DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2017-1-97-105


Kuznetsov Alexander Evgen’evich
Ph.D. in Sociology, Associate Professor
of the Department of Sociology

Perm State University,
15, Bukirev str., Perm, 614990, Russia;
e-mail: Этот адрес электронной почты защищен от спам-ботов. У вас должен быть включен JavaScript для просмотра.
ORCID: 0000-0003-1699-6466

Obtaining objectivity sets a formidable challenge to qualitative data analysis. Objectivity could partially be guaranteed in the case there is an evidence for the existence of a natural organisation of data that has immediately explanatory force, i.e. has it independently of generation of any secondary descriptions and other analytic or concept-dependent accounts. Sequential organisation is one case. It is here proposed to consider another type of organisation that is not dependent on turn-taking. The paper (1) discusses the chiastic organisation of a text segment as a specific cultural object, which (2) was occasionally discovered in an interview transcript while running domain analysis (J. Spradley) and theoretical coding (B. Glaser), (3) is an ethnomethodological case, (4) demonstrating «noticeable absence» (H. Sacks) outside sequential organisation, and (5) connection between the conception of hierarchical and contrast categorisations (L. Jayyusi) and the definition of culture as a classification system of hierarchically ordered oppositions (E. Durkheim, M. Mauss). The case of chiastic structure described here suggests the opportunity of the employment of semantic relations (as developed in ethnographic observation and/or grounded theory in Glaser’s version) within the framework of membership categorizations analysis. Besides some consolidation of methodologies, this proposal offers opportunity of achieving more rigour in qualitative research. The problem of chiastic structure has gained importance outside sociology, e.g. in biblical studies.

Keywords: ethnomethodology, conversation analysis, membership categorizations analysis, chiasm, domain analysis, theoretical coding.


  1. Dey I. Qualitative Data Analysis: A User-Friendly Guide for Social Scientists. London; N.Y.: Routledge, 2005. 287 p. DOI: 10.4324/9780203412497. (In English).
  2. Tukey J.W. The future of data analysis. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics. 1962, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 1–67. DOI: 10.1214/aoms/1177704711. (In English).
  3. Tukey J.W. Exploratory Data Analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1977, 676 p. (In English).
  4. Burawoy M. Reconstructing Social Theories. Ethnography unbound: power and resistance in the modern metropolis / ed. by M. Burawoy. Berkeley; Los Angeles; Oxford: University of California Press, 1991, pp. 8–27. (In English).
    1. Silverman D. Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods of Analyzing Talk, Text and Interaction. London: Sage, 1993, 240 p. (In English).
    2. Mulkay M.J. The Word and the World: Explorations in the Form of Sociological Thought. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1985, 259 p. (In English).
    3. Burawoy M. Teaching Participant Observation. Ethnography unbound: power and resistance in the modern metropolis / ed. by M. Burawoy. Berkeley; Los Angeles; Oxford: University of California Press, 1991, pp. 291–300. (In English).
    4. Brewer J.D. Ethnography. Buckingham, PA: Open University Press, 2005, 206 p. (In English).
    5. Garfinkel H. Ethnomethodology’s Program: Working out Durkeim’s Aphorism. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2002, 286 p. (In English).
    6. Garfinkel H. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1967, 288 p. (In English).
    7. Heritage J. Goffman, Garfinkel and Conversation Analysis. Discourse Theory and Practice / eds. by M. Wetherall, S. Taylor, S.J. Yates. London: Sage, 2001, pp. 47–56. (In English).
    8. Schegloff E.A. Introduction. Sacks H. Lectures in conversation. Vol. I–II. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1992. pp. ix–lxii. (In English).
    9. Silverman D. Harvey Sacks: Social science and conversation analysis. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1998, 217 p. (In English).
    10. Schegloff E.A. Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, 293 p. (In English).
  5. Sacks H., Schegloff E. A., Jefferson G. [A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation]. Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie [Sociological Review]. 2015, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 142–202. Available at: (accessed 30.12.2016) (In Russian.)
    1. Sacks H., Schegloff E.A., Jefferson G. A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation. Language. 1974, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 696–735. DOI: 10.1353/lan.1974.0010. (In English).
    2. Austin J.L. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962, 166 p. (In English).
    3. Searle J.R. Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969, 198 p. (In English).
  6. Mann W.C., Thompson S.A. Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Framework for the Analysis of Texts. IPRA Papers in Pragmatics. Vol. 1, 1987. 82 p. Available at:
    download/144/144-431-1-PB.pdf (accessed 12.11.2012).
    (In English).
  7. Mann W.C., Thompson S.A. Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organization. Reprint from «The structure of discourse». ISI Reprint Series, 1987. Available at:
    Thompson_1987.pdf (accessed 19.10.2012). (In English).
    1. Mann W.C., Matthiessen C.M.I.M., Thompson S.A. Rhetorical Structure Theory and Text Analysis. Discourse description: diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text / eds. by W.C. Mann, S.A. Thompson. Amsterdam, PH: John Benjamins, 1992, pp. 39–78. (In English).
    2. Sacks H. On the analyzability of stories by children. Ethnomethodology: Selected Readings / ed. by R. Turner. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books, 1991, pp. 216–232. (In English).
    3. Sudman S., Bradburn N., Schwarz N. Thinking about answers: The Application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1996, 304 p. (In English).
    4. Schwarz N. Cognitive Aspects of Survey Methodology. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2007, vol. 21, pp. 277–287. DOI: 10.1002/acp.1340. (In English).
    5. Seedhouse P.Conversation Analysis as Research Methodology. Applying conversation analysis / eds. by K. Richards, P. Seedhouse. N.Y.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, pp. 251–266. DOI: 10.1057/9780230287853_15. (In English).
    6. Sacks H. Lectures in Conversation. Vol. I–II. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1992, 812 p. (In English).
    7. Sacks H. Notes on methodology. Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis / eds. by J.M. Atkinson, J. Heritage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984, pp. 21–27. (In English).
    8. Schegloff E.A. Notes on a Conversational Practice: Formulating Place. Studies in Social Interaction / ed. by D. Sudnow. N.Y.: The Free Press, 1972, pp. 75–119. (In English).

The date of the manuscript receipt 01.11.2016

Please cite this article in English as:

Kuznetsov A.E. The discovery of a chiastic structure in a natural text and the prospects of the ethnomethodology progress. First article // Perm University Herald. Series «Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology». 2017. Iss. 1. P.97–105. DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2017-1-97-105

Узнайте как убрать вы здесь в Joomla