEM,] (2/a1b1 T5)

[BEFORE] (2/a2b1 T3)

[WITH MY FRIEND ALBERT.] (2/a2b1 T5)

[BEFORE RUNNING THE PRESS.] (5/a3b1 T1)

[COME OUT ALL BLACK.] (2/a3b1 T1)

[AND MY FRIEND IS FAR AWAY.] (2/a1b2 T5)

There is something very interesting we find in reading down the list of morphotopical elements. Having read the original paragraphs, untransformed, the reader may also experience this interest in seeing the morsels out of which topicalization is made of, the anatomy of discourse, one cannot help but think by

H20 analogy! Attempts to reconnect (excluding the attempt to reconstruct the original --which is still another type of task, no doubt worth exploring! ) the morsels may be undertaken under various conditions (see also CHART R/11). The statement of these conditions represent experimental hypotheses about the behavioral properties of the presentational trigram (i.e., Zero, First, and Second Order Elements). For instance, suppose the following statement of conditions:

Statement of Condition A. Reconnect the available orthographs intc either a paragraph or a set of not necessarily related string of sentences;

Statement of Condition B. The restrictions are as follows:

(i) you may use only exactly designated selections for particular sentence locations (e. g., element a2 may be used in position 2 only, element a2b2 may occur only in the second sub-position of the second position, and so on).

Attempting to follow these two conditions yields various paragraph fragments as follows:

*[I'M AT THE AIRPORT] (1/0 T2) [AND] (l/a1 T5) [TURN ON THE RADIO.] (7/a2 T4) [I AM SLIGHTLY DISTURBED] (2/0 T4) [BUT] (2/a1 T4) [I FEEL NOTHING ELSE.] (2/a2 T4) [I HEAR SOMEONE YELLING] (3/0 T5) ["OH NO! WHY ME?"] (3/al T1) [I KNOW HOW IT FEELS] (4/0 T2)

However, if the less stringent condition is used for reconnection, i. e., if one may use any available element in any position, the task becomes easier. Of course, this appears to be the case with the current small corpus of 113 elements from the five sample paragraphs. Here is nevertheless a possible reconnection:

*[I AM SPEAR FISHING] (1/a2 T5) [AND] (4/a1 T5) [MY MOTHER IS TELLING ME] (1/0 T4) [TO SPEAR A HUGE UHU!] (7/a1 T5) ["OH NO! WHY ME?"] (3/a1 T1) [GOTTA HOLD MY BREATH.] (9/al T5) [SHE SAYS TO ME:] (4/0 T4) ["YOU DUMB, STUPID IDIOT."] (6/a1 T1) [HER VOICE IS QUIVERING SLIGHTLY.] (3/a2 T4) [I SAY TO MYSELF,] (3/0 T1) ["I FEEL"] (7/a8 T1) ["REALLY PISSED OFF.''] (7/a9 T1) [I GOT CARRIED AWAY AND STARTED USING MY ARMS AND MAKING NOISES] (1/a1 T3) [AND] (3/a1 T4) [I SEE] (2/a1 T2) [THIS UPSETS HER MORE.] (5/a3 T4) [I SAY TO MYSELF,] (6/0 T1) ["I JUST DON'T CARE ANY MORE!"] (4/a3 T4) [AND] (1/a1 T5) [I FEEL RELAXED AGAIN.] (8/a3 T4) [MY EYES GET TEARY,] (5/0 T2) [AND] (8/a2 T4) [STRANGELY,] (8/0 T4) [I FEEL NOTHING ELSE.] (2/a2 T4)

The empirical study of connectivity of orthographs is a key issue in our work. The various applications we envisage from the standpoint of these preliminary findings will now be described.

Individual Differences and Cognitive Processes.

Critics of psychology are wont to point out with derision that scientific rigor has at times led psychologists to deny that man thinks because thinking cannot be studied objectively. However, scientific rigor does not seem to us to exclude anything and surely the issue is miscast in that mode. Instead, we can merely rely on common sense practice that any demonstrable relationship is worthy of investigation if of interest, and any interest that persists in remaining un-demonstrable despite attempts should or would be abandoned.

The definition we propose for the products generated by TRANSFORMATION TYPE D, namely "standardized imaginings, " avoids intractable cognitive processes without denying the subjectivity of social existence on the daily round. That is, if we are to justify the designation of "individual" behavior within a socializing cultural environment, we must provide the mechanism or explanation whereby persons within identical cultures perform differently, so much so that ''individual person" implies "unique make-up. " Thus, from an identity in culture, individuals develop personal identities which are diverse and variant. Note the etymological directions involved in the expression "personal identity":

TABLE [8.5.5.4.1.1] Exemplifying the Technique of Contrastive Correspondences in Topographic Morphology: The Dictionary View on Personal Identity.

