‘The fragile science of bruising’ – Observations on intercorporeal connections between coaches and boxers before and during a fight

References

• Allen-Collinson, J., & Hockey, J. (2017). “Intercorporeal enaction and synchrony – the case of distance running together.” In C. Meyer & U. v. Wedelstaedt (Eds.), Moving bodies in interaction – interacting bodies in motion: Intercorporeality, interkinesthesia, and enaction in sports (Vol. 8, pp. 173–191). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. doi:10.1075/ais.8.07all.
   Google Scholar
• Allen-Collinson, J., & Owton, H. (2015). Intense embodiment: Senses of heat in women’s running and boxing. Body & Society, 21(2), 245–268. doi:10.1177/1357034X14538849
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold, L. (2012). Dialogic embodied action: Using gesture to organize sequence and participation in instructional interaction. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 45(3), 269–296. doi:10.1080/08351813.2012.699256
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkinson, P., & Morriss, L. (2017). On Ethnographic knowledge. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(5), 323–331. doi:10.1177/1077800416655825
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bassetti, C., & Liberman, K. (2021). The orderliness and sociability of “talking together”: Portrait of a conversational jam session. Social Interaction Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 4(1). doi:10.7146/si.v4i1.122793
   Google Scholar
• Beauchez, J. (2018). Boxing, the gym, and men: The mark of the fist. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-56029-8
   Google Scholar
• Coates, S. (1999). Analysing the physical: An ethnomethodological study of boxing. Ethnographic Studies, 4(1), 14–26.
   Google Scholar
• Ehmer, O., & Brône, G. (2021). Instructing embodied knowledge: Multimodal approaches to interactive practices for knowledge constitution. Linguistics Vanguard, 7(s4), 20210012. doi:10.1515/lingvan-2021-0012
   Google Scholar
• Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Garfinkel, H., & Wieder, D. L. (1992). Two incommensurable, asymmetrically alternate technologies of social analysis. In G. Watson & R. M. Seiler (Eds.), Text in context: Contributions to ethnomethodology (pp. 175–206). Newbury Park: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Girton, G. D. (1986). Kung Fu: Toward a praxiological hermeneutic of the martial arts. In H. Garfinkel (Ed.), Ethnomethodological studies of work (pp. 60–91). London: Routledge/Kegan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Hockey, J. (2013). Knowing the ‘going. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise & Health, 5(1), 127–141. doi:10.1080/2159676X.2012.693531
   Google Scholar
• Hockey, J., & Allen-Collinson, J. (2013). Distance running as play/work: Training-together as a joint accomplishment. In P. Tolmie & M. Rouncefield (Eds.), Ethnomethodology at play (pp. 211–226). Farnham: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Hockey, J., & Allen-Collinson, J. (2018). Distance runners as thermal objects: Temperature work, somatic learning and thermal attunement. Culture Machine, 17/ Thermal Objects, 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Hofstetter, E. (2022). A novice inquiry into unique adequacy. Qualitative Research, 146879412211329. doi:10.1177/14687941221132959
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkings, K. N. (2017). Rock climbers’ communicative and sensory practices: Routine intercorporeality between climbers, rock, and auxiliary technologies. In C. Meyer & U. v. Wedelstaedt (Eds.), Moving bodies in interaction – interacting bodies in motion: Intercorporeality, interkinesthesia, and enaction in sports (pp. 149–172). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. doi:10.1075/ais.8
   Google Scholar
• Jenkings, K. N. (2018). Unique adequacy. Studies of the Military, Militarism and Militarisation Ethnographic Studies, 15(1), 38–57. doi:10.5281/zenodo.1475771
   Google Scholar
• Koschmann, T. (2011). Understanding understanding in action. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(2), 435–437. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2010.08.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindwall, O., & Ekström, A. (2012). Instruction-in-interaction: The teaching and learning of a manual skill. Human Studies, 35(1), 27–49. doi:10.1007/s10746-012-9213-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). Signs. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, C., Meier zu Verl, C., & v. Wedelstaedt, U. (2016). Zwischenleiblichkeit und Interkinästhetik: Dimensionen körperlicher Kopräsenz in der situierten Interaktion. In R. Keller & J. Raab (Eds.), Wissensforschung – Forschungswissen. Beiträge und Debatten zum 1. Sektionskongress der Wissenssoziologie (pp. 317–331). Weinheim: Beltz Juventa.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, C., & v. Wedelstaedt, U. (2013). Skopische Sozialität. Sichtbarkeitsregime und visuelle Praktiken im Boxen. Soziale Welt, Sonderheft Visuelle Soziologie, 64(1–2), 69–95. doi:10.5771/0038-6073-2013-1-2-69
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, C., & v. Wedelstaedt, U., (Eds.). (2017a). Moving bodies in interaction – interacting bodies in motion: Intercorporeality, interkinesthesia, and enaction in sports. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. doi:10.1075/ais.8
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, C., & v. Wedelstaedt, U. (2017b). Intercorporeality, interkinesthesia, and enaction: New perspectives on Moving bodies in interaction. In C. Meyer & U. V. Wedelstaedt (Eds.), Moving bodies in interaction – interacting bodies in motion: Intercorporeality, interkinesthesia, and enaction in sports (pp. 1–24). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. doi:10.1075/ais.8.01mey
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, C., & v. Wedelstaedt, U. (2018). Multiparty coordination under time pressure: The social organisation of handball team time-out activities. In E. Reber & C. Gerhardt (Eds.), Embodied activities in face-to-face and mediated settings: Social encounters in time and space (pp. 217–254). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, C., & v. Wedelstaedt, U. (2020). Achieving competitive hardness: The preference for hard touch as practical accomplishment in professional handball. Social Interaction, 3(1). doi:10.7146/si.v3i1.120253
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, C., & v. Wedelstaedt, U. (2022). Semiotic and asemiotic practices in boxing. Semiotica, 2022(248), 251–278. doi:10.1515/sem-2022-0075
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oates, J. C. (2006). On boxing. New York: Harper Perennial.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1987). Recycled turn beginnings, a precise repair mechanism in conversation’s turn-taking organization. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organisation (pp. 70–85). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, D. H. T. (2008). The art and aesthetics of boxing. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
   Google Scholar
• Selting, M., Auer P, Barth-Weingarten D. (2011). A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT 2. Gesprächsforschung - Online-Zeitschrift Zur Verbalen Interaktion, 12, 1–51.
   Google Scholar
• Sugden, J. P. (1996). Boxing and society: An international analysis. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• v. Wedelstaedt, U., & Singh, A. (2017). “Chapter 13. Intercorporeality with imaginary bodies: The case of trampoline and boxing training.” In C. Meyer & U. v. Wedelstaedt (Eds.), Moving bodies in interaction – interacting bodies in motion: Intercorporeality, interkinesthesia, and enaction in sports (Vol. 8, pp. 323–344). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. doi:10.1075/ais.8.13vwe.
   Google Scholar
• Wacquant, L. (2004). Body & soul: Notebooks of an apprentice boxer. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wacquant, L. (2011). Habitus as topic and tool: Reflections on becoming a prizefighter. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 8(1), 81–92. doi:10.1080/14780887.2010.544176
   Google Scholar
• Woodward, K. (2007). Boxing, masculinity, and identity: The “I” of the tiger. London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203020180
   Google Scholar