Interação polêmica nos comentários da página do facebook Quebrando o Tabu

• Autor(a) principal: Pereira, Danielle Ketley de Sousa
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Outros Autores: Brito, Mariza Angélica Paiva
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC)
• Texto Completo: http://www.repositorio.ufc.br/handle/riufc/53878
• topic: Linguística Textual; Interação Polêmica; Marcas Textuais

In this article, we address reflections arising from the discussions undertaken in the Grupo de Estudos em Linguística Textual (GELT/UNILAB), which aligns with the investigations of the PROTEXTO Research Group (UFC). It is possible to analyze, through the criteria of analysis of Textual Linguistics, the argumentative aspects in the texts, as proposed by Cavalcante (2016) and defended by Macedo (2018), with the theoretical support of the argumentation analysis in the discourses, of Amossy (2008, 2017). Based on this reference, our purpose is to investigate how textual marks contribute to the construction of argumentation and polemic interaction in comments. The thus analysis sample consists of a set of comments generated from two posts about the Women’s Soccer World Cup 2019, on the page Quebrando o Tabu, on the social network Facebook. The analyzes focus on dissent on the Web, based on the three characteristics of the polemic and actantial structure, according to Amossy (2017). In this sense, we will adopt as theoretical contribution, besides the aforementioned authors, the contributions of Amossy (2008), Cavalcante, Pinto and Brito (2018), Macedo and Cavalcante (2019) and Maia (2019). We will also establish a dialogue between Textual Linguistics and Theory of Argumentation in Discourse, of Amossy (2005, 2011, 2018), in order to contribute to an analysis of argumentation based on parameters of textuality. We start from the hypothesis, developed by Amossy, that the controversy in the public space has three characteristics: the dichotomization, the polarization and the attempt to disqualify the other, and we demonstrate how they present themselves in the analyzed examples.