Book contents
- Language Awareness in Business and the Professions
- Language Awareness in Business and the Professions
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Language Awareness in Business and the Professions
- Part III Language Awareness in Education and Training
- 8 Critical Language Awareness and Business Communication
- 9 A Developmental Framework for Professional Communication Competence
- 10 Membership Categorisation Analysis
- 11 Sociolinguistic Awareness in Business Professionals
- Index
- References
10 - Membership Categorisation Analysis
Developing Awareness of Categories and Their Consequences
from Part III - Language Awareness in Education and Training
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2022
Edited by
Book contents
- Language Awareness in Business and the Professions
- Language Awareness in Business and the Professions
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Language Awareness in Business and the Professions
- Part III Language Awareness in Education and Training
- 8 Critical Language Awareness and Business Communication
- 9 A Developmental Framework for Professional Communication Competence
- 10 Membership Categorisation Analysis
- 11 Sociolinguistic Awareness in Business Professionals
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter outlines an approach to the study of categorisation in language practice grounded in the work of American sociologist Harvey Sacks known as Membership Categorisation Analysis. MCA proposes that categories and their associated ‘normative orders’ are not simply stored in people’s heads; they are used as part of the accomplishment of practical tasks in various social settings. Thus, MCA focuses on how categories are used to do things within talk and text, such as criticising, complaining, praising, encouraging, inviting, commending, blaming, and so on. Moreover, we also propose that power relations can be central to the study of categories. We demonstrate this in a political context through analysis of a political speech made by the previous British Prime Minister, Theresa May. We show that May’s category-based reasoning about social injustice was used to appeal to a sense of social solidarity and moral responsibility of ‘the fortunate’ to help the ‘less fortunate’ in society. We conclude that MCA has value for students and practitioners of language because no other approach comes as close to the study of how categories are used in talk and text in real-life situations.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Language Awareness in Business and the Professions , pp. 183 - 203Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Alexander, J. C. (2010). The Performance of Politics: Obama’s Victory and the Democratic Struggle for Power. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Arminen, I. (2012). Ethnomethodology in the analysis of discourse and interaction. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Baker, Carolyn D. (2000). Locating culture in action: Membership categorisation in texts and talk. In Lee, A. and Poynton, C., (eds.) Culture and Text: Discourse and Methodology in Social Research and Cultural Studies. Allen & Unwin: 99–113.Google Scholar
Bale, T. (2012/2016). The Conservatives since 1945: The Drivers of Party Change. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Benson, D. and Hughes, J. A. (1983). The Perspective of Ethnomethodology. Longman Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Benwell, B. and Stokoe, E. (2006). Discourse and Identity. Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Berger, P. L. and Luckmann, T. (1991). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Penguin UK.Google Scholar
Billig, M. (1985). Prejudice, categorization and particularization: From a perceptual to a rhetorical approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15(1), 79–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Billig, M. (1987). Anti-Semitic themes and the British far Left: some social-psychological observations on indirect aspects of the conspiracy tradition. In Changing Conceptions of Conspiracy. Springer: 115–136.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bowker, G. C. and Starr, S. L. (2000). Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. MIT press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, J. (2014). Analysing Political Speeches: Rhetoric, Discourse and Metaphor. Palgrave.Google Scholar
Cornelissen, J. P., Mantere, S. and Vaara, E. (2014). The contraction of meaning: The combined effect of communication, emotions, and materiality on sensemaking in the Stockwell shooting. Journal of Management Studies, 51(5), 699–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durkheim, E. (1915) (reprinted 2008). The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (Oxford World’s Classics). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Edelman, M. J. (1977). Political Language: Words That Succeed and Policies That Fail. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Edelman, M. J. (1964) (reprinted 1985). The Symbolic Uses of Politics. University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, D. (1991). Categories are for talking: On the cognitive and discursive bases of categorization. Theory & Psychology, 1(4), 515–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eglin, P. and Hester, S. (2003). The Montreal Massacre: A Story of Membership Categorization Analysis. Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Eglin, P. and Hester, S. (1999). ‘You’re all a bunch of feminists:’ Categorization and the politics of terror in the Montreal Massacre. Human Studies, 22(2–4), 253–272.Google Scholar
Gardner, R. (2012). Enriching CA through MCA? Stokoe’s MCA keys. Discourse Studies, 14(3), 313–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, P. M. (1972). A symbolic interactionist analysis of politics. Sociological Inquiry, 42(3–4), 35–75.Google Scholar
Hajer, M. A. (2009). Authoritative Governance: Policy Making in the Age of Mediatization. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hester, S. (1992). Recognizing references to deviance in referral talk. Text in Context: Contributions to Ethnomethodology, 156–174.Google Scholar
Hester, S. and Eglin, P. (1997). Culture in Action: Studies in Membership Categorization Analysis (No. 4). University Press of America.Google Scholar
Housley, W. and Fitzgerald, R. (2002). The reconsidered model of membership categorization analysis. Qualitative Research, 2(1), 59–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Housley, W. and Fitzgerald, R. (2015) Introduction to Membership Categorisation Analysis. In Fitzgerald, R. and Housley, W. (eds.) Advances in Membership Categorisation Analysis. Sage: 1–22.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Llewellyn, N. and Hindmarsh, J. (2013). The order problem: Inference and interaction in interactive service work. Human Relations, 66(11), 1401–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulkay, M. (2014). Science and the Sociology of Knowledge (RLE Social Theory). Routledge.Google Scholar
Potter, J. (1996). Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. Sage.Google Scholar
Psathas, G. (1999). Studying the organization in action: Membership categorization and interaction analysis. Human Studies, 22(2–4): 139–162.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1972). An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for doing sociology. Studies in Social Interaction, 31–73..Google Scholar
Seldon, A. and Snowdon, P. (2015). Cameron at 10: The Inside Story, 2010–2015. William Collins.Google Scholar
Silverman, D. (1998). Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Snowdon, P. (2010). Back from the Brink: The Extraordinary Fall and Rise of the Conservative Party. HarperCollins UK.Google Scholar
Stetson, J. (1999). Victim, offender and witness in the employment of news stories. In Jalbert, P. L. (ed.) Media Studies: Ethnomethodological Approaches. University Press of America: 77–110.Google Scholar
Stokoe, E. (2010). ‘I’m not gonna hit a lady’: Conversation analysis, membership categorization and men’s denials of violence towards women. Discourse & Society, 21(1), 59–82.Google Scholar
Stokoe, E. (2012). Moving forward with membership categorization analysis: Methods for systematic analysis. Discourse Studies, 14(3), 277–303.Google Scholar
Stokoe, E. and Attenborough, F. (2015). Prospective and retrospective categorisation. In Fitzgerald, R. and Housley, W. (eds.) Advances in Membership Categorisation Analysis. Sage: pp. 51–70. Publications Ltd, www.doi.org/10.4135/9781473917873Google Scholar
Thornborrow, J. (2014). Power Talk: Language and Interaction in Institutional Discourse. Routledge.Google Scholar
Watson, D. R. (1978). Categorizations, authorization and blame: Negotiation in conversation. Sociology, 12(1), 105–113.Google Scholar
Watson, R. (2015). De-reifying categories. In Fitzgerald, R. and Housley, W. (eds.) Advances in Membership Categorisation Analysis. SAGE: 23–50.Google Scholar
Watson, G. and Goulet, J. G. (1998). What can ethnomethodology say about power? Qualitative Inquiry, 4(1), 96–113.Google Scholar
Whittle, A. and Mueller, F. (2011). The language of interests: The contribution of discursive psychology. Human Relations, 64(3), 415–435.Google Scholar
- 2
- Cited by