 Now before that, we never use this term during the whole talk about conversation analysis and its relationship with gender. Here we have given it a special name, we are calling it feminist conversation analysis. Usually here we combine two perspectives together, one is feminist perspective and the other is conversation analysis perspective. Feminism, you know, this is a political movement. If you remember our introductory talk, introductory modules and I introduced this term, I told you that it was a political movement. Here women especially, they raise voice against injustice and inequalities about women and they find out solutions through legal system, justice system, etc. So that is a political perspective and conversation analysis, this is a sociological perspective. So when we put them together, it becomes feminist conversation analysis. This is a kind of research methodology. You will be introduced to this in this module. Feministic interest in issues of gender, power, injustices and violence and oppression against women. Feminist CA conversation analysis was introduced to conduct research regarding these gender issues, these feminist concerns. It was specially introduced for this purpose. The feminist researcher does not presuppose anything and then collects evidence from the conversation. Now you know that in conversation analysis, background knowledge, previous thing, history, etc. of something that has no role in understanding conversation. So that is why when a feminist conducts research through conversation analysis, he does not presuppose something. He does not come up with some assumed things in his or her mind, some values or beliefs regarding gender and gender practices in society. He comes empty-minded, plain-minded. Now it is practically impossible but it is assumed for the purpose of analysis that we suspend whatever already exists in our mind. So this is, it never happens that they first make up something in their mind, they develop some hypothesis and assumptions and after that they look the conversational data and from that data they just point out the evidences to verify or to reject their hypothesis. Women are oppressed, women face domestic violence, this is their hypothesis and after that during conversation they find out which language cues are available to support this hypothesis. Rather it does not happen that we impose categories on the data in support of our hypothesis. What happens? Conversation reveals unforced relation of social action with politics, with history, with culture. So we approach conversation data and from that we relate the data with history. We say this is part of tradition, this is part of politics, this is part of culture, this is part of age. So this is the way feminist conversation analysis is conducted. When participants describe themselves, now this is the procedure, this is the procedure of feminist analysis. When participants describe themselves usually in the opening utterances when the talk starts, they first of all describe themselves. I am Mr. XY, I am a teacher, I like this, so they introduce themselves and I face abuse, etc. They leave cues and then from those cues we find out where gender is involved, where domestic violence is involved, things like that. So when they describe themselves, introduce themselves in opening utterances, after that their social categories are known, whether they are women, whether they are teachers, whether they are Pakistanis, etc. Sometimes the participants of conversation they don't describe them directly, indirectly they describe themselves and the analyst has to point it out. This description provides addresses and access to common sense cultural knowledge to understand the utterances in a conversation. Now what happens? When in a conversation a woman says that I am victim of something at my home, so definitely the person who listens to that, the addressee, he would instantly because of common sense knowledge, the knowledge that is shared among the people of the same culture, he would instantly think that this is home, where somebody abuses this woman and definitely that person would be her husband. So this is the way the listener or addressee understands, tries to understand the talk of the speaker. How does the analyst know what the talk reveals? He or she knows this through next term proof policy. Now how can we know that? The addressee has understood what the speaker has told because no reference to background, etc. is given. For this purpose feminist conversation analysts have introduced a procedure and that procedure of analysis is known as next term proof analysis. Next term is, what is next term? Next term is response to the previous term. We have said that conversation has a structure, it is series of terms. There is term taking, there is first term and then in response to that there is next term. So this is next term that follows first term. And in next term you know always we have response to the first term. Okay, the response is co-constructed. It is this response that is proof of participants' giant understanding. So first is utterance, the question, the inquiry, there can be invitation, etc. And then in response to that you get the second answer, second utterance by the second speaker. So this is how both utterances together they show us whether the addressee understood the addresses point of view or whatever he, she wants to say. This is a task that you would do it. Here you will apply this procedure which I have mentioned which is called next term proof procedure. You will focus on next terms throughout this dialogue because every next term would be understood in light of the previous terms. Previous terms would provide a kind of context to understand next term. Okay, you will find out whether second terms in this dialogue really shows understanding of the addressee. This is a transcript of a dialogue. Here two persons are involved. One is contact, the person who is contacted. That can be some service, as you call for example to some service provider, to some food chain, etc. So this is called here contact and in case of this dialogue, the contact is a service that provides legal advice and support to women who face some kind of violence in society. The caller is definitely a woman. So these two persons are involved in this conversation. In the left most, first column you see numbers. They are numbers of lines, not number of sentences. So this is the way how transcription for conversation is prepared. Then you have the routine symbols which we have already seen in previous dialogues. So here the talk goes on. You will focus on the opening entrance. You will find out whether there is description of the caller. And after that you will find out where the person, which next term shows that the person who is attending the call understands because he is addressee or she is addressee. So which next term shows that the person who is receiving the call understand the message of the caller. So which words, which cues, which linguistic symbols, which stress shows this. So you will conduct this task to understand how feminist conversation analysis is conducted. We conclude that CA helps the feminist researcher to verify feminist stance on issues of inequality. Feminists think that there is inequality in justice against women in society. So this is their stance. Now to verify their stance, one thing is that they assume. They believe in their, for example, intuitions. They may be biased in their own opinion. But to verify their stance in a scientific way on the basis of data, they can use this methodology of feminist conversation analysis.