This article has four aims. First, it will consider explicitly, and polemically, the hierarchical relationship between conversation analysis (CA) and membership categorization analysis (MCA). Whilst the CA ‘juggernaut’ flourishes, the MCA ‘milk float’ is in danger of being run off the road. For MCA to survive either as a separate discipline, or within CA as a focus equivalent to other ‘generic orders of conversation’, I suggest it must generate new types of systematic studies and reveal fundamental categorial practices. With such a goal in mind, the second aim of the article is to provide a set of clear analytic steps and procedures for conducting MCA, which are grounded in basic categorial and sequential concerns. Third, the article aims to demonstrate how order can be found in the intuitively ‘messy’ discourse phenomenon of membership categories, and how to approach their analysis systematically as a robust feature of particular action-oriented environments. Through the exemplar analyses, the final aim of the article is to promote MCA as a method for interrogating culture, reality and society, without recourse to its reputed ‘wild and promiscuous’ analytic approach.
AntakiCWiddicombeS (eds) (1998) Identities in Talk. London: SAGE.
2.
BakerCD (2000) Locating culture in action: Membership categorization in texts and talk. In: LeeAPoyntonC (eds) Culture and Text: Discourse and Methodology in Social Research and Cultural Studies. London: Routledge, pp. 99–113.
3.
BakerCD (2004) Membership categorization and interview accounts. In: SilvermanD (ed.) Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice, 2nd edn.London: SAGE, pp. 162–176.
4.
BenwellBMStokoeE (2006) Discourse and Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
5.
CarlinA (2010) Reading ‘A tutorial on membership categorization’ by Emanuel Schegloff. Journal of Pragmatics42: 257–261.
6.
ChomskyN (1957) Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.
7.
ClaymanSHeritageJ (2002) The News Interview: Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
CliftonJ (2009) A membership categorization analysis of the Waco Siege: Perpetrator–victim identity as a moral discrepancy device for ‘doing’ subversion. Sociological Research Online14(5), art. 8. Available at: http://www.socresonline.org.uk/14/5/8.html.
9.
DrewPHoltE (1988) Complainable matters: The use of idiomatic expressions in making complaints. Social Problems35(4): 501–520.
10.
EdwardsD (1994) Script formulations: A study of event descriptions in conversation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology13(3): 211–247.
11.
EdwardsD (1998) The relevant thing about her: Social identity categories in use. In: AntakiCWiddicombeS (eds) Identities in Talk. London: SAGE, pp. 15–33.
12.
EdwardsD (2005) Moaning, whinging and laughing: The subjective side of complaints. Discourse Studies7(1): 5–29.
13.
EdwardsD (2006) Facts, norms and dispositions: Practical uses of the modal would in police interrogations. Discourse Studies8(4): 475–501.
14.
EglinPHesterS (1999) ‘You’re all a bunch of feminists!’: Categorization and the politics of terror in the Montreal Massacre. Human Studies22: 253–272.
15.
FitzgeraldRHousleyWButlerC (2009) Omnirelevance and interactional context. Australian Journal of Communication36(3): 45–64.
16.
FreedAFEhrlichS (eds) (2010) ‘Why Do You Ask?’: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17.
GardnerR (2002) When Listeners Talk: Response Tokens and Recipient Stance with Special Reference to ‘Mm’. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
18.
HansenAD (2005) A practical task: Ethnicity as a resource in social interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction38(1): 63–104.
19.
HepburnAPotterJ (2010) Interrogating tears: Some uses of ‘tag questions’ in a child protection helpline. In: FreedAFEhrlichS (eds) ‘Why Do You Ask?’: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 69–86.
20.
HeritageJ (1984) Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity.
21.
HeritageJ (2005) Conversation analysis and institutional talk. In: FitchKLSandersRE (eds) Handbook of Language and Social Interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 103–147.
22.
HesterSEglinP (eds) (1997) Culture in Action: Studies in Membership Categorization Analysis. Boston, MA: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and University Press of America.
23.
HesterSFrancisD (1997) Reality analysis in a classroom storytelling. British Journal of Sociology48(1): 95–112.
HousleyWFitzgeraldR (2009) Membership categorization, culture and norms in action. Discourse & Society20(3): 345–362.
26.
HutchbyI (2006) Media Talk: Conversation Analysis and the Study of Broadcasting. Glasgow: Open University Press.
27.
JacksonC (2011) The gendered ‘I’. In: SpeerSStokoeE (eds) Conversation and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 31–47.
28.
JayyusiL (1984) Categorization and the Moral Order. London: Routledge.
29.
JayyusiL (1991) Values and moral judgement: Communicative praxis as a moral order. In: ButtonG (ed.) Ethnomethodology and the Human Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 227–251.
