Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
The radicalism of ethnomethodologyAn assessment of sources and principles$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Martyn Hammersley

Print publication date: 2018

Print ISBN-13: 9781526124623

Published to Manchester Scholarship Online: January 2019

DOI: 10.7228/manchester/9781526124623.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM MANCHESTER SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.manchester.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Manchester University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in MSO for personal use.date: 05 August 2021

Garfinkel and Goffman via Simmel: parallels and divergences

Garfinkel and Goffman via Simmel: parallels and divergences

Chapter:
(p.46) 2 Garfinkel and Goffman via Simmel: parallels and divergences
Source:
The radicalism of ethnomethodology
Author(s):

Martyn Hammersley

Publisher:
Manchester University Press
DOI:10.7228/manchester/9781526124623.003.0003

This chapter compares the orientations of Garfinkel and Goffman. Their work is often regarded as similar, being concerned with the study of mundane patterns of social interaction. However, ethnomethodologists usually insist that there are fundamental differences between them. Their orientations are examined via a comparison with the work of a third sociologist, Georg Simmel, who was an important influence upon Goffman. While Garfinkel does not seem to have drawn on Simmel’s work, there are interesting parallels: in particular, they share a concern with the constitutive role that social interaction plays in social life. It is argued that, despite similarities between the orientations of Garfinkel and Goffman, the differences are more significant. For Goffman, the aim is to generate conceptual frameworks that illuminate everyday behavior, whereas ethnomethodologists resist the bringing in of new concepts, being concerned instead with explicating the processes by which social phenomena are produced in their own terms. Other differences relate to what is taken to be the context of social interaction, with Goffman treating the interaction order as mediating the effects of outside factors, whereas ethnomethodologists insist that the context of any process of social interaction can only be what is constituted as context within it.

Keywords:   Garfinkel, Goffman, Simmel, Constitutive role of social interaction, Conceptualising context

Manchester Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.