Resear ch on Language and Soci al I nt er act i on, 26( 1) , 99- 128 Copyr i ght 1993, Lawr ence Er l baum Associ at es, I nc . Ref l ect i ons on Quant i f i cat i on in the St udy of Conver sat i on Emanuel A . Schegl of f Depar t ment of Soci ol ogy Uni ver si t y of Cal i f orni a, Los Angel es Sever al year s ago, a gr aduat e st udent with a quant i t at i ve back- gr ound who was t aki ng my cour se on " Conver sat i onal St r uct ur es" r ai sed t he quest i on, " Why don' t you peopl e quant i f y?" Thi s st udent seemed cl ear l y t o f i nd t he mat eri al s and t he cour se' s st ance t owar d t hem engagi ng, and di d not mean t he quest i on so muc h as a chal l enge as a recommendat i on. Per haps it had been prompt ed by t he so- cal l ed i nf ormal quant i f i cat i on r epr esent ed in t he c ommon use in s ome conver sat i on - anal yt i c wri t i ng of t erms such as massi vel y, over whel m- i ngl y, r egul ar l y, or di nar i l y, and ( as in t he cur r ent sent ence) c ommonl y . I r esponded to t he quest i on at s ome l engt h, r evi ewi ng a number of const r ai nt s on " ser i ous" or "f or mal " quant i f i cat i on in t he st udy of conver sat i on -mat t ers t hat seemed to me c ommon knowl edge (in a di f f er ence sense of c ommon) , al t hough most l y di sr egar ded in pr act i ce; in any case, not hi ng new . Si nce t hat time, I have had occasi on to di scuss t hese r ef l ect i ons with pr act i t i oner s of sever al di sci pl i nes in t he soci al / human sci ences, i n- cl udi ng many f or whom quant i f i cat i on is an i mport ant t ool .' On t he Request s f or r epr i nt s shoul d be sent to Emanuel A. Schegl of f , Depar t ment of Soci ol ogy , Uni ver si t y of Cal i f orni a, Los Angel es, Hai nes Hal l , Room 264, Los Angel es, CA 90024.