This is one of my assignments for my qualitative methods class in which I had to learn how to memo. To be quite honest I don't know what I think of memoing. Sometimes it does seem like you're able to dig down beneath the surface of things and pull something out that surprises you...that you hadn't noticed before but seems to be the start of something meaningful. Other times it just seems be a load of drivel spewed out onto a sheet to meet and assignment's requirements. So I guess I find myself a little torn. I don't really understand much about the process...after all this is a learning experience and this is only the first stage of what would eventually end up being extensive coding and recoding. I figure that maybe some of what comes out of this sort of excercise has meaning but you have to dig through the junk to find the diamonds. I guess what I'm saying is that in short not everything that gets memoed is equal; you have to pick and choose the good stuff.
QUOTATION:
R: That’s fine. How has having a cell phone affected your relationships with others?
E: Well I’d say that probably progresses relationships more quickly than if you didn’t have one.
R: How so?
E: Well the more you’re in contact with other people the quicker the relationship goes. For instance, if I had a friend who I’d known for lets say three months or so, I mean that’s a decent amount of time, I mean that’s not forever, if we moved away from each other, and we communicated via mail. Well letters take time to get delivered, people lose interest in that time, you can’t keep up with current events as well. So with a cell phone the relationship progresses a lot faster, I feel like I’ve known the person a lot longer, I can talk to that person everyday if I wanted to. So in essence, it speeds up our social interaction and in some cases I’d say if a relationship with another human being has a beginning and an end it could actually speed up the end if there was an end.
MEMO:
Well I’d say that probably progresses relationships more quickly than if you didn’t have one.
“Probably” indicates a property of ambiguity which can vary from extreme doubt to certainty. His use of the word probably indicates that he believes something is more likely to occur than not although the out come is still in some doubt. Often it is used synonymously with the word likely.
For me the word “progress” has clinical or technical connotations so it seems unusual that to me that the subject has picked this word to describe his personal relationships. Progress often entails development. It is the condition of moving from one state to the next. As such there are often liminal periods where the context of progress is not well defined, usually prior to imminent paradigm shifts. Progress also does not proceed at a steady rate. Long periods of stagnation may be punctuated by quick periods of development or “progress” with only minimal growth during the interim. Additionally, progress is not necessarily permanent. Both the Greeks and the Romans amassed large amounts of knowledge that was lost to Western Europe, where it had previously been disseminated. It was only during the Crusades that some of this lost information was reintroduced to the Christian world. Another interpretation of progress is to move towards a goal. One may say they’ve “made progress” when they feel closer to achieving a goal. However, the phrase “making progress” includes the tacit understanding that the goal is not yet achieved.
The use of the word “quickly” implies a property of speed. Speed can vary from lack of movement to extreme. It is important to distinguish speed from velocity. Speed is merely the rate of movement while velocity indicates the rate of movement as well as the direction.
Well the more you’re in contact with other people the quicker the relationship goes.
The first thing that stands out to me here is the phrase “the quicker the relationship goes”. As discussed earlier “quick” denotes a property of speed that does not entail a specification of direction. This phrase taken as a whole indicates that speed is a property of relationships. Based on my personal experiences I would tend to agree with this assertion. Relationships tend to progress at different rates. Why do some relationships progress faster than others? Is the rate of development more uniform in some types of relationships than others? Is speed a property of all relationships? What effect does the speed of relational development have on the relationship?
The word “contact” implies two things that touch one another. Touch might be considered by many to be our most intimate sense. After all we have limited ability to determine what we see, smell, or hear, but we expect to have some say in what we touch and how we ourselves are touched. Individuals have regions of comfort from which individuals will retreat when invaded by other people. We are selective in who we let into our personal regions. In this sense, contact is indicative of relational development as we only let people we trust in close. In a more figurative sense closer in line with that used here, to “maintain contact” with someone is continue to interact despite the constraints of time and space. Historically, time and space have constrained the potential for interaction but technologies such as writing, the post, and telephony have remedied that.
The word “more” indicates a property of amount which can range from little to much, or less to more. The choice of the word “more” also indicates a comparison. In this case the comparison seems to relate to contact. A property of contact may be frequency of contact.
