Cultura da representação de arquitetura: concursos de projeto, Brasil 2008-2011

This thesis deepens the issues pointed out in our master's dissertation (2009) and the following texts about architectural projects representation presented in architectural competitions. It aims to identify the representation culture of projects from architectural competitions. Were there common ways to argue among successful architects? Which were them? How extent the various arguments are consistent or what is the discursive coherent? Which interlocutors were privileged in argumentation, the requesting ones or those that evaluate the proposals? To answer these questions, we began from a correlation suggested by TOSTRUP (1999) among some drawings – plans, sections, façades, perspective, details or texts - and emphasized aspects in a project argumentation (place, zoning, environmental comfort, energy efficiency, etc.). On the top of this, we add functions that DURAND (2003) indicates relevant to architectural representations: conception, communication or seduction and execution. Other writers, such as COLLINS (1971), COLLYER (2004), MOON (2005), BANDEIRA (2007), and OXMAN (2008) in different ways, offered us subsidies to relate kinds of architectural representations with specific functions or strategies of persuasion. Thus, for 08 Brazilian competitions, occurred between 2008 – 2011, we analyzed the requests from the brief of the official announcement, the evaluations of the jurors, and the boards of the winning designs – graphical and textual representations. That allowed us to observe a representation culture predominantly based on perspectives and plans, even been articulated in different arguments. This may emphasize since objective aspects as building execution to appeals of mere visual seduction. In what regards to the audience, even when the official announcement resembled to one another, the winners’ argumentation were different, suggesting a possible jury’s privilege as an interlocutor.

For the win (FTW)! Contribuições de um serious game para o ensino-aprendizagem de argumentação

This is a qualitative and reflexive research with focus on digital literacy. Among the digital media that could support the teaching of argumentation in the Science & Technology and Information Technology undergraduate courses of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, we chose a serious game as object of research. Given the object of study in the discipline of reading and writing II – argumentation and genre from the order of argumentative writing -, common to the undergraduate courses mentioned, we invest on the development of a serious game, named ArgumentACTION, because we believe that it may, in fact, become a promising didactic instrument. Therefore we intend to understand whether and how this game can help students develop their reading and writing skills more independently, specifically towards an argumentative order genre: the opinion piece. With this research, we intend to contribute to the teaching of the Portuguese language on three bases: extending theoretical scope, in order to generate greater intelligibility on the teaching-learning process of argumenting; proposing a new methodological possibility, with the incorporation of a serious games to teaching; perfecting the game with which we are working, in order to build – and make available – a more refined digital tool to subsidize the teaching and learning of reading and writing of opinion pieces. To do so, we use the following as theoretical-methodological: Studies of Literacy (KLEIMAN, 2012b; TINOCO, 2008; OLIVEIRA, 2010; GEE, 2009; 2010; ROJO, 2012), The Applied Linguistics (KLEIMAN, 1998; BUSH-LEE, 2009), The Philosophy of Language (BAKHTIN, VOLOSHINOV, 2012) and Critical Pedagogy (DEWEY, 2010). A group of students from the upper mentioned undergraduate courses collaborated with this research by playing and analyzing the game. They were also interviewed about their experience in this matter. From the data generated, we established the categories of analysis: decollection, interest, multimodality/multisemiosis and interactivity, agent of literacy, learning principles. The conclusions we obtained show that the investment in applications, especially games, can bring real benefits to the teaching/learning of the Portuguese language; moreover they reveal that the work on argumenting has much to gain with the incorporation of serious games; however the possible advantages depend on a focused teaching practice and constant improvements and updates of this type of interactive tool, as well as the pedagogical practice from those who use and develop the games.

Argumentação em foco: a perspectiva de avaliação do ENEM

Nowadays ENEM is the main large-scale evaluation instrument of Brazilian education. Universities also often use it in order to select their candidates. Reading exam seeks to evaluate student’s capacity of producing argumentative and dissertation prose writing about a social, scientific, cultural or political theme. This paper is located in this context: we want to discuss the evaluation of ENEM’s Writing Exam argumentation. Our startpoint is presuppose that the capacity to develop a well-argued text evaluation goes through several specific skills, which cover different aspects of what is understood about argumentation process. Therefore, considering argumentation as an object of different theoretical approaches and covers different concepts, we intend to verify not only the approaches, but also subjacent concepts and how they were converted into skills and competences established on the ENEM Writing Exam’s matrix of correction. With regard to the nature, it is a theoretical paper, in other words, we intend to offer only a discussion about the theme, not necessarily offering a practical application. Concerning to the goals, it has an exploratory character as we intend to offer a problem treatment, in order to make it more explicit and them construct some hypotheses. In these terms, we surveyed some theoretical approaches about argumentation and presented three conceptions: rhetorical argumentation, textual argumentation and linguistics argumentation. At next, we analyzed the participant’s guide (ENEM’s 2013 Writing Exam ) and how each one of these conceptions are mobilized in the writing evaluation, beginning from how they are considered on the description of competences and skills up to used on correction. This analysis shows that is not assumed a very well established theoretical base, which can contribute to a certain fragility on the Writing Exam evaluation process.

