I have some troubles in understanding this sentence below. Can someone help me explaining what this sentence means? It means a lot. Thanks.
Schegloff argues that the reverse should be the case: start from the micro and work up to the macro, justifying the latter, if it is invoked at all, via the former.
By "the micro" she seems to mean the small details that make up the moment-by-moment process of conversation, the mechanics of the interplays. The macro is the politics of the conversation, the relative weight, if you will, of the fighters in the slugging match and how that weight is employed. The relative weight can only be measured by the success or failure of the strategies employed and not by any arbitrary judgment arrived at beforehand, that is to say the micro events justify whatever macro assessment of the participants is possible in the context of Conversational Analysis.
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
By "the micro" she seems to mean the small details that make up the moment-by-moment process of conversation, the mechanics of the interplays. The macro is the politics of the conversation, the relative weight, if you will, of the fighters in the slugging match and how that weight is employed. The relative weight can only be measured by the success or failure of the strategies employed and not