For instance, if I had a friend who I’d known for lets say three months or so, I mean that’s a decent amount of time, I mean that’s not forever
The first thing that I focus on in this line is the word “friend”. Friendship is one of the few voluntary, social relationships that we as a society engage in and therefore could be said to hold a rather unique position in our social networks. Friendships may exist on many different levels and mean different things to different people. A friend to me is someone with whom you spend time but who also fulfills certain social and functional tasks. For example, a friend may be someone who comforts you or whom you buy beers for in a bar. Additionally, what friendship means may vary by the stage of life you are in. What does the term friendship mean to the subject? The subject is nineteen year old college student. How does the subject’s age effect his understanding of friendship? Furthermore, the subject is a college student. College is often thought of as a period of instability with major life changes occurring in a relatively quick succession. How does the University culture effect his understanding of what qualifies as friendship?
“Time” or duration appears to be an important property of friendship. There are several references made to time in just this one line. These range from the indistinct (ie. A decent amount of time) to the specific (ie. Three monthes, or forever). The duration of a friendship likely plays an important role in the level of development it has achieved.
The word “decent” to me is an interesting lexical choice in that it can reasonably be interpreted in two distinct ways. First, decent can be interpreted as “good”. A more likely interpretation in my opinion is “adequate”. This property of adequacy suggests that in order for something to fulfill a certain function it must be deemed adequate. The logical question that follows is what determines adequacy? Are there numerous criteria or is it merely the a singular phenomenon such as the passage of time?
if we moved away from each other, and we communicated via mail. Well letters take time to get delivered, people lose interest in that time, you can’t keep up with current events as well.
“Moved away” indicates an increase in space. This may be significant in that increases in space may constrain interaction.
“Take time” is an interesting choice of words. When someone “takes” something they possess it. When used in this sense it refers to something that accompanies and individual. If letters “take” time, then time may be an important property of the postal system for the subject. Alternatively, the word “take” can mean to take some thing away or to even steal. In this sense the use of letters and the subsequent time requirements may diminish some aspects of the interaction.
Two word pairs in the remainder of this line seem especially important. First, “lose interest” implies interest wanes with the passage of time. It is something that may be difficult to retain. When something is lost it may never be recovered. Alternatively, it may be rediscovered accidentally at some future point in the future or even sought out. As a result, loss may be either permanent or temporary. Furthermore, implicit in the concept of loss is the concept of value. Things that are not worth anything are rarely lost because no one desires to look for them. For example, one does not lose an empty hamburger wrapper, but one may lose one’s wedding ring.
The second word pair of interest is “can’t keep”. “Keep” implies possession. Something that is kept is retained. An alternative definition also implies physical support or care. A mistress can be kept. Likewise a house or dwelling can be up kept. This connotation of the word implies maintenance.
So with a cell phone the relationship progresses a lot faster, I feel like I’ve known the person a lot longer, I can talk to that person everyday if I wanted to.
The word “feel” can be interpreted as relating to the sense of touch or as relating to emotions. However, in this context it appears to me to represent a level subjectivity intrinsic in lived experience. The use of the personal pronoun “I” immediately prior to the word feel indicates that the subject is taking possession of this experience or emotions. The subjectivity of the word “feel” indicates that others may feel differently than the subject and there is an implicit assumption that others may not agree with the subjects understanding or that objective reality may not match the subject’s perception.
“Progress” is described as moving faster with the possession of the cell phone. This another example of the subject referring to speed of relationship development. Is faster relationship development necessarily superior? Are there benefits to accelerated relationship development? Drawbacks? Under what conditions is it desirable to accelerate relationship development? Is it ever desirable to impede or delay relational development?
The word “can” implies potential or ability to accomplish a task but not necessarily practice. The fact that he describes this as an ability of his own seems significant. Rather than saying “we can talk” he says “I can talk”. This makes me think of how a cell phone can in some ways lend power to it’s possessor. In mythology even many gods were incapable of communicating with one another across great distance and required the services of messenger gods such as Hermes. Modern technology has, in effect, lent us abilities that exceed mythical divine beings. The fact that the subject sees this as a personal ability rather than a feature of the interaction may hold significance.
So in essence, it speeds up our social interaction and in some cases I’d say if a relationship with another human being has a beginning and an end it could actually speed up the end if there was an end.
The phrase “in essence” indicates a defining quality of an object, thought, belief, or action. Without this one thing the very nature of the object, thought, belief etc. would change in a fundamental way. In context, this phrase suggests to me that the subject views speed as the essential property of cellular phones that impacts relationships.
His use of the term “human being” is curious. Again this term seems to have a more clinical or technical connotation to it than a simpler words like “person” or “somebody”. Is there a reason that this particular term was chosen?
