This olde exchange concerning the place of ‘social-structural’ considerations in descriptions of the organizations of talk-in-interaction was recently brought to mind. (Perhaps the ‘obscurity’ involved was there to shield the suggestion from promiscuous application!) #EMCA

Over the years, I’ve sometimes given grad students the list of reading - as I then recalled it - that Sacks gave me when we first met. Yesterday, I came across my original list, while rummaging through a file folder of my earliest lecture notes from grad school. Here is the actual list. Enjoy!

I just came across another (apparent) handout: “Some Ways Conversation Analysts Interrogate Talk-in-Interaction” but cannot remember the venue at which it was circulated. Nonetheless, some might find it or bits of it useful… www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/poylj...

Because CA findings are necessarily tied to and grounded in and configured by reference to participants’ situated participation, I was wondering just how broad or general purpose CA findings could be (without becoming untethered). www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/k4f6n...

I’ve come across a clipping of Note 1 from “Everyone has to lie” which I haven’t thought about for a long time. So, I thought I’d pass it along. www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/kl82h... There were reasons for this shift. Here’s one: We didn’t know that these small sequences just kept ‘bipping along’.

Here’s an old note from a beginning grad student (requesting some help with a first assignment) and then my reply.

Here is an old course assignment I created, but I find it can be a useful way to proceed with the work. www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/v78l1...

I just stumbled across an old course handout. I thought I might share it here.