Assumption of the burden: Science or criticism?
- 1 September 1981
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Communication Quarterly
- Vol. 29 (4) , 283-296
- https://doi.org/10.1080/01463378109369417
Abstract
This article adjudicates the claim to science made by current researchers in speech communication. It argues the point that contemporary research is best characterized as criticism, and that the cause of research in the field would be best advanced if scholars engaged in the enterprise of discourse analysis and conversation analysis regarded themselves as critics and made themselves subject to criticism as such.Keywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Structure of conversational argument: Pragmatic bases for the enthymemeQuarterly Journal of Speech, 1980
- Sexists, racists, and other classes of classifiers: Form and function of “...Ist” accusationsQuarterly Journal of Speech, 1980
- Creating and confronting social order: A comparison of rules perspectivesWestern Journal of Speech Communication, 1980
- Science and the rhetoric of realityCentral States Speech Journal, 1980
- The sequential analysis of social interactionQuarterly Journal of Speech, 1979
- On keeping the faith in matters scientificWestern Journal of Speech Communication, 1978
- ON TAKING OURSELVES SERIOUSLY: AN ANALYSIS OF SOME PERSISTENT PROBLEMS AND PROMISING DIRECTIONS IN INTERPERSONAL RESEARCHHuman Communication Research, 1978
- The rules perspective as a theoretical basis for the study of human communicationCommunication Quarterly, 1977
- Thepersonaeof scientific discourseQuarterly Journal of Speech, 1975
- A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for ConversationLanguage, 1974