Citational Practices: Knowledge, Personhood, and Subjectivity

Goodman, J. E., Tomlinson, M., & Richland, J. B. (2014). Citational Practices: Knowledge, Personhood, and Subjectivity. Annual Review of Anthropology, 43(1), 449-463.

Citation seems to be the repeated utterance in this case.

450- Citation is often used interchangeably with the more familiar term quotation. Both citation and quotation derive from the “embedding capacity” of language (Goffman 1981, p. 3)—that is, from the premise that discourse can embed other discourse.

Citational practices, as we define them, transcend quotation, locating situated utterances in relation to the metapragmatic, socio- cultural, ideological, and institutional dimensions of language use (per Bakhtin 1981). From this perspective, citation never merely repeats an earlier utterance but reconstitutes discourse marked as prior (or anticipates future discourse) in relation to emergent concerns (Tannen 2007).

Citational practices enable close examination of how situated utterances articulate with discourse genres, ideologies of personhood, and institutionalized regimes of knowledge.

We begin with what has typically been characterized as the interaction order, approaching citation in terms of the distribution of voice, which Erving Goffman (1974, 1979) termed an utterance’s “production format.” We also address the corollary phenomenon of “participant structure,” or the organization of social roles in discourse production. Second, we examine genres, which we view as citational devices that explicitly link situated discourse to wider social orders. Third, we consider how culturally shaped ideologies of personhood contribute to the ways citational practices mediate between situated encounters and larger sociocultural formations of knowledge and authority. We then consider how subjectivity and knowledge may be co-constituted through citational practices. We turn in the final section to an extended discussion of citational practices in the highly codified realm of legal discourse.

451- Production format is inseparable from participant structure, or the “interactional organization within which the structuring of any single encounter is accomplished”

Maximize or minimizing the space between self utterance

452- We follow Briggs & Bauman (1992) in understanding genre as an “orienting framework for the production and reception of discourse” (pp. 142–43) or a “routinized vehicle for encoding and expressing particular orders of knowledge and experience” (Bauman 2004, p. 6).

Pragmatic dimensions of genre include participant structure and production format.

Citational practices are informed by wider ideologies of personhood, which we define in terms of the qualities, characteristics, capacities, responsibilities, and moral assumptions that may be associated with socially recognized categories of person (per Irvine 1992).

-every context calls for a different interpretation

455-456- Both Goffman and Bakhtin developed approaches to citation that challenge an unproblematic “alignment of speech with speakers with selves” (Hastings & Manning 2004, p. 299). Goffman (1974) proposed a theatrical subject composed of a range of “figures,” or “the selves we project through talk” (p. 541). Figures are constituted through particular kinds of citational relationships to their words, from asymptotic imitation to sharp demarcations between one’s “own” voice and a figural voice (Hastings & Manning 2004). The figure of “I” is never identical with the subject but is “always at one degree of remove from an integral speaker” (Hastings & Manning 2004, p. 303). Goffman’s figures can be compared with Bakhtin’s voices, or social personae that “play against one another or jostle for dominance even within the discourse of a single speaker” (Keane 1999, p. 272).

Goodman, et. al. use legal discourse to critique the practice of citationality with reproducing ideologies of subjectivity, knowledge, and personhood (456).

46o- Knowledge, personhood, and subjectivity come together creatively and consequentially in the vast array of sites where the law is constituted in and by the use of legal discourse and texts and the manifold ways in which social actors engage each other in negotiating who is authorized to use legal language, in what ways, and to what effects.

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s