Assumptions

Symbolic interactionism has been characterized as building on a set of assumptions. 1. Humans must be studied on their own level and efforts to infer principles of behavior from the study of nonhuman form is misguided. This reflects the emphasis on symbolic communication. The assumption is justified by the highly developed symbolic capacities of human beings . 2. The most fruitful approach to the study of human behavior is through an analysis of society. This assumption underlies the potentialities of human development in the social process. It argues against the views of biological nature of humans and of learning and socialization. 3. The human being is an active agent of behavior rather than simply a passive respondent to external stimuli.

Assumptions

A CONCEPTUAL PROPOSAL These

few assumptions can be dissectedi nto the followingc oncepts: I. Language. Languager eferst o all the utterances, gesturesa nd move-mentso ne interactantc ommunicatesto self or other. It is viewed as a conversationo f gesturesa risingo ut of the interactionp rocess.I nter-actants can communicatei n a silent-gesturalla nguageo r in a set of personally specific vocal utterances. Their languages may transcend situations (the language of the law). They may be sacred or profane; formal or informal, vulgar or polite. 2. InteractionalSe ttinga ndi nteractional rena. Theset wo conceptsd ifferenti-ate the concrete setting wherein interaction occurs (setting) and the behaviour that occurs within settings (arena). Every physical setting, whetherb oundedb y wallso r not, is automaticallytr ansformedin to an arena given the presence of more than two actors. Settings are im-movable, arenas are produced by social selves. 3. Self. Selfi s defineda s all the thoughtsa nd utterancesa ny personh as with himself as a distinct object. It is a process and arises out of covert, silent conversations and is behaviourallyo bservedt hrougho ne's com-municativea cts, throught he conversationo f gestures. 4. jroint Act describes any behaviour where one interactant takes accounto f at least one personb esidesh imself.I t representsth e joining of at least two separatel ines of action into a joint, interactional pro-duction. (Joint acts take many forms,t o be discussedb elow.) 5. Interactionaloc casiond esignatesa ll the behavioursth at occurb etween more than one actor during that self's presence in an interactional arena. Interactional occasions are temporally bounded units of be-haviour that have beginnings, middles and ends. The occasion des-cribes that period of time in which interactantsa re in one another's physical, if not symbolic presence. 6. Encounter.In side interactional arenasd uringi nteractional occasions encounterso ccur.O ccasionss et the stagef or encounters, whichm ay be defined as any joint act between two or more persons where the inter-actantsa re maintainings ymbolic,v isual,a uditory,a nd at timest actile contact.2E ncountersla st only as long as two or morep ersonss ustaina mutual coorientationo f action and activity. Co-presente ncounters end when interactantsle ave one another'sp hysicalp resence;a lthough they may be subsequentlys ustaineds ymbolically. Encountersof signiJi-canced escribet hese momentso f co-presencew here one or both interactants carry from the encounter an image of other such that (I) sym-bolic, non-co-presenten countersa re produced,a nd (2) the probability of futuree ncountersis increased.D anglinge ncountersde scribea ll those 270 J%ormanS. Denzin Implications ofinteractionismfor t hes tudyo f deviance co-present episodes that carry over into the future. They reflect some consensus among selves that there is unfinished business at hand and futurei nteractionsa re necessaryt o get that businessd one. Labellingen counters, describet hose encounterso f significancew here one actor is defined in new, novel, and typically deviant ways. Appre-hended in the middle of a deviant act, he or she is publicly branded deviant,o r morallyu nacceptable. Labellinge ncountersd escribet hose moments when one class of interactants exercise their authority and power over another class of actors. 7. A Socialr elationship isdefined as any situationw here two or more A Socialr elationship isdefined as any situationw here two or more personss ymbolizeo ne anotheri n distinctt ermsa nd sustaina nd display thoses

ymbolizationsth rought heiri nteractional encounters. They may occur with physically absent others, or with those an actor sees on a routinec o-presentb asis.T wo classeso f othersm ay be takena ccounto f. Thosew hosei nfluencet ranscendse tting-arena (orientational others); and those whose effect is setting arena specific (setting specific others). Studies of the labelling encounter must untangle the relationship between these two classes of others. Typically labellers-members of oEcial social control agencies-act as setting specific others for the deviant, or the pre-deviant. Having been defined as deviant, the in-dividual finds himself in a social relationship with a labeller that attemptst o make the labellera trans-setting, orientational other. 8. Ruleso f conductre presenta ny recipef or actiont hat guidesb ehaviour between two or more persons in a concrete situation. They specify the dimensionsa nd conditionsu nder which the set of actionsc an be and will be carried out. Rules of conduct take three forms: civil-legal rules protects selves and their properties. Ceremonial rules protect the occasions of interaction and keep selves apart. Relational rules bring selvest ogethera nd representc omplexm ixtureso f one and two. It can be seen that labelling encounters those moments when one or more selves are classeda s inadequate,i mpropitious, or deviant-involve an applicationo f ruleso f conduct.A n act, built up undero ne set of rules, is judged from the standpoint of another set of rules. Typically civil-legal rules brand relationally specific rules deviant; and the obverse occurs.M ost labellinge ncountersin volver ule and otherj uxtaposition-ing. 9. Socialo bjectsar e social constructs. They representa nythinga person