The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository
Warning ePrints Soton is experiencing an issue with some file downloads not being available. We are working hard to fix this. Please bear with us.

Reflexivity

Reflexivity
Reflexivity
This chapter addresses reflexivity as a central aspect of research in the situated study of language, a stance taken by linguistic ethnography (LE) and shared with other perspectives on communication, such as linguistic anthropology (Duranti 1997) and critical sociolinguistics (Heller 1996/2006, Martín Rojo 2010). Broadly speaking, “ethnography aims to describe the sometimes chaotic, contradictory, polymorph character of human behaviour in concrete settings” (Blommaert 2007). Since researchers are likely to follow threads, tie them together, categorise and identify patterns, and bring their own particular perspective against a background of previous research in the area to the table, such indeterminacy finds some order when researchers acknowledge joint responsibility for the knowledge production process in which they participate when doing ethnography. Since the term “reflexivity” can refer to epistemological positioning in research as well as decisions taken regarding research practices (in fact Foley (2002: 473) defines it as “a slippery term”), when I speak of “methodological reflexivity” in the research context I take it to encompass reflexive practices stemming from a variety of perspectives, whether they be epistemological considerations or the researcher’s questioning of his or her own socio-political, cultural, ideological or other forms of personal subjectivity. The need to recognise the essential role that the researcher’s subjectivity plays throughout the process of language research, and the ways in which it imbues the research produced, is part of the poststructuralist stance in the social sciences that was initiated in the 1960s.
Heteroglossia, team ethnography, ethics, participant observation , fieldnotes, , language diversity in classroom settings
213-228
Routledge
Patino, Adriana
6a3c90b1-c110-4c9e-8991-afb409e76ef7
Tusting, Karin
Patino, Adriana
6a3c90b1-c110-4c9e-8991-afb409e76ef7
Tusting, Karin

Patino, Adriana (2019) Reflexivity. In, Tusting, Karin (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Linguistic Ethnography. (Routledge Handbooks in Applied Linguistics) Routledge, pp. 213-228.

Record type: Book Section

Abstract

This chapter addresses reflexivity as a central aspect of research in the situated study of language, a stance taken by linguistic ethnography (LE) and shared with other perspectives on communication, such as linguistic anthropology (Duranti 1997) and critical sociolinguistics (Heller 1996/2006, Martín Rojo 2010). Broadly speaking, “ethnography aims to describe the sometimes chaotic, contradictory, polymorph character of human behaviour in concrete settings” (Blommaert 2007). Since researchers are likely to follow threads, tie them together, categorise and identify patterns, and bring their own particular perspective against a background of previous research in the area to the table, such indeterminacy finds some order when researchers acknowledge joint responsibility for the knowledge production process in which they participate when doing ethnography. Since the term “reflexivity” can refer to epistemological positioning in research as well as decisions taken regarding research practices (in fact Foley (2002: 473) defines it as “a slippery term”), when I speak of “methodological reflexivity” in the research context I take it to encompass reflexive practices stemming from a variety of perspectives, whether they be epistemological considerations or the researcher’s questioning of his or her own socio-political, cultural, ideological or other forms of personal subjectivity. The need to recognise the essential role that the researcher’s subjectivity plays throughout the process of language research, and the ways in which it imbues the research produced, is part of the poststructuralist stance in the social sciences that was initiated in the 1960s.

Text
REFLEXIVITY Patino-Santos - Accepted Manuscript
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy

More information

e-pub ahead of print date: 1 September 2019
Published date: 2019
Keywords: Heteroglossia, team ethnography, ethics, participant observation , fieldnotes, , language diversity in classroom settings

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 423172
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/423172
PURE UUID: 56de700b-d5db-4c49-be2a-2ff75d41f20a

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 19 Sep 2018 16:30
Last modified: 21 Nov 2021 13:17

Export record

Contributors

Author: Adriana Patino
Editor: Karin Tusting

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×