Naturism is an alternative discourse, as consciously and systematically proposes a vision of reality, an order of things and a logic of social relations that diverge from the hegemonic ideology. In this sense, this naturalism is political, if we understand the political and ethical proposal of interaction and social action. There arises the need for its exponents to adopt discursive strategies that allow them to justify it. Then drove the hypothesis that the discursive strategies used by the author in question share some.
Are our goals in this paper: review of the structures of meaning in the discourse of that author through the selected sample, those pertaining to the construction of the identity I, We, Naturism and underlying the discursive construction of reality be must be present and the alternative proposal, to identify the strategic functions that are fulfilled in the discourse, to compare the logic of this discourse with political discourse.
Define the arguments means, first, to break with formal logic and tradition of thought and, second, discussion regarding the argument as a subject area that restates much of the same original tradition. However, propose plot analysis as a tool for linguistic analysis also leads us to understand it as a concrete manifestation of language in use. And speaking of argument precisely as a phenomenon of language in use is necessary to perform three basic tasks As a distinct tradition of formal logic, is just add the notion of audience.
As we approach the definition of argument from the rhetorical tradition comes to an argument for a hearing. Put in colloquial terms, the argument is an argument for someone in a given situation. DEVELOPMENT Essential features of political discourse. These features are: The leader takes as its starting point the current situation and gives its opinion, is offered in exchange for the current situation, providing tools for that change, the political discourse as an agent of degradation processes and as opponent agent improvement processes to the issuer and its group
Are our goals in this paper: review of the structures of meaning in the discourse of that author through the selected sample, those pertaining to the construction of the identity I, We, Naturism and underlying be the discursive construction of reality must be present and the alternative proposal, to identify the strategic functions that are fulfilled in the discourse, to compare the logic of this discourse with political discourse. Success will set the thematic structure of discourse, the semantic actants and estancial system and processes.
Method and corpus Critical discourse analysis by considering that the text is necessarily embedded in a context, the discourse being the conjunction of both components. The text that conveys a set of meanings that makes sense if considered in relation to the context: the participants of the communicative event, time, space and circumstances. Actants and lexicalization processes Is the analysis of lexicalization that allows us to arrive later the meaning of the discourse structures.
The establishment of semantic fields Pottier, made up of complex structured syntactically significant, is one of the linguistic level that most directly leads us to discover the relations of logical-conceptual level. Estancial Analysis The above leads to the development of hospitality towards areas where we can see the representation of events through the relationships between the actants. We saw actantial areas which are located in the actants of the two themes in the discourse.
We note that the patient or immediate product of the process issue raised in the decline of the species subject that corresponds to the knot of the initial situation in turn becomes the motivation of the author’s proposal “Naturism”. Another interesting aspect is the structuring of speech by opposing pairs selfish altruism, pollution naturism Well past sunset, which justifies the conclusion that the proposal is constructed as a reverse mirror image of reality. In this sense we could speak of a radical change of the inversion of values. As a distinct tradition of formal logic, is just add the notion of audience.
As we approach the definition of argument from the rhetorical tradition comes to an argument for a hearing. Put in colloquial terms, the argument is an argument for someone in a given situation. He suggested a thesis before an audience, however, we are not understanding this argument as true or false, but as a probable or improbable thesis. If formal logic it is important demonstration in this tradition, we present a new term, testing the rhetoric. To a particular audience he suggested a probable thesis, which must support in his speech.
Clarify that if speech rhetoric involves the exposure of a thesis to an audience in a given situation can be recognized in it three elements: Purpose, probability and adjustment. The rhetoric is a constant interplay between the intentions of a speaker to present this thesis and adjustment may talk to the purposes of that same speaker. But we must specify what we mean by adjustment has nothing to do with the situation in a speech to pronounce. The setting can be understood as the excess or defect in the language. Adjusted speech says what needs to be said and what is enough for the thing to be said
The traditional neo-rhetoric One way to introduce the neo rhetoric is that, as its name suggests, aims to build a theory of argument taking up two central aspects of its predecessor, the rhetorical tradition: First, he insists on demonstrating analytically separate argument. From there, analyzes its consequences for scientific reasoning. Second, re he conceptualizes the purposes of defining a critical constituent of the arguments. Starting orderly tell that to this tradition, the need for theory argument can be explained by science.
The reflection of tradition Neo rhetoric is responsible for what he wanted the formalist tradition, a neutral language for science, however, concludes that such an undertaking is not possible, because in science there are arguments. Even the scientist is a constructor argument to be sanctioned by a community. The argument as a phenomenon of language in use does not comply with any conditions of universality and, although this way of defining it may seem interesting, there is no guidance on this theory methodology which enables the description of actual arguments.
