Language, discourse and politics

After discussing the meaning of the word politics, this paper shows that there are four possible approaches to the issue of the relationships between language, discourse and politics: a) the intrinsic political nature of language; b) the relations of power between discourses and their political dimension; c) the relations of power between languages and the political dimension of their usage and; d) linguistic policies. This paper addresses only the first two of these items. Languages have an intrinsically political nature because they subject their speakers to their order. The acts of silencing operationalized in discourse manifest a relation of power. The spread of discourses in the social space is also subject to the order of power. The use of language may be the space of pertinence, but is also that of exclusion, separation and even the elimination of the other. Therefore, language is not a neutral communication tool, but it is permeated by politics, by power. Because of the dislocations that it produces, literature is a form of swindling language, unveiling the powers that are imprinted on it.

ADHD in a representative sample of the Brazilian population: estimated prevalence and comparative adequacy of criteria between adolescents and adults according to the item response theory

Background: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a clinically significant disorder in adulthood, but current diagnostic criteria and instruments do not seem to adequately capture the complexity of the disorder in this developmental phase. Accordingly, there are limited data on the proportion of adults affected by the disorder, specially in developing countries. Method: We assessed a representative household sample of the Brazilian population for ADHD with the Adult ADHD Self-report Scale (ASRS) Screener, and evaluated the instrument according to the Rasch model of item response theory. Results: The sample was comprised by 3007 individuals, and the overal prevalence of positive screeners for ADHD was 5.8% [95% confidence interval (CI), 4.8-7.0]. Rasch analyses revealed the misfitt of the overall sample to expectations of the model. The evaluation of the sample stratified by age revealed that data for adolescents showed a signficant fittnes to the model expectations, while items completed by adults were not adequated. Conclusions: The lack of fitness to the model for adult respondents challenges the possibility of a linear transformation of the ordinal data into interval measures and the utilization of parametric analyses of data. This result suggests that diagnostic criteria and instruments for adult ADHD must take into account a developmental perspective. Moreover, it calls for further evaluation of currently employed research methods in light of modern theories of psychometrics. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.