"The hypothesis is that any utterance can be understood in numerous ways, and that people make decisions about how to interpret a given utterance based on their definition of what is happening at the time of interaction. In other words, they define the interaction in terms of a frame or schema which is identifiable and familiar (Goffman 1974)." (Gumperz 1982, 130)
"A basic assumption is that this channelling of interpretation is effected by conversational implicatures based on conventionalized co-occurence-expectations between content and surface style.
That is, constellations of surface features of message form are the means by which
Roughly speaking, a contextualization cue is any feature of linguistic form that contributes to the signalling of contextual presuppositions." (Gumperz 1982, 131)
"The issue as we have defined it, concerns the discovery of hitherto unstudied connections between perception of surface linguistic signs and interpretation." (Gumperz 1982, 32)
"Our unit of analysis is a set of conversational exchanges which is sufficiently complete to provide a basis for applying the criteria outlined above. Ideally, we look for brief, thematically self-contained sequences; that is, sequences which, although they may be part of a larger interaction or sequentially discontinous, nontheless have identifiable beginnings, middles, and ends." (Gumperz & Tannen 1979, 307)
"… given knowledge of the outcome, we can then hypothesize about what contributed to it by looking at internal evidence in the form of utterances and responses.
We obtain independent confirmation of our hypotheses by asking first participants and then others
society & communication
"Social boundaries can then be empirically determined, as a result of the data gathered, based on similarity of interpretations and agreement as to which aspects of the communication led to those interpretations. Systematic attention to certain lingusitic and paralinguistic aspects of conversations then yieldy insight into the system of cueing meaning which is operating for people who agree on certain interpretations." (Gumperz &: Tannen 1979, 308)
"A speech activity is a set of social relationships enacted about a set of schemata in relation to some communicative goal. Speech activities can be characterized through descriptive phrases such as 'discussing politics', 'chatting about the wheather', 'telling a story to someone', and 'lecturing about linguistics'.
Such descriptions imply certain expectations about thematic progression, turn taking rules, form, and outcome of the interaction, as well as constraints on content. In the activity of discussing, we look for semantic relationships between subsequent utterances, and topic change is constrained. In the activity of chatting, topics change freely, and no such expectations hold. Lecturing, in turn, implies clear role separation between speaker and audience and strong limitations on who can talk and what questions can be asked." (Gumperz 1982, 166)
Goffman, Erving (1974) Frame Analysis. New York: Harper and Row
W. Grießhaber 2003-2005