25

Cet article traite des méthodes interprétatives et des statuts des discours dans la démarche socio-anthropologique, en se centrant sur les rapports de place sur le terrain. L’inclusion du sociologue dans l’analyse des données recueillies interroge la distinction entre discours “authentiques”, “naturels” et discours “artificiels”, voire “biaisés”. Dans cette perspective, les malentendus qui émaillent l’enquête doivent être considérés non pas comme un obstacle mais comme un support de l’analyse. Ainsi, dans le domaine des relations interethniques, la manipulation des frontières sociales et ethniques par les chercheurs comme par les enquêtés – le malentendu doublement bien entendu – constitue notamment un bon révélateur de l’organisation sociale des différences culturelles.

Working relationships in the field: misunderstanding as a resource By concentrating on the relationship between investigator and informer and the places each assumes respectively during an interview, this article deals with the ways that interviews may be interpreted when using a socialanthropological approach. The fact that the sociologist is included in the analysis of data questions the distinction often made between “authentic”, “natural” and “artificial”, or even “slanted” discourse. In such a perspective, the misunderstandings that all interviews inevitably contain must be considered not as an obstacle but rather as a help for the analyst. For instance, in the domain of interethnic relations, the manipulation of the social and ethnic frontiers by the researcher as well as by the informers – a misunderstanding doubly well understood! – clearly reveals the social organization of cultural differences.