PERSONAL

LATIN: Persona = actor' s face mask,

hence a character or person

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

Peculiar to a certain person

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

Private and/or individual, having to do with intimate conduct

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

BOTANY: (morphological structures)

LAW: e. g., personal property

GRAMMAR: e. g., Personal pronoun

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

OF the person, body, or physical apearance; to personate or impersonate

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

Done by oneself without the use of another

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

Having the nature of a rational selfconscious being

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

Involving persons, e. g., local news

item, classified ad, belongings, etc.

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

PSYCHOLOGY

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

PERSONNEL = employment of persons

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

Habitual patterns of behavior or expression; distinctive individual traits considered collectively and impressing others

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

PERSONIFICATION = representing a person and/or perfect quality; PERSONALISM = emphasizes rights or centrality of the individual;

IDENTITY

O LATIN: Idem = the same as that previously mentioned

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

1 Condition of sameness

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

2 Condition of being a specific thing, e. g.l individuality, membership, . . .

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

MATH.: e.g., 2(x+a) = 2x+2a

3

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

4 POLICE: "Identikit" (transparencies of parts of face)

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

5a IDENTIFY= to consider/make/treat the same

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

5b To recognize identity, see (2)

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

5c To connect/associate/involve closely

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

5d0 PSYCHOANALYSIS

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

5d1 Oneself with another

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

Put oneself in another's place

5d2 and share the other's thoughts, feelings, problems

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

5d2i To sympathize with

(continued)

PERSONALITY= the quality of being a particular person; Tending to make personal;

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

PERSONALIZE = applying to a particular person; PERSONAl EQUATION = allowance for variation attributable to individuals

IDENTIFICATION

6 IDENTIFIER/IDENTIFIABLE Anything by which something can be identified

[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

IDENTICAl/IDENTIC

7 IDENTICAl TWINS

LOGIC: Identical Proposition[--- Unable To Translate Graphic ---]

These data are culled from Webster's New World Dictionary. We have taken the liberty of rearranging the dictionary information, as well as encapsulating the wordings to suit our current expository purposes. Note that we have listed 7 correspondences in topic between the entry "Personal" and the entry "Identity. " Contrast 1 gives us a definition for the expression "Personal Identity, " namely, the condition of sameness peculiar to a certain person. Here, "condition of sameness" can be seen to depend on specificity (2), convention (5a), recognition (5b), relationship (5c), and empathy (5d2). "Peculiar to a certain person" can be seen to involve the individual's conduct (2), physical body or appearance (4), rationality and consciousness (5b), possessions (5c), habitual and distinctive traits (5d2), and ethical/political status. Putting it all together, we form the following definitional account:

PERSONAl IDENTITY is the condition of sameness peculiar to a certain person. Areas of observation that operationally define a person include behavior, physical appearance, subjective experience, reputation, and recognition. Methods for determining sameness in persons include categorization byprior convention, spontaneous recognition, emotional response, and argument by logic or evidence.

The above paraphrase no doubt includes a series of unspecified transformations and we hope that our methods will throw some light on this important and ubiquitous problem: namely, how to specify the derivation steps in one's conclusions. What we understand of this problem at this stage leads us to believe that spontaneous creativity is describable by knowable parameters, and further, that ordinary scientific data splicing techniques (e.g., matrix algebra, topology, projective geometry) provide adequate solutions to the determination of the functional relationships that characterize spontaneous activity.

Observation and records of spontaneous activity on the daily round provide the data for determining the dimensions of variability for "the social human animal" or, more particularly, individual differences in personal identity. The methods of data splicing described above under PMNS is suitable for the investigation of "Social Darwinism"--ethology, arcology, social biology, zoosemiotics, etc. --which attempts to reconstruct the functional relationship between individual behavior and social environment. The current established view involves the following accepted principles:

1. Every species, by definition, contains a gene pool which is distributed unevenly across a living generation,

2. A natural process called inheritance, selectively consigns to offspring the particular gene traits possessed by the parental dyad;

3. Gene traits have functional correspondences with observable physical and behavioral traits so that the mechanism of inheritance establishes the survival of adaptive traits, i. e., traits that favored the competitive survival of the parents and parents' ancestors;

4. Acquired characteristics on the daily round are transmitted to offspring by parents, though it is a matter of dispute which if any are mediated by the inheritance of genes. If not by genes, the transmission process is termed "cultural" or "ethnic. " The dispute has implications for the social issue of the modifiability of familial and ethnically transmitted traits.

