Argumentation and impoliteness
the post in the instances of the interaction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47456/cl.v15i31.35662Keywords:
Argumentation, Impoliteness, Interaction, Digital social contexts, FacebookAbstract
Based on the theoretical convergence of the studies of (im)politeness and argumentation, this article aims to analyze (im)polite linguistic-discursive strategies that underlie the oppinions of readers who commented on the news report’s post on Facebook, regarding “Moradores de rua se casam em avenida de BH”. For the construction of the theoretical basis, we based this article on works affiliated to the studies of (im)politeness (LAKOFF, 1973; LEECH, 1983; BROWN; LEVINSON, 1987; CULPEPER, 1996) and argumentation (ROULET, 1989; AMOSSY, 2000; 2009; 2017; RODRIGUES, 2011). Under the guidance of a qualitative paradigm, 22 comments were analyzed on the referred news report, published in 2019 on Portal G1’s Facebook profile. As a result, we noticed, in the corpus, that the interlocutions were permeated by several linguistic-discursive strategies that aimed to ridicule the collective marriage held in Belo Horizonte (BH), revealing clearly aggressive and impolite speech.
Downloads
References
AMOSSY, R. L’argumentation dans le discours. Paris: Armand Colin, 2000.
AMOSSY, R. Argumentation in Discourse: A Socio-discursive approach to arguments. OSSA Conference Archive. 1. 2009. Disponível em: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA8/keynotes/1. Acesso em: 15 maio 2021.
AMOSSY, R. Apologia da polêmica. São Paulo: Contexto, 2017.
ANGENOT, M. Dialogues de sourds. Traité de rhétorique antilogique. Paris: Mille et une nuits, 2008.
BALOCCO, A. E.; SHEPHERD, T. M. G. A violência verbal em comentários eletrônicos: um estudo discursivo-interacional. D.E.L.T.A., v. 33, n. 4, p. 1013-1037, 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-44506536361317067. Acesso em: 15 maio 2021.
BLITVICH, P. G-C.; SIFIANOU, M. Im/politeness and discursive pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, v. 145, p. 91-101, 2019.
BRIZ, A. Cortesía verbal codificada y cortesía verbal interpretada. In: BRAVO, D.; BRIZ, A. (eds.). Pragmática sociocultural: estudios sobre el discurso de cortesía en español. Barcelona: Ariel, 2004.
BROWN, P.; LEVINSON, S. C. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: University Press, 1987.
CABRAL, A. L. T; LIMA, N. V. Argumentação e polêmica nas redes sociais: o papel de violência verbal. Signo, v. 42, n. 73, p. 86-97, 2017.
CARVALHEIRO, J. R.; PRIOR, H.; MORAIS, R. Público, privado e representação online. In: CARVALHEIRO, J. R. (Coord.). A nova fluidez de uma velha dicotomia: público e privado nas comunicações móveis. Covilhã: LabCom, 2015. p. 7-27.
CHIZZOTTI, A. A pesquisa qualitativa em ciências humanas e sociais: evolução e desafios. Revista Portuguesa de Educação, v. 16, n. 2, p. 221-236, 2003.
CULPEPER, J. Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, v. 25, p. 349-367, 1996.
CULPEPER, J. Impoliteness and entertainment in television quiz show: the weakest link. Journal of Politeness Research, v. 1, p. 35-72, 2005.
FONSECA, J. Heterogeneidade na língua e no discurso. FONSECA, J. Linguística e Texto: Teoria, descrição, aplicação. Lisboa: ICALP, 1992. p. 249-292.
GAUTHIER, G. L’argumentation périphérique dans la communication politique: le cas del’argument ad hominem. Hermès, v. 16, n. 2, p. 167-185, 1995.
GOFFMAN, E. Interaction Ritual: essays on face-to-face behavior. UK: Penguin University Books, 1967.
GRICE, H. P. Logic and Conversation. In: JAWORSKI, A.; COUPLAND, N. (Eds.). The Discourse Reader. 2. ed. USA: Routledge, 2006 [1975]. p. 66-77.
HAUGH, M.; CULPEPER, J. Integrative pragmatics and (im)politeness theory. In: ILIE, C.; NORRICK, N. R. (Eds.). Pragmatics and its Interfaces. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2018. p. 213-239.
ILIE, C. Unparliamentary Language: insults as congnitive formas of ideological confrontation. In: DIRVEN, R.; ROSLYN, F.; ILIE, C. (Orgs). Language and Ideology. vol. II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2001. p. 238-261.
KERBRAT-ORECCHIONI, C. Análise da Conversação. São Paulo: Parábola, 2006.
LAKOFF, R. T. The logic of politeness; or, minding your p’s and q’s. In: CORUM, C. et al. (Eds.). Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, p. 292-305, 1973.
LEECH, G. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman, 1983.
LEECH, G. The Pragmatics of Politeness. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.
LOCHER, M.; WATTS, R. Relational work and impoliteness: Negotiating norms and linguistic behaviour. In: BOUSFIELD, D.; LOCHER, M. (eds.). Impoliteness in Language. Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2008. p. 77-99.
MASON, J. Qualitative Researching. 2. ed. London, Thousand Oaks & New Delhi: SAGE, 2002.
MOESCHLER, J. Dire et contradire. Pragmatique de la négation et acte de réfutation dans la conversation. Berne: Peter Lang, 1982.
PERELMAN, C.; OLBRECHTS-TYTECA, L. Traité de l’argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique. Bruxelles: Presses de l’Université Libre de Bruxelles, 1970 [1958].
PLANTIN, C. Le trilogue argumentatif. Présentation de modèle, analyse de cas, Langue Française, v. 112, p. 9-30, 1996.
RODRIGUES, M. das G. S. Ponto de vista emocionado no gênero discursivo comentário on-line – violência verbal. Linha D’Água, v. 34, n. 1, p. 13-28, 2021.
RODRIGUES, S.V. Estrutura e Funcionamento da interação verbal polémica. Contribut para o estudo da polemicidade em Camilo Castelo Branco. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, 2011.
ROULET, E. Une forme peu étudiée de’échange agonal: la controverse. Cahiers de Praxématique, v. 13, n. 3 pp. 7-18, 1989.
TERKOURAFI, M. Beyond the micro-level in politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research, v. 1, n. 2, p. 237-263, 2005.
THOMPSON, J. B. A interação mediada na era digital. Matrizes, v. 12, n. 3, p. 17-44, 2018.
THOMPSON, J. B. The media and modernity: a social theory of the media. Cambridge: Polity, 1995.
VAN EEMEREN, F. H.; GROOTENDORST, R. Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions. A theoretical model for the analysis of discussions directed towards solving conflicts of opinion. Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 1984.
VAN EEMEREN, F. H.; GROOTENDORST, R. Argumentation, communication and fallacies. A pragma-dialectical perspective. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass. Publishers, 1992.
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Revista (Con)Textos Linguísticos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors assign the copyright of the article to the publisher of Revista (Con)Textos Linguísticos (Graduate Program in Linguistics, Ufes), if the submission is accepted for publication. Responsibility for the content of articles rests exclusively with their authors. The full or partial submission of the text already published in this periodical to any other periodical is prohibited.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.