Loading...
Publication
(Des)acordo ortográfico: análise discursivo-pragmática da polémica verbal em textos de opinião sobre o acordo ortográfico de 1990
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.9 MB | Adobe PDF |
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
A presente tese de doutoramento é um trabalho de investigação cujo principal objetivo é
estudar a construção da polémica verbal num corpus de artigos de opinião sobre o Acordo Ortográfico de 1990, nas perspetivas da Análise do Discurso, da Retórica, das Teorias da Argumentação e
da Pragmática.
Partindo de um corpus constituído por doze artigos de opinião, sobre o Acordo Ortográfico
de 1990, dados à estampa na imprensa portuguesa, entre 2015 e 2017 (inclusive), ensaiámos perceber de que forma se constrói o discurso polémico no âmbito desses textos, identificando as regularidades da organização e do funcionamento da polémica escrita, bem como os argumentos e contraargumentos ativados nos exemplares. Privilegiámos, nesse sentido, e num primeiro momento, questões relacionadas com a construção discursiva dos ethè dos autores dos textos, evidências relativas
à natureza dialógica dos discursos em análise, assim como dos diferentes graus de agressividade
presentes. Seguidamente, procedemos ao levantamento dos tipos de argumentos e contra-argumentos convocados, procurando perceber se a sua natureza era estritamente linguística ou abarcava
outras esferas, como a política e a pessoal. Complementarmente, refletimos sobre a própria estrutura
do artigo de opinião, tendo em conta aquele que se prevê ser o seu modelo genérico.
Os resultados da análise permitiram-nos comprovar que os textos de opinião analisados têm
uma natureza polémica, centrada na necessidade de denegrir o adversário, mais do que em defender
ou atacar o texto em apreço; a maioria dos autores esgrimem argumentos que se afastam do cerne
da discussão dos fundamentos do AO e organizam o seu texto em torno de outras questões, como
as falhas de conduta ou de caráter dos seus oponentes; e mobilizam, preferencialmente, argumentos
de natureza pessoal, política, histórica, entre outros, distanciando-se dos argumentos de natureza
linguística, que, quando convocados, incorrem em imprecisões linguísticas.
The present doctoral thesis is a research work whose main goal is to study the construction of verbal polemics in a corpus of opinion articles about the Orthographic Agreement of 1990, from the perspectives of Discourse Analysis, Rhetoric, Argumentation Theories and Pragmatics. Based on a corpus of twelve opinion articles about the Orthographic Agreement of 1990, published in the Portuguese press between 2015 and 2017 (included), we tried to understand how the polemical discourse is built within these texts, identifying the regularities of the organization and functioning of written polemics, as well as the arguments and counter-arguments activated in the examples. We privileged, in this sense, and in a first moment, questions related to the discursive construction of the authors’ ethè, evidence concerning the dialogical nature of the discourses under analysis, as well as the different degrees of aggressiveness present. Then, we proceeded to the survey of the types of arguments and counter-arguments, trying to understand if their nature was strictly linguistic or if they embraced other spheres, such as political and personal. In addition, we reflected on the structure of the opinion article itself, taking into account what is expected to be its generic model. The results of the analysis allowed us to prove that the opinion texts analyzed have a polemic nature, focused on the need to decrease the opponent, rather than on defending or attacking the text under consideration; most of the authors make arguments that move away from the core of the discussion of the fundamentals of the OA and organize their text around other issues, such as the failures of conduct or character of their opponents; and they mobilize, preferably, arguments of a personal, political, historical nature, among others, distancing themselves from arguments of a linguistic nature, which, when invoked, incur in linguistic inaccuracies.
The present doctoral thesis is a research work whose main goal is to study the construction of verbal polemics in a corpus of opinion articles about the Orthographic Agreement of 1990, from the perspectives of Discourse Analysis, Rhetoric, Argumentation Theories and Pragmatics. Based on a corpus of twelve opinion articles about the Orthographic Agreement of 1990, published in the Portuguese press between 2015 and 2017 (included), we tried to understand how the polemical discourse is built within these texts, identifying the regularities of the organization and functioning of written polemics, as well as the arguments and counter-arguments activated in the examples. We privileged, in this sense, and in a first moment, questions related to the discursive construction of the authors’ ethè, evidence concerning the dialogical nature of the discourses under analysis, as well as the different degrees of aggressiveness present. Then, we proceeded to the survey of the types of arguments and counter-arguments, trying to understand if their nature was strictly linguistic or if they embraced other spheres, such as political and personal. In addition, we reflected on the structure of the opinion article itself, taking into account what is expected to be its generic model. The results of the analysis allowed us to prove that the opinion texts analyzed have a polemic nature, focused on the need to decrease the opponent, rather than on defending or attacking the text under consideration; most of the authors make arguments that move away from the core of the discussion of the fundamentals of the OA and organize their text around other issues, such as the failures of conduct or character of their opponents; and they mobilize, preferably, arguments of a personal, political, historical nature, among others, distancing themselves from arguments of a linguistic nature, which, when invoked, incur in linguistic inaccuracies.
Description
Keywords
Polémica Análise do discurso Pragmática Argumentação Polemics Speech analysis Pragmatics Argumentation
Citation
Ninitas, Mariana Rosa Moita Silva - (Des)acordo ortográfico [Em linha]: análise discursivo-pragmática da polémica verbal em textos de opinião sobre o acordo ortográfico de 1990. [Em linha]. [S.l.]: [s.n.], [2023]. 346 p.