Conversation Analysis

Conversation Analysis as a Theory and a Method

Conversation analysis came out of sociology in the late 1960s. Founded by Harvey Sacks in collaboration with Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson, CA is rooted in two key developments in sociology: Erving Goffman’s micro-sociology of “the interaction order” and Harold Garfinkel’s ethnomethodology. Goffman argued that “the interaction order”—or direct human interaction—is a fundamental social institution that underpins and constitutes the workings of other societal institutions (such as politics and education), and that it should be studied as a domain in its own right. Independently, Garfinkel developed ethnomethodology, an approach to the study of social order that aims to understand procedures or methods of common-sense reasoning social actors use to make sense of each other’s social conduct. Ethnomethodology emphasizes the accountable orderliness of everyday life. Influenced by these two lines of thought, conversation analysis sees conversation (and other forms of talk-in-interaction) as an orderly social organization and aims to elucidate how interactants make sense of each other’s interactional conduct.

Conversation analysis embodies a particular theoretical orientation and offers a distinct methodology. As a theory, CA is built on a number of assumptions about the nature of human interaction. First, social action is seen as central to the organization of talk-in-interaction. Conversation analysts view social interaction as organized so as to advance courses of action—to arrange a future get-together, to receive medical treatment, to ask for assistance, etc.—rather than as driven by the need to exchange information, thoughts, or feelings. For instance, in the following transcript of a telephone conversation, when the caller (Donny) says “My ca:r is sta::lled.” (in line 9), he is, evidently, not simply informing his addressee Marcia about his car troubles but attempts to get her to help him (see lines 17–25):