The word “if” is used several times and implies that something is conditional. During its first use the subject seems to question whether relationships have neat beginnings and ends. Duration is not be merely a property of friendship but is a property of several or all social relationships. It can be understood conceived of as running along a dimension from the beginning to the end. The subject’s use of “if” seems to indicate some doubt as to whether this is how relationships truly function. “If” is also used in reference to whether relationships actually end. What does this say about the subject? Does he view relational dissolution as avoidable in some relationships? Does he not see beyond the scope of the immediate? Someone wise once told me that all relationships end, if by nothing else than by death. The choice of a conditional phrase here indicates a level of naivety or lack of foresight.
QUOTATION:
R: That’s fine. How has having a cell phone affected your relationships with others?
E: Well I’d say that probably progresses relationships more quickly than if you didn’t have one.
R: How so?
E: Well the more you’re in contact with other people the quicker the relationship goes. For instance, if I had a friend who I’d known for lets say three months or so, I mean that’s a decent amount of time, I mean that’s not forever, if we moved away from each other, and we communicated via mail. Well letters take time to get delivered, people lose interest in that time, you can’t keep up with current events as well. So with a cell phone the relationship progresses a lot faster, I feel like I’ve known the person a lot longer, I can talk to that person everyday if I wanted to. So in essence, it speeds up our social interaction and in some cases I’d say if a relationship with another human being has a beginning and an end it could actually speed up the end if there was an end.
MEMO:
Well I’d say that probably progresses relationships more quickly than if you didn’t have one.
“Probably” indicates a property of ambiguity which can vary from extreme doubt to certainty. His use of the word probably indicates that he believes something is more likely to occur than not although the out come is still in some doubt. Often it is used synonymously with the word likely.
For me the word “progress” has clinical or technical connotations so it seems unusual that to me that the subject has picked this word to describe his personal relationships. Progress often entails development. It is the condition of moving from one state to the next. As such there are often liminal periods where the context of progress is not well defined, usually prior to imminent paradigm shifts. Progress also does not proceed at a steady rate. Long periods of stagnation may be punctuated by quick periods of development or “progress” with only minimal growth during the interim. Additionally, progress is not necessarily permanent. Both the Greeks and the Romans amassed large amounts of knowledge that was lost to Western Europe, where it had previously been disseminated. It was only during the Crusades that some of this lost information was reintroduced to the Christian world. Another interpretation of progress is to move towards a goal. One may say they’ve “made progress” when they feel closer to achieving a goal. However, the phrase “making progress” includes the tacit understanding that the goal is not yet achieved.
The use of the word “quickly” implies a property of speed. Speed can vary from lack of movement to extreme. It is important to distinguish speed from velocity. Speed is merely the rate of movement while velocity indicates the rate of movement as well as the direction.
Well the more you’re in contact with other people the quicker the relationship goes.
The first thing that stands out to me here is the phrase “the quicker the relationship goes”. As discussed earlier “quick” denotes a property of speed that does not entail a specification of direction. This phrase taken as a whole indicates that speed is a property of relationships. Based on my personal experiences I would tend to agree with this assertion. Relationships tend to progress at different rates. Why do some relationships progress faster than others? Is the rate of development more uniform in some types of relationships than others? Is speed a property of all relationships? What effect does the speed of relational development have on the relationship?
The word “contact” implies two things that touch one another. Touch might be considered by many to be our most intimate sense. After all we have limited ability to determine what we see, smell, or hear, but we expect to have some say in what we touch and how we ourselves are touched. Individuals have regions of comfort from which individuals will retreat when invaded by other people. We are selective in who we let into our personal regions. In this sense, contact is indicative of relational development as we only let people we trust in close. In a more figurative sense closer in line with that used here, to “maintain contact” with someone is continue to interact despite the constraints of time and space. Historically, time and space have constrained the potential for interaction but technologies such as writing, the post, and telephony have remedied that.
The word “more” indicates a property of amount which can range from little to much, or less to more. The choice of the word “more” also indicates a comparison. In this case the comparison seems to relate to contact. A property of contact may be frequency of contact.
For instance, if I had a friend who I’d known for lets say three months or so, I mean that’s a decent amount of time, I mean that’s not forever
The first thing that I focus on in this line is the word “friend”. Friendship is one of the few voluntary, social relationships that we as a society engage in and therefore could be said to hold a rather unique position in our social networks. Friendships may exist on many different levels and mean different things to different people. A friend to me is someone with whom you spend time but who also fulfills certain social and functional tasks. For example, a friend may be someone who comforts you or whom you buy beers for in a bar. Additionally, what friendship means may vary by the stage of life you are in. What does the term friendship mean to the subject? The subject is nineteen year old college student. How does the subject’s age effect his understanding of friendship? Furthermore, the subject is a college student. College is often thought of as a period of instability with major life changes occurring in a relatively quick succession. How does the University culture effect his understanding of what qualifies as friendship?
