We reject the claim advanced by McHoul and Rapley that our remarks implied any ironic attitude toward ‘lay usage’. We do not think that elucidating the grammar of use involves any sort of irony and argue that such a charge is based upon the misconception (interestingly shared by many cognitivist thinkers) that ordinary use is a function of lay users’ beliefs.
Churchland, P.S. (1989). Neurophilosophy: Toward a unified science of the mind/ brain. Cambridge, MA: Bradford .
2.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. New York: Prentice-Hall .
3.
Garfinkel, H. , & Sacks, H. (1990). On formal structures of practical actions. In J. Coulter (Ed.), Ethnomethodological sociology (pp. 63–65). Vermont: Edward Elgar .
4.
McHoul, A. , & Rapley, M. (2006). Clarifying the point: A brief response to Sharrock and Coulter . Theory & Psychology, 16, 277–279 .
