3 resultados para vignette in-text
em Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte(UFRN)
Resumo:
The Textual Analysis of Discourse has its origin in Text Linguistics and it aims at studying the co(n)text meaning production based on the analysis of concrete texts by offering elements to the understanding of the text as a discourse practice throughout the plans or levels of linguistic analysis. In this perspective, we intend to investigate the enunciative responsibility phenomenon in the sentencing court judgment. To do so, we review the theoretical contributions of Textual Analysis of Discourse (ADAM, 2011) and the Enunciative Linguistics from various authors, among them, Rabatel (1998, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2010), Nølke (2001, 2005, 2009, 2013), Nølke, Fløttum and Norén (2004), Guentchéva (1994, 1996) and Guentchéva et al. (1994). In this direction, we investigate the enunciative responsibility through a range that comprises the phenomenon from four gradations, each one with a kind of point of view (PoV) and with links that may mark the assumption or the distance from the point of view. Regarding the legal approach of the thesis, our theoretical anchoring follows several authors, among them, Petri (1994), Soto (2001), Alvarez (2002), Alves (2003), Cornu (2005), Albi (2007), Bittar (2010), Asensio and Polanco (2011), López Samaniego (2006), López Montolío and Samaniego (2008), Montolío (2002, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013), Sterling (2010), Prieto (2013), Lawrence and Rodrigues (2013) and Rodrigues, Passeggi and Silva Neto (2014). Our corpus is composed of 13 sentences from criminal cases arising from the district of Currais Novos-RN, completed in 2012. The results reveal how the judge, from various enunciative instances, builds the court decision, which allowed us to understand the configuration of (non) assumption of enunciative responsibility in the sentencing court judgment discourse genre. In conclusion, we perceive that the discourse units are envisaged or through the assumption, or the non assumption of PoV by the enunciative instances, what guides the producer organization argumentative text and his (her) communicative purposes. With that, the judge creates and/or modifies values and beliefs, induces and/or guides his (her) interlocutor by being able to demonstrate objectivity and/or preventing his (her) face through the mediated constructions or engage through the assumption of the enunciative responsibility of the propositional content of an utterance. In short, we reaffirm our belief that the (non) assumption of the enunciative responsibility configures as an argumentative mechanism strongly marked by the producer of the text with a view to their communicative purposes. The sentence, therefore, is constructed in this game of taking and/or not taking of statements according to argumentative orientation and the objectives of the text producer.
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.
