competência e argumentação nas afasias: um ... - IEL - Unicamp

AbstractMy dissertation is inscribed within a theoretical approach which takes theargumentation of an enunciative point of view - one of pragmatic and lingusiticcharacter - in which different aspects are considered, such as (i) the linguisticinstruments proper of the argumentative constitution, specific linguistic operatorsand modifiers, (ii) the relation of reciprocity / intersubjectivity between theinterlocutores and (iii) the effects of meaning provoked by the objectification ofsignification.My reflexions on argumention are opposed to the classically establishedconsideration of the relation between aphasia and metalanguage which seesaphasia as a metalinguistic loss or alteration, that is, of the capacity owned byindividuals to make reference of the world through categories of language, takenas a system contatined in itself.Therefore, I reconsider the question of the heuristic advantages that comefrom the postulation of a specific competence - strictly linguistic or cognitive - forclaiming or of the postulation of a broader competence, from the most variedgestures which may allow argumentation (in language). Argumentation here meansperforming it in a way suitable to the different interactive situations which thesubject undergoes, the different discursive genres and the different audiencehe/she interacts.The enunciative approach that orientates my analysis, as well as thespecificities of a linguistic corpus compromised by the restrictions imposed byaphasia allow a series of reflexions concerning the relation between competenceand argumentation, finding as support the interactions developed in Centro deConvivência de Afásicos (CCA).The data on aphasia are, then, essential to compose the empiric domain inwhich I establish the relation between competence and argumentation once thecompromising or loss of metalanguage would emply loss or compromsing oflinguistic competence.Thus, the specificity of corpus brings about the search and use of verbal andnon-verbal resources which aphasic speakers make use in their argumentativeperformances. These different gestures overlap in the enunciative situation, that is,aphasic subjects (non-aphasic subjects as well) evoke different knowledge toargumentate in a competent manner to their discursive/conversational purposes.Non-massive aphasias - such as the ones presented by the subjects in thisdissertation - compromise but do not destroy neither the attitude meta of theseaphasic subjects nor their competence to language, once all subjects have ahistory as subjecst of language, with intact memory abilities. In this sense, thelinguistic restrictions provoked by aphasia end by explaining the linguistic(manipulation of argumentative operators, prosody), cognitive (intonation,drawings, eye contact) and pragmatic (world knowledge, manipulation of discursivelaws, recognition of intention) paths that the aphasic uses for argumentating.Key-words: argumentation, competence, aphasia, enunciation, interaction.xi