It is my contention that two transcribers writing down the “same” recorded interview will bring out two different texts, inspite of their keeping true to their original. The differences in their transcriptions are often regarded as “errors”. The assumption I hold is that the variety of those “errors” can be channelled into two classes corresponding to two types of interaction the transcriber ideally joins in: first, the class of backward looking or retrospective figures the transcriber creates when he starts taking part into the construction of meaning the interviewer and the interviewee have jointly brought about; second, the class of forward looking or prospective figures the transcriber creates when he starts construing a relationship with the future reader of his transcript who is positioned in his text as a “lector in fabula”.
Transcription as Interaction
SORMANO, Andrea
2012-01-01
Abstract
It is my contention that two transcribers writing down the “same” recorded interview will bring out two different texts, inspite of their keeping true to their original. The differences in their transcriptions are often regarded as “errors”. The assumption I hold is that the variety of those “errors” can be channelled into two classes corresponding to two types of interaction the transcriber ideally joins in: first, the class of backward looking or retrospective figures the transcriber creates when he starts taking part into the construction of meaning the interviewer and the interviewee have jointly brought about; second, the class of forward looking or prospective figures the transcriber creates when he starts construing a relationship with the future reader of his transcript who is positioned in his text as a “lector in fabula”.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
