방법 비교
선택한 방법을 나란히 검토하세요. 서로 다른 행은 강조 표시됩니다.
| 비교 대화 분석× | 담화 분석× | |
|---|---|---|
| 분야≠ | 질적 방법 | 질적 연구 |
| 계열 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 기원 연도≠ | 1974 (CA foundation); comparative applications from 1980s–1990s | 1989 (Fairclough); 1987 (Potter & Wetherell) |
| 창시자≠ | Harvey Sacks, Emanuel Schegloff, Gail Jefferson (CA foundation); comparative extension developed across the field from the 1980s onward | Norman Fairclough; Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell |
| 유형≠ | Qualitative micro-analytic research design | Method |
| 원전≠ | Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. DOI ↗ | Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman. link ↗ |
| 별칭≠ | comparative CA, cross-contextual conversation analysis, comparative interactional analysis, comparative talk-in-interaction | DA, Critical Discourse Analysis, Discursive Analysis |
| 관련≠ | 3 | 2 |
| 요약≠ | Comparative Conversation Analysis (comparative CA) applies the rigorous micro-analytic methods of Conversation Analysis across two or more contrasting interactional settings, languages, cultures, or participant groups. It examines how the sequential organisation of talk — turn-taking, repair, adjacency pairs, and action formation — varies or remains stable across contexts, producing cross-contextual evidence about the architecture of human interaction. | Discourse analysis is a qualitative research methodology that examines how language, communication, and power shape meaning, identity, and social reality. Developed across linguistics, sociology, and psychology (particularly by Norman Fairclough and Jonathan Potter), discourse analysis goes beyond content to analyze language use as a social practice that constitutes and reflects power relations, ideologies, and social structures. |
| ScholarGate데이터셋 ↗ |
|
|