Guided conversation

Out of the ten objectives of a sociolinguistic interview listed in Labov (1984), the following four are to be realized primarily through guided conversations:

1.

To gain comparable answers to questions that enable us to contrast the different attitudes and experiences of particular sub-cultures (e.g. danger of death, fate, premonition, fights and the rules of fair fighting, attitudes towards ethnic minorities, ambitions relating to school and education).

2.

To prompt the informant to relate personal experiences which would show up community norms and styles of personal interaction and where speech style tends to be close to the vernacular.

3.

To stimulate group sessions and record conversations whereby informants engage in conversation among themselves and not with the field worker.

4.

To locate the topics that are closest to the informants and also to give them a chance to raise topics of their own.

The Observer's paradox and the microphone

In order to gain optimum quality recordings, small sized lavalier microphones should be used, clipped to the informant's garment. This may serve to eliminate microphone fright but it has the drawback that the speech of the field worker may become too low or inaudible. Therefore, when making a test recording the field worker should take up a position that is not disturbingly close to the informant yet their voice should be audible on the tape.

Group sessions can only be recorded with a desktop microphone. Here two strategies should be followed: (1) If the field worker cannot leave the scene of the conversation, s/he should strive to keep a low profile. S/he should speak to the informants from an equal footing, but should withdraw from the conversation whenever possible. (2) Following Löfström (1982) the field worker should try to leave the scene of the conversation. Owing to the higher level of shared knowledge between informants, this ploy will yield conversation that may prove ``too intimate'' for the field workers, in other words they will be unable to interpret every word, phrase or conversation topic during the transcription. At the same time, the absence of the field worker may reduce the observer effect.

As a general rule the field worker should go through the network of conversational modules but should try to leave the scene either in the middle or towards the end of the conversation. If another member of the family or a neighbour drops in on a tête-á-tête conversation, the new person should also be involved in it. It is not desirable, however, that this newcomer should take over the role of the informant. Whenever there is such a danger, the informant should be given back the turn with a question like ``And what do you think about this?''

An unexpected telephone call in the course of an interview provides an opportunity to record speech outside the framework of the interview in a non-surreptitious way. In such cases the field worker should encourage the informant to answer the phone and whenever there is a chance for a longer conversation he/she should try to leave the room by asking to go to the lavatory (but without stopping the tape recorder).

On the role of the field worker

It is a point of fundamental principle that the field worker should not act from a position of authority but rather as a helpful inquirer who knows less about the local way of life, customs, problems and language. Information should go from informant to field worker and not vice versa (Labov 1984).

It may easily happen that the field worker may inadvertently raise a question that makes the informant stunned or outraged. In such a case the field worker should skilfully slip into another conversational topic. It must be made clear to the informants right at the beginning of the interview that whenever they are asked a question that they do not wish to answer, they should feel free to do so by simply indicating clearly to the field worker that they do not want to give an answer to the particular question. For example: if early on in the interview, perhaps in the demographic module, it turns out that the informant is (recently) divorced, it is quite understandable if s/he refuses to answer questions relating to his/her family life. However, if on the contrary, s/he suddenly opens up and starts to smear his/her divorced spouse, s/he should be encouraged to talk as long as possible.

Conversation modules

Conversation modules are a group of questions related to the same topic e.g. child rearing, one's purpose in life etc. (Labov 1984:33).

When engaged in modules one should pay particular attention to the use of colloquial style, the use of any feature that may be considered formal should be avoided.

The precise wording of the question is extremely important. The field worker should by no means resort to improvisation. Some of the questions are marked with two asterisks, meaning they should be put word by word without the slightest alteration. As for the rest of the questions, the field worker should try to say them in the shortest possible form. According to Labov (op. cit. 34) good module questions need not take more than 5 seconds to ask. This brevity can be acquired but at the expense of practice - it is a skill that will never come "of its own".

The network of modules

The modules can be arranged into a network, but there is no prescribed sequential order. The field worker should start the conversation with the least personal questions like e.g. How long have you been living here? and progress gradually towards more and more intimate topics (e.g. religion). The transition from one module to the other should be as smooth as possible (cf. tangential shifts, Labov 1984:37 ff). If the informant shows interest in a topic, it is desirable to return to it later on.

Practical hints on the guided conversation

1.

Although the guided conversation will inevitably contain a lot of dialogue, the field worker should make sure it contains as many long stretches of speech from the informant as possible. To this end:

2.

Yes-no questions (e.g. ``Do you like vegetable soup?'' ) should be kept to a minimum, and information seeking questions (why ..., when..., what happened..., please tell me... ) should be used instead.

3.

The field worker should aim to speak as little as possible. For this reason, instead of following the informant's speech with constant PHATIC LANGUAGE (yes , aha , and indeed etc.) the field workers should use their eyes only to indicate that they are with the informant.

4.

The informant should be given ample time to think and reflect. While the informant is holding a pause, s/he should not be interrupted. Instead, s/he should be encouraged to proceed with enquiring looks and gestures.

5.

A good interview is characterized by much speech from the informant and little from the field worker. The field worker should convince the informant that s/he is genuinely interested in what the informant is saying. As far as possible, the field worker should sincerely relate to the personality and problems of the informant.

6.

The field worker should avoid interrupting the informant, s/he should not be speaking simultaneously with the informant. The less there is such overlap the better the interview, and vice versa.

7.

In the course of guided conversation the field workers should hold a piece of paper ready (this may be the interview log book) and they should jot down the questions that occur to them while the informant is speaking. Natural conversation would require the field worker to respond verbally straight away as the conversation progresses. However, this would unduly cut up the conversation into short exchanges. It is hoped that by ``eliciting by eye'' and noting down the odd question to be raised later on, the field worker will be able to gain more or less continuous monologues from the informant.

8.

It is by no means required that all the modules should be worked through. It is, however, imperative to cover all the obligatory modules marked with K (for kötelezo 'obligatory' in Hungarian).

9.

The minimum time the obligatory and optional modules should take in an interview is 30 minutes. This means that if in a long-winding interview the tests, reading passages and the preliminary conversation last 90 minutes, the field worker should (a) either be prepared at the 90th minute to use the supplementary tape when the two hours run out or (b) to shift to half the recording speed used. If s/he chooses the latter option, s/he should immediately record in the log book the counter setting on the tape recorder and AFTER the interview s/he should record in the book the fact that s/he has changed speed. Not during the interview.