30.
JeffersonG (2004) Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In: LernerG (ed.) Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 13–31.
31.
KitzingerCFrithH (1999) Just say no? The use of conversation analysis in developing a feminist perspective on sexual refusal. Discourse & Society10(3): 293–316.
32.
LeeJ (1984) Innocent victims and evil-doers. Women’s Studies International Forum7(1): 69–73.
33.
LepperG (2000) Categories in Text and Talk. London: SAGE.
34.
LynchM (1993) Scientific Practice and Ordinary Action: Ethnomethodology and Social Studies of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35.
PlunkettR (2009) Fashioning the feasible: Categorization and social change. Australian Journal of Communication36(3): 23–44.
36.
PomerantzAMandelbaumJ (2005) Conversation analytic approaches to the relevance and uses of relationship categories in interaction. In: FitchKLSandersRE (eds) Handbook of Language and Social Interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 149–171.
37.
RaymondG (2003) Grammar and social organization: Yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review68: 939–967.
38.
RaymondGHeritageJ (2006) The epistemics of social relationships: Owning grandchildren. Language in Society35(5): 677–705.
39.
SacksH (1979) A revolutionary category: Hotrodder. In: PsathasG (ed.) Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York: Irvington, pp. 7–14.
40.
SacksH (1992) Lectures on Conversation, vols I and II, ed. JeffersonG. Oxford: Blackwell.
41.
SchegloffEA (1991) Reflections on talk and social structure. In: BodenDZimmermanD (eds) Talk and Social Structure. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 44–70.
42.
SchegloffEA (1992) Introduction. In: Sacks H, Lectures on Conversation, vols I and II, ed. JeffersonG. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. ix–lxii.
43.
SchegloffEA (2005) On integrity in inquiry. . . of the investigated, not the investigator. Discourse Studies7(4–5): 455–480.
44.
SchegloffEA (2007a) A tutorial on membership categorization. Journal of Pragmatics39: 462–482.
45.
SchegloffEA (2007b) Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46.
Seymour-SmithSWetherellMPhoenixA (2002) ‘My wife ordered me to come!’: A discursive analysis of doctors’ and nurses’ accounts of men’s use of general practitioners. Journal of Health Psychology7(3): 253–267.
47.
SidnellJ (2010) Conversation Analysis: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell-Wiley.
48.
SilvermanD (1998) Harvey Sacks: Social Science and Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press.
49.
SilvermanD (2001) Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction. London: SAGE.
50.
SpeerSAStokoeE (2011) Conversation and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
51.
StiversT (2008) Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction41(1): 31–57.
52.
StokoeEH (1998) Talking about gender: The conversational construction of gender categories in academic discourse. Discourse & Society9(2): 217–240.
53.
StokoeE (2009a) Doing actions with identity categories: Complaints and denials in neighbour disputes. Text and Talk29(1): 75–97.
54.
StokoeE (2009b) ‘I’ve got a girlfriend’: Police officers doing ‘self-disclosure’ in their interrogations of suspects. Narrative Inquiry19(1): 154–182.
55.
StokoeE (2010a) ‘I’m not gonna hit a lady’: Conversation analysis, membership categorization and men’s denials of violence towards women. Discourse & Society21(1): 1–24.
56.
StokoeE (2010b) Gender, conversation analysis, and the anatomy of membership categorization practices. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00261.x10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00261.x.
57.
StokoeE (2011) ‘Girl – woman – sorry!’: On the repair and non-repair of consecutive gender categories. In: SpeerSStokoeE (eds) Conversation and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 85–111.
58.
SummerfieldTMcHoulA (2005) Family as a commonsensical device and its place in law. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law18: 243–261.
59.
Van DijkT (1987) Communicating Racism: Ethnic Prejudice in Thought and Talk. London: SAGE.
60.
WatsonDR (1978) Categorization, authorization and blame-negotiation in conversation. Sociology12(1): 105–113.
61.
WatsonDR (1997) Some general reflections on ‘categorization’ and ‘sequence’ in the analysis of conversation. In: HesterSEglinP (eds) Culture in Action: Studies in Membership Categorization Analysis. Washington, DC: University Press of America, pp. 49–75.
62.
WhiteheadKA (2009) ‘Categorizing the categorizer’: The management of racial common sense in interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly72(4): 325–342.
63.
WilkinsonSKitzingerC (2008) Using conversation analysis in feminist and critical research. Social and Personality Psychology Compass2(2): 555–573.
64.
WooffittR (2005) Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis: A Comparative and Critical Introduction. London: SAGE.
65.
WowkMT (1984) Blame allocation, sex and gender in a murder interrogation. Women’s Studies International Forum7: 75–82.
