Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
---|---|---|---|---|
289.68 KB | Adobe PDF |
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Este estudo teve como objectivo perceber, através de práticas discursivas veiculadas na imprensa
oficial de dois grupos políticos – Partido Socialista e Partido Comunista Português –, a forma como
estes dois partidos políticos construíram o significado de um incidente crítico que os opôs – o conflito
no jornal “República” – no contexto revolucionário do pós 25 de Abril. Enquadrado nos pressupostos
de “uma proposta pós moderna” de análise retórica de discurso (Billig, 1991, 2012), bem como das
propostas da Análise Crítica de Discurso de Van Dijk (2006), em particular sobre as dicotomias
argumentativas utilizadas pelas formações políticas em confronto, procedeu-se à reconstrução quer das
polaridades ideológicas utilizadas pelos dois partidos, quer à interpretação dos momentos em que os
discursos políticos se veiculam como maioritários vs. minoritários, e, desse modo, apresentar uma
análise daqueles discursos com base no pressuposto de Billig (1991, 2012) de que a defesa de uma
determinada posição só é entendível como oposição (explícita ou implicitamente) a uma posição
contrária. No discurso socialista o caso “República” é construído como argumento retórico que invoca
aquilo a que se opõe – o “totalitarismo” da atuação do PCP – promovendo uma mobilização que, num
contexto de legitimidade eleitoral (Eleições para a Assembleia Constituinte, ganhas pelo Partido
Socialista), convoca os portugueses à luta pela liberdade de expressão, através de uma generalização
retórica do incidente. No discurso comunista, a retórica do argumento conspirativo (“aliança” do PS
a forças que se opunham ao processo revolucionário) associado a uma bipolarização da realidade
(Reacção vs. Revolução) em torno do caso, seve o propósito de legitimar a actuação revolucionária
do Partido no âmbito do pós 25 de Abril (nomeadamente, tendo em conta a “aliança Povo – MFA”,
recorrentemente evocada). A análise dos discursos, também tendo em conta os mecanismos retóricos
identificados por Potter (1996) e Castro (2002), permitiu proceder à reconstrução do significado do
conflito subjacente aos argumentários apresentados pelos dois grupos políticos em confronto. Em
causa estão diferenças ideológicas e posições sobre a condução política futura do país, em torno de
duas legitimidades: revolucionária vs. eleitoral.
ABSTRACT: The goal of this study is to understand, through discursive practices conveyed by the official media of two political groups – the Socialist Party (Partido Socialista) and the Portuguese Communist Party (Partido Comunista Português) – the way in which these two political parties have constructed the significance of a critical incident which opposed them – the conflict in the “República” newspaper – in the revolutionary context of the post-25 April, 1974. Based on the idea of a “post-modern proposal” of rhetorical analysis of discourse (Billig, 1991, 2012), as well as on the proposals of Critical Analysis of Discourse of Van Dijk (2006), specially the argumentative dichotomy used by the opposing political forces, we reconstruct the ideological polarities used by the two parties and also interpret the moments in which the political discourses are conveyed as majority vs. minority and this way we present an analysis of such discourses based on Billig’s assumption (1991, 2012) that the defense of a certain position can only be understood as opposition (explicit or implicitly) to a contrary position. In the socialist discourse the case “República” is constructed as a rhetorical argument against the “totalitarianism” of PCP’s action, promoting a mobilization which, in a context of electoral legitimacy (Elections for the Constituent Assembly that had just been won by the Socialist Party), convokes Portuguese people to fight for freedom of speech, through the rhetorical generalization of the incident. In the communist discourse, the rhetoric of the conspiracy argument (“alliance” of the Socialist Party and the forces opposed to the revolutionary process) associated with the bipolarization of reality surrounding the case (Reaction vs. Revolution) serves the purpose of legitimating the revolutionary action of the Party in the post-25 April environment (namely having in mind the “People-MFA Alliance”, recurrently evoked). The analysis of the discourses, having also in attention the rhetorical mechanisms identified by Potter (1996) and Castro (2002) allows the reconstruction of the significance of the conflict beneath the argumentation presented by the political parties in dispute. The main issues at stake are the ideological differences and positions about the future conduct of the country, around two legitimacies: revolutionary vs. electoral.
ABSTRACT: The goal of this study is to understand, through discursive practices conveyed by the official media of two political groups – the Socialist Party (Partido Socialista) and the Portuguese Communist Party (Partido Comunista Português) – the way in which these two political parties have constructed the significance of a critical incident which opposed them – the conflict in the “República” newspaper – in the revolutionary context of the post-25 April, 1974. Based on the idea of a “post-modern proposal” of rhetorical analysis of discourse (Billig, 1991, 2012), as well as on the proposals of Critical Analysis of Discourse of Van Dijk (2006), specially the argumentative dichotomy used by the opposing political forces, we reconstruct the ideological polarities used by the two parties and also interpret the moments in which the political discourses are conveyed as majority vs. minority and this way we present an analysis of such discourses based on Billig’s assumption (1991, 2012) that the defense of a certain position can only be understood as opposition (explicit or implicitly) to a contrary position. In the socialist discourse the case “República” is constructed as a rhetorical argument against the “totalitarianism” of PCP’s action, promoting a mobilization which, in a context of electoral legitimacy (Elections for the Constituent Assembly that had just been won by the Socialist Party), convokes Portuguese people to fight for freedom of speech, through the rhetorical generalization of the incident. In the communist discourse, the rhetoric of the conspiracy argument (“alliance” of the Socialist Party and the forces opposed to the revolutionary process) associated with the bipolarization of reality surrounding the case (Reaction vs. Revolution) serves the purpose of legitimating the revolutionary action of the Party in the post-25 April environment (namely having in mind the “People-MFA Alliance”, recurrently evoked). The analysis of the discourses, having also in attention the rhetorical mechanisms identified by Potter (1996) and Castro (2002) allows the reconstruction of the significance of the conflict beneath the argumentation presented by the political parties in dispute. The main issues at stake are the ideological differences and positions about the future conduct of the country, around two legitimacies: revolutionary vs. electoral.
Description
Keywords
25 de Abril de 1974 Análise de discurso Retórica Política 25 April 1974 Discourse analysis Rhetoric Politics
Citation
Análise Psicológica, 32, 105-126
Publisher
ISPA - Instituto Universitário