3 resultados para Ensino Direto
em Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte(UFRN)
Resumo:
This paper attempts to investigate the discourse manifestations of the grammatical relation direct object with respect to the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic properties that underlie this element. The research adopts theoretical orientation of the functionalism from North American and Brazilian schools inspired in Givón (1995, 2001), Hopper and Thompson (1980), Chafe (1979), Furtado da Cunha, Oliveira, Martelotta (2003) inter alia. From functionalism, the research uses principles of iconicity, markedness and informativity and it analize categories of transitivity, grounding and animacy. This research is anchored in prototype model (TAYLOR 1995); construction grammar model (GOLDBERG 1996, 2002). Both theoretical orientations share the view that language is a malleable living organism subject to socio-cultural context. Grammar is then the result of created, maintained, and systematized linguistic patterns developed from and used for language use. According to a functional linguistics and cognitivist linguistics verbs are stored in the speakers lexicon in syntactic-semantic frames which are more frequent. These frames carry information concerning obligatory and optional arguments and the semantic roles these arguments take in the clause. The analysis focuses on the semantic type of the verbs and its relationship with the argument encoded as a direct object observing the aspectual nature of verbs. Direct objects are classified according to their morphology (lexical or pronominal noun phrase), semantic role, informational content and animacy. This study discusses pedagogical implications with relation to how the grammatical concepts touched on this paper are treated in school textbooks. The empirical data come from Corpus Discurso & Gramática: a língua falada e escrita na cidade do Natal (FURTADO DA CUNHA, 1998). This corpus is composed of texts that contain spoken and written modalities. These modalities are in turn organized according to different types: personal narratives, retold narrative, description of preferred place, procedural place, procedural description and report on argumentation. The sample data totals 40 texts produced by four language consultants of the last graduation date. The paper shows that the same syntactic structures (formed through Subject-Verb-Object) correspond to different semantic-pragmatic structures in relation to specific communicative purposes even verb is an event, process or state. The argument structure are not aleatory but are related to experience; that is the way humans conceptualize the world and talk about it
Resumo:
This thesis investigates materialization strategies of non-assumption of enunciation responsibility and inscription of an authorial voice in scientific articles produced by initial researchers in Linguistics. The specific focus lays on identify, describe and interpret: i) linguistics marks that assign enunciation responsibility; ii) the positions taken by the first speaker-enunciator (L1/E1) in relation to points of view (PoV) imputed to second enunciators (e2); and iii) the linguistic marks that assign the formulation of themselves' PoV. As a practical deployment, it is proposed to discuss how to teach taking into account text discursive strategies regarding to enunciation responsibility and also authorship in academic and scientific texts. Our research corpus is formed by eight scientific essays and they were selected in a renamed Linguistics scientific magazine which is high evaluated by Qualis/CAPES (Brazil Science Agency). The methodology follows the assumptions of a qualitative research, and an it has such an interpretative basis, even though it takes support in a quantitative approach, too. Theoretically, we based this research on Textual Analysis of Speech and linguistics theories about linguistic enunciation area. The results show two kinds of movements in PoV management: imputation and responsibility. In imputation contexts, the most recursive linguistic marks were reported speech, indirect speech, reported speech with “that”, modalization in reported speech (in enunciation with “according to”, “in agreement with”, “for”), beyond that we see certain points of non-coincidences of speech, specifically the non-coincidence of the speech itself. The way those linguistic marks occur in the text point out three kinds of enunciation positions that are assumed by L1/E1 in relation to PoV of e2: agreement, disagreement and a pseudo neutrality. It was clearly recursive the imputation followed by agreement (explicit or not), this perspective puts other’s voices to defend a speech assumed like own authorship. In speech responsibility contexts, we observed such a formulation of inner PoV that results from theoretical findings undertaken by novice researchers (revealing how he/she interpreted concepts of the theory) or arising from their research data, allowing them to express with more autonomy and without reporting to speeches from e2. Based on those data, we can say that, in text by initial researchers, the authorship is strongly built upon PoV and also dependent from others' words (theory and the scholars quoted there), taking into account that many contexts in which we can observe agreement position, PoV formulations with words taken from e2 and assumed as own words by syntactic integration, the comments about what the other says, the absence of explanations and additions, as well as a data analysis that could show agreement with the theory used to support the work. These results allow us to visualize how initial researcher dialogs with the theoretical enunciation sources he or she takes as support and how he/she displays the status of a subject doing a research and positioning himself/herself as a researcher/author in the scientific field. In assuming the reported speech, when quoting, as a resource that allows the enunciation responsibility and also when doing evidence to the positions of speaker-enunciator in relation do reported PoV, this suggests to a textual-discursive treatment of quoting in academic and scientific text, in a context of teaching that gives attention to the development of communication skills of initial researcher and that can contribute to insert and interact students in the scientific field.
Resumo:
This thesis investigates materialization strategies of non-assumption of enunciation responsibility and inscription of an authorial voice in scientific articles produced by initial researchers in Linguistics. The specific focus lays on identify, describe and interpret: i) linguistics marks that assign enunciation responsibility; ii) the positions taken by the first speaker-enunciator (L1/E1) in relation to points of view (PoV) imputed to second enunciators (e2); and iii) the linguistic marks that assign the formulation of themselves' PoV. As a practical deployment, it is proposed to discuss how to teach taking into account text discursive strategies regarding to enunciation responsibility and also authorship in academic and scientific texts. Our research corpus is formed by eight scientific essays and they were selected in a renamed Linguistics scientific magazine which is high evaluated by Qualis/CAPES (Brazil Science Agency). The methodology follows the assumptions of a qualitative research, and an it has such an interpretative basis, even though it takes support in a quantitative approach, too. Theoretically, we based this research on Textual Analysis of Speech and linguistics theories about linguistic enunciation area. The results show two kinds of movements in PoV management: imputation and responsibility. In imputation contexts, the most recursive linguistic marks were reported speech, indirect speech, reported speech with “that”, modalization in reported speech (in enunciation with “according to”, “in agreement with”, “for”), beyond that we see certain points of non-coincidences of speech, specifically the non-coincidence of the speech itself. The way those linguistic marks occur in the text point out three kinds of enunciation positions that are assumed by L1/E1 in relation to PoV of e2: agreement, disagreement and a pseudo neutrality. It was clearly recursive the imputation followed by agreement (explicit or not), this perspective puts other’s voices to defend a speech assumed like own authorship. In speech responsibility contexts, we observed such a formulation of inner PoV that results from theoretical findings undertaken by novice researchers (revealing how he/she interpreted concepts of the theory) or arising from their research data, allowing them to express with more autonomy and without reporting to speeches from e2. Based on those data, we can say that, in text by initial researchers, the authorship is strongly built upon PoV and also dependent from others' words (theory and the scholars quoted there), taking into account that many contexts in which we can observe agreement position, PoV formulations with words taken from e2 and assumed as own words by syntactic integration, the comments about what the other says, the absence of explanations and additions, as well as a data analysis that could show agreement with the theory used to support the work. These results allow us to visualize how initial researcher dialogs with the theoretical enunciation sources he or she takes as support and how he/she displays the status of a subject doing a research and positioning himself/herself as a researcher/author in the scientific field. In assuming the reported speech, when quoting, as a resource that allows the enunciation responsibility and also when doing evidence to the positions of speaker-enunciator in relation do reported PoV, this suggests to a textual-discursive treatment of quoting in academic and scientific text, in a context of teaching that gives attention to the development of communication skills of initial researcher and that can contribute to insert and interact students in the scientific field.
