Yes, it’s important to have CA work available in ASR. AJS is another important leading outlet with a recent CA paper:

Whitehead, Raymond & Bowman, (2025), "Cross-Cutting Preferences in Interactional Trajectories Toward Violence", American Journal of Sociology.

How about running this again, but increasing the data set by a power of 10 - and not including any data collected before 1984?
Also, would it be feasible to introduce the original Pomerantz report, rather than just a summary (and perhaps Sacks’ piece on Agreement & Contiguity)?

I would be curious to see the results of another kind of instruction to AI: Reproduce the investigation that resulted in a published CA report and compare/contrast the new results with that of the original/target published report.

…asked them to "find a something". The results are less impressive than the conceptual acrobatics in their PhD proposals.
——
Perhaps your instruction to AI came in the wrong place (as a starting place). Sacks’ instruction would have come after seeing what he could do/notice in data sessions.

Here’s the whole thing:

“I asked five AIs to draft PhD proposals in conversation analysis.”

I wonder what would happen if you directed them to (as Sacks did to Pomerantz) “Find a something,” instead of starting by requiring a proposal.”

Here’s my brief contribution to Manny’s memorial.

I should make it clear, that when I recommend these readings, it’s NOT to expose the intellectual history of our field, but because I strongly believe they furnish students with a necessary deep backdrop for doing good CA work.

When I offered my ‘Sacks reading list’ from memory I would have included IA Richards and Parry’s student Alfred Lord.

And I believe he was connected to a research proposal of Garfunkel’s on ‘Kids’ Culture’ but he told me that his relationship to that stuff was “historical.”

Sacks was drawn to stuff about children, not because they were children, but because of how people wrote about them. See One Boy's Day: A Specimen Record of Behavior
by Roger Barker (& Sacks had Baker’s unpublished records too) or Children's Games in Street and Playground by the Opies.

Sacks was engaged in self-consciously groundbreaking methodological empirical studies. I believe he was scanning the world of scholarship for investigations that resonated in some way. Each of the readings on the list do that in very different ways.

And when I wrote, “There were reasons for this shift” I was also thinking of something Manny once mentioned about this: That Harvey thought it would just be too easy for people to misuse (i.e. stipulate) membership categories, rather than develop them from data.

Perhaps I should have made it clear that when I wrote “We didn’t know that these small sequences just kept ‘bipping along’” I was echoing what Harvey said to me, not giving my own opinion.

I’ve always wished I could refer to ‘lean’ as ‘tilt’ for the alliterative torque & tilt’ ( I think some physical therapists use ‘hinge’ which may have some technical advantage in the same way ‘torque’ has some advantage over ‘twist’ - but loses its vernacular flavor.

This reminds me of a lovely paper written for Sandy Thompson’s and my Language and the Body seminar on “Laugh Leans” (unfortunately, never prepared for publication).