The speeches are not just a kind of transparent film through which and through which you see things, not simply a mirror of what is said and what you think. The discourse has its own consistency, thickness, density, performance. Speech laws exist as economic laws. A speech exists as a monument, it exists as a technique exists as a system of social relations, etc. This density is proper to try to examine speech. The third criticism is sometimes raised by those analysts who are reluctant to address the application of a quantitative approach and formal language.
These analysts prefer proper qualitative or hermeneutic approaches, in which the investigator takes over the object by means of a logic of proximity and depth. The analyst deploys its sociolinguistic competence and comprehensive, also applying conceptual tools that allow you to capture the complex effects of meaning in the text. This perspective is, of course, valid and relevant. But it is also legitimate to adopt a different attitude to the production of meaning. In fact, one can point to the phenomenon of repetition in the surface Textual.
In this perspective, the analysis of cliches political discourse is as revealing as the study of compulsions in psychoanalytic theory. Repetition refers to the gap between a gap or a lost object primary satisfaction in Freudian perspective and the act by which the repressed is to re-emerge. The systematic and extensive approach The conceptual framework we have presented in the preceding section may take the form of a systematic approach and extensive systematic call, then run formal protocols whose principles must be explicit and extensive, since the nalysis is built on a corpus in which all elements have a priori equally. As noted above, the presidential address conceived as central to the production of meaning from the state responds to a logic of sameness. If we consider that the work involves fixing hegemonic ways, admit that the word frequency can serve as an instance of operacionalita of our methodological framework. The repetition is, in effect, as measured by frequency of use of words and associations. The example taken here to illustrate our approach leads directly to the problems we have tackled in the first section.
We had indicated that the word president is part of a designated area in which the basic meanings of politics tend to stabilize around certain significant. Put in simpler terms, the presidential address reflects a kind of script, in which ways to name the collective reality is largely predetermined by the hegemonic relationship underlying the social order. However, rhetoric can not be understood only as a mere cosmetic exercise or wrapping of language. The rhetoric is more than beautiful words that are arranged in a particular linguistic make-up operation.
Rhetoric speech also suggests a particular reasoning scheme. Importantly, linguistic expressions are only the manifestation of these schemes. The rhetoric speaks not only is the art of making good packaging to what is meant, but to expose an idea so that the audience accepts the thesis proposal, unaware of the shortcomings and gaps in the formulation of the proposal. Rhetoric speech presents a reasoning scheme that lacks one or more premises. The logical way to present the test is known as rhetorical enthymeme, which compared with the traditional syllogism shows an inferential chain that lacks one or more premises.
However, the validity of reasoning is not an issue that matters much when it comes to state a thesis before an audience. Everyday speech is full of fallacies. The speeches are not just a kind of transparent film through which and through which you see things, not simply a mirror of what is said and what you think. The discourse has its own consistency, thickness, density, performance. Speech laws exist as economic laws. A speech exists as a monument, it exists as a technique exists as a system of social relations, etc. This density is proper to try to examine speech.
Conclusion In conclusion K. ‘s speech Bhat shares essential features of political discourse. However, there is no specific identification of the opponent or pursues a conquest of political power and institutional, which distance in this speech that is considered strictly political, that is, flowing in and around the area of ??institutional policy understood as the stage of the debate over access to power, by its constitution and legitimation of authority. The speech obviously aim of this study is not intended to venture into that scenario.
However, there is an emphasis on behaviors and beliefs indicate that it considers unethical as the source of a disastrous social situation that leads to the individual and the species to his imminent ruin and destruction also posed principles for change of direction, and presented to naturism as an ideology to be embraced by the subjects of this change. The question then is what model of argumentative analysis can deal with the corpus and their social conditions: Tradition neo rhetoric tries to enroll the plot analysis in social situations in which the argument occurs.
For that warns us that the practical rationality will have different rules apply. In short, we can say that this is the central part of his discussion with formal logic. The argument as a phenomenon of language in use does not comply with any conditions of universality and, although this way of defining it may seem interesting, there is no guidance on this theory methodology which enables the description of actual arguments. As we can see, justice refers to different themes in each case. Peron is justice for social justice, a justice tied to an economic project defined in terms of national independence.
Social justice is also to Alfonsin, but assumes a much more abstract and formal: it is largely an equity rule, the foundation of peaceful coexistence. For Menem, justice refers to the idea of ??responding to the needs of the population health, hunger, security, education in the context of a strongly design welfare. Kirchner connects justice to the citizens, through equity, dignity and inclusion. References to memory and removed impunity to justice for socio-economic and legalistic, to integrate the issue of national identity.