“Time” or duration appears to be an important property of friendship. There are several references made to time in just this one line. These range from the indistinct (ie. A decent amount of time) to the specific (ie. Three monthes, or forever). The duration of a friendship likely plays an important role in the level of development it has achieved.
The word “decent” to me is an interesting lexical choice in that it can reasonably be interpreted in two distinct ways. First, decent can be interpreted as “good”. A more likely interpretation in my opinion is “adequate”. This property of adequacy suggests that in order for something to fulfill a certain function it must be deemed adequate. The logical question that follows is what determines adequacy? Are there numerous criteria or is it merely the a singular phenomenon such as the passage of time?
if we moved away from each other, and we communicated via mail. Well letters take time to get delivered, people lose interest in that time, you can’t keep up with current events as well.
“Moved away” indicates an increase in space. This may be significant in that increases in space may constrain interaction.
“Take time” is an interesting choice of words. When someone “takes” something they possess it. When used in this sense it refers to something that accompanies and individual. If letters “take” time, then time may be an important property of the postal system for the subject. Alternatively, the word “take” can mean to take some thing away or to even steal. In this sense the use of letters and the subsequent time requirements may diminish some aspects of the interaction.
Two word pairs in the remainder of this line seem especially important. First, “lose interest” implies interest wanes with the passage of time. It is something that may be difficult to retain. When something is lost it may never be recovered. Alternatively, it may be rediscovered accidentally at some future point in the future or even sought out. As a result, loss may be either permanent or temporary. Furthermore, implicit in the concept of loss is the concept of value. Things that are not worth anything are rarely lost because no one desires to look for them. For example, one does not lose an empty hamburger wrapper, but one may lose one’s wedding ring.
The second word pair of interest is “can’t keep”. “Keep” implies possession. Something that is kept is retained. An alternative definition also implies physical support or care. A mistress can be kept. Likewise a house or dwelling can be up kept. This connotation of the word implies maintenance.
So with a cell phone the relationship progresses a lot faster, I feel like I’ve known the person a lot longer, I can talk to that person everyday if I wanted to.
The word “feel” can be interpreted as relating to the sense of touch or as relating to emotions. However, in this context it appears to me to represent a level subjectivity intrinsic in lived experience. The use of the personal pronoun “I” immediately prior to the word feel indicates that the subject is taking possession of this experience or emotions. The subjectivity of the word “feel” indicates that others may feel differently than the subject and there is an implicit assumption that others may not agree with the subjects understanding or that objective reality may not match the subject’s perception.
“Progress” is described as moving faster with the possession of the cell phone. This another example of the subject referring to speed of relationship development. Is faster relationship development necessarily superior? Are there benefits to accelerated relationship development? Drawbacks? Under what conditions is it desirable to accelerate relationship development? Is it ever desirable to impede or delay relational development?
The word “can” implies potential or ability to accomplish a task but not necessarily practice. The fact that he describes this as an ability of his own seems significant. Rather than saying “we can talk” he says “I can talk”. This makes me think of how a cell phone can in some ways lend power to it’s possessor. In mythology even many gods were incapable of communicating with one another across great distance and required the services of messenger gods such as Hermes. Modern technology has, in effect, lent us abilities that exceed mythical divine beings. The fact that the subject sees this as a personal ability rather than a feature of the interaction may hold significance.
So in essence, it speeds up our social interaction and in some cases I’d say if a relationship with another human being has a beginning and an end it could actually speed up the end if there was an end.
The phrase “in essence” indicates a defining quality of an object, thought, belief, or action. Without this one thing the very nature of the object, thought, belief etc. would change in a fundamental way. In context, this phrase suggests to me that the subject views speed as the essential property of cellular phones that impacts relationships.
His use of the term “human being” is curious. Again this term seems to have a more clinical or technical connotation to it than a simpler words like “person” or “somebody”. Is there a reason that this particular term was chosen?
The word “if” is used several times and implies that something is conditional. During its first use the subject seems to question whether relationships have neat beginnings and ends. Duration is not be merely a property of friendship but is a property of several or all social relationships. It can be understood conceived of as running along a dimension from the beginning to the end. The subject’s use of “if” seems to indicate some doubt as to whether this is how relationships truly function. “If” is also used in reference to whether relationships actually end. What does this say about the subject? Does he view relational dissolution as avoidable in some relationships? Does he not see beyond the scope of the immediate? Someone wise once told me that all relationships end, if by nothing else than by death. The choice of a conditional phrase here indicates a level of naivety or lack of foresight.