Faced with the issue of what constitutes individual traits in personal identity, the social psychologist has often turned to the data splicing techniques of questionnaire reports, verbal instructions, and error analysis of time-studies and skilled tasks. This has given us intelligence and personality tests which have been used in the community for selection, diagnosis, counseling, and therapy. The current established view in psychology recognizes the functional correspondence between traits and normative achievement. Thus, training programs in education and industry are based directly on the assumption that teaching particular skills, those that can be treated as traits, facilitate later adaptive responses on the daily round of the individual person.

Trait skills can be defined as presentational enactments. Trait skills are selected by their functional properties: those traits that are recognized as central, causative, generative, are the traits which the training and educative programs select to transmit. This has often been investigated under the rubric of "assimilation," "socialization," "enculturation," "acculturation," and so on. Social psychologists have written a vast literature on the experimental behavior of subjects within such explanatory frames as adaptability, achievement, competence, achievement motivation, sociability, dominance, intelligence, creativity, cooperativeness, leadership, conformity, maladaptive behavior, and many others that correspond to the ordinary man's psychologizings about traits: namely, self modification attempts in seeking to improve one's character and station in life, resistance to propaganda from out-group attempts at disruption or usurpation of power, persistence in child rearing practices as a way of upholding and maintaining familial characteristics, and many others.

Training and testing of traits imply that certain traits are both causative and presentational. In other words, instructional conditions can be set up as simulations and models of the target conduct. We call these framed presentations enactments.

Enactments are presentation units on the daily round. For example, a m~n walking down the street performs a series of enactments: each enactment is preceded by another and they are marked by boundary limits or markers that indicate where the enactment begins and where it ends: leaving house/crossing street/entering store/looking around/ locating desired section/walking over/and so on. Each such section of behavior on the daily round constitutes an enactment unit. Within enactment units are to be found microdescriptions of social behavior: e. g., /crossing street/: //stepping off the side walk//looking to the left//looking to the right// looking to the left while proceeding forward//looking to the right//stepping on the curb//. As well, within enactment units at the microdescriptive level there are further sub-components: e.g.,//looking to the left//: ///rotating head towards the left feeling some ache in the shoulder///glancing down the street as far as the eye would go and noting a car in the distance///hesitating while slowing down and angling towards the right furthest away from the oncoming car//etc.

It will be recalled that indexed and catalogued orthographs provide a community pool of enactment referrals; that is, community cataloguing practices provide regulars on their daily round with a well practiced and often rehearsed repertoire of verbal displays for the presentation of enactments. We have shown that lists of such recognizable topic nominal constructions have the important property of reconnectability, and have illustrated this by making up a new paragraph presentation out of the available constituents. We saw that reconnectability relates to comprehensibility of social situations and pointed out that its study provides information on individual variation. We have argued that the dimensions of individual variability on the daily round are selectively significant to maintenance of personal identity. Personal identity or individuality is a complex of enactments: it develops and evolves through group and institutional operations, such as recognition, reputation, membership, and personal characteristics. When measured, the latter are indexicalized as traits, skills, inclinations, motivation, etc. Presentational enactments on the daily round are analyzable into sequential behaviors whose microstructures and flow operations are describable at various levels of micro- and micro-microdescription.

The study of individual variation on the daily round must start with an appropriate taxonomy or typology of behavioral sequences. Following that, individual variation can be specified by reference to such a taxonomy, and explanations may then be investigated concerning the causes and control of variation. We have proposed that the collection of data in the Daily Round Archives constitute an evolving corpus of available displays that characterize the cultural environment of a community. When indexed and catalogued, these data along with the Index of CCPs (James and Nahl, 1975-77) provide an adequate base for the operational definition of "socio-cultural environment. " Each community thus receives a unique identity defined by its "culturological and sociometric index. " Within such a standard reference or norm, individual variation can be exactly typified as a function of community environmental variables.

The PMNS operation illustrated earlier in connection with "My Standardized Imaginings"--"Interior Dialogue," section of "Emotionalizing Episodes," provides information on the content of enactment units, which are shared in common, (i. e., they are recognizable by regulars), as well as information of individual variations in how they are interconnected into a presentation. Our preliminary findings have isolated a typology of three elements for orthographic items in paragraph presentations: namely, zero order units, first order units, and second order units. We have suggested that a study of the syntax of presentations would reveal the combinatorial properties of these elements. Knowing this, we can then state in precise terms the location of a particular presentation within the available standard, i. e., an individual deviation from the norm. The reconstruction of causal attribution in standardized imaginings is a well known issue in the social psychology literature on subjects where it appears in outlines and indices under such rubrics as attribution theory, causal attribution, misattribution, self-attribution, and cognitive inferencing.

Next portion

See a related article on Principles of Ethnosematnics


Click Here!