Ethnography as Method, Methodology, and “Deep Theorizing”
Ethnography as Method, Methodology, and “Deep Theorizing”
复制标题
民族志作为方法、方法论和“深度理论化”
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
T. Lillis
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
T. Lillis
本文批判性地探讨了民族志对于增强学术写作研究的情境敏感方法的价值。作者利用两项纵向研究（英国的学生写作以及匈牙利、斯洛伐克、西班牙和葡萄牙的专业学术写作）的数据，阐述了民族志对学术写作研究的不同贡献，这取决于它被解释为方法、方法论或“深度理论化”的层次。在讨论民族志的第三个层次时，作者利用最近围绕语言民族志的争论来探讨民族志作为深层理论化如何通过索引性和方向的具体概念有助于完善学术写作的社会实践叙述。通过研究民族志的三个层次，她的目的是表明学术写作研究中文本和语境之间的本体论差距，并就如何缩小这种差距展开辩论。
This article critically explores the value of ethnography for enhancing context-sensitive approaches to the study of academic writing. Drawing on data from two longitudinal studies, student writing in the United Kingdom and professional academic writing in Hungary, Slovakia, Spain, and Portugal, the author illustrates the different contributions ethnography can make to researching academic writing, depending on the level at which it is construed, as method, methodology, or “deep theorizing.” In discussing the third level of ethnography, the author draws on recent debates around linguistic ethnography to explore how ethnography as deep theorizing can contribute to refining social practice accounts of academic writing through the specific notions of indexicality and orientation. By working through three levels of ethnography, her aim is to signal the ontological gap between text and context in academic writing research and to open up debate about how this gap can be narrowed.