O plano de texto e as marcas linguísticas da responsabilidade enunciativa no artigo de opinião do vestibular 2010 da UFRN

With this thesis, we investigate papers produced by candidates to the vestibular 2010 from UFRN related to the (non) taking on of different points of view in the textual zone of the argumentation and counter-argumentation. The candidates had to produce an opinion article about the polemic theme of the security cameras. The corpus of this research contents 100 papers produced by the candidates to the vestibular 2010 from different areas (humans I, humans II, technological I, technological II and biomedical). To this study, we are based on theoretical perspectives from authors of different theories and linguistic fields that dialog among them. In this direction, we follow Bakhtin (1995), Rabatel (2008 a, 2008 b), Guentchéva (1994, 1996, 2011) and Rodrigues, Passeggi e Silva Neto (2010), among others, that are concerned to dialogism, enunciative theories, discuss analyzes, and linguistic of the text. This group of linguistic approach is linked to the Textual Analyze of the Discuss (ADAM, 2011), that conducts analyze of the data of this research. Related to the methodology, we follow the qualitative analyze in an interpretative way. We investigate how the candidate, as a writer, takes on information inserted in his/her paper. With this in mind, this research tries to answer the following questions: (1) How the candidate organizes his/her discuss in respect to the enunciative responsibility? (2) Which linguistic marks conduct to identify the different voices in the texts? (3) How the textual plan is presented in the opinion article? (4) In which part of the textual plan is possible to identify the enunciative responsibility? In this sense, the aims of this study are identify, describe, analyze and interpret the different voices presented in the text and the way the candidate takes on (or not) the different points of view presented in the papers during argumentation and counterargumentation movement. In general, the results reveal that the presence of linguistic marks (connectors, people marks, among others) design the grade of enunciative responsibility of the writer, stimulating his/her involving and taking on enunciative responsibility.

Os operadores argumentativos como estratégia linguística e discursiva da argumentação na sentença judicial

We studied in this dissertation the argumentation in the court judgment, which goal was to identify, describe and explain the running of argumentative operators in the argumentative orientation of text and discourse built through the text of the judgment. We support our research in the constructs adopted for the ATD – (Textual Analysis of the Discourses) - Adam (2011), in the studies about the Aristotle’s Rhetoric (1959) and Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca (1996) and other works such as of the Alves (2005), Capez (2008), Charaudeau (2012), Keller and Bastos (2015), Koch (2009; 2011), Rodrigues, Silva Neto and Passeggi (2010), Trubilhano and Henriques (2013). In a methodological way, we made use of deductive-inductive method, because we analyzed the argumentation in an "unknown" text - particular case - based on a theory already known (about language, text and argumentation). About the nature and objectives, our search was characterized as qualitatively and as an explanatory and descriptive investigation, with technical procedures of documental collection of Bibliographic Search. As corpus, we use a court judgment of character condemnatory, issued on September 10, 2014 and taken from the online site of the Federal Court of Rio Grande do Norte (JFRN). The results revealed that the argumentative operators exercised decisive roles in the organization of argumentative strategies of the text and the speech , guiding the announcer to the Desired conclusion by the enunciator. It was also possible to conclude that the use of argumentative operators allowed syllogistic constructions in the form of presentation of the arguments and in the construction of argumentation. In addition, operators like "but", "until", "already", "although" etc. helped to identify in the data's analysis the point of view (PoV) of the enunciator, the expectation break about the previous enunciate and / or the value scale given to the argument. Finally, with the use of argumentative operators the enunciator introduced arguments able to demonstrate/justify a thesis and refute an opposing thesis towards a conclusion sought by the own enunciator.

Os operadores argumentativos como estratégia linguística e discursiva da argumentação na sentença judicial

We studied in this dissertation the argumentation in the court judgment, which goal was to identify, describe and explain the running of argumentative operators in the argumentative orientation of text and discourse built through the text of the judgment. We support our research in the constructs adopted for the ATD – (Textual Analysis of the Discourses) - Adam (2011), in the studies about the Aristotle’s Rhetoric (1959) and Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca (1996) and other works such as of the Alves (2005), Capez (2008), Charaudeau (2012), Keller and Bastos (2015), Koch (2009; 2011), Rodrigues, Silva Neto and Passeggi (2010), Trubilhano and Henriques (2013). In a methodological way, we made use of deductive-inductive method, because we analyzed the argumentation in an "unknown" text - particular case - based on a theory already known (about language, text and argumentation). About the nature and objectives, our search was characterized as qualitatively and as an explanatory and descriptive investigation, with technical procedures of documental collection of Bibliographic Search. As corpus, we use a court judgment of character condemnatory, issued on September 10, 2014 and taken from the online site of the Federal Court of Rio Grande do Norte (JFRN). The results revealed that the argumentative operators exercised decisive roles in the organization of argumentative strategies of the text and the speech , guiding the announcer to the Desired conclusion by the enunciator. It was also possible to conclude that the use of argumentative operators allowed syllogistic constructions in the form of presentation of the arguments and in the construction of argumentation. In addition, operators like "but", "until", "already", "although" etc. helped to identify in the data's analysis the point of view (PoV) of the enunciator, the expectation break about the previous enunciate and / or the value scale given to the argument. Finally, with the use of argumentative operators the enunciator introduced arguments able to demonstrate/justify a thesis and refute an opposing thesis towards a conclusion sought by the own enunciator.