Full text
| |
| Author(s): |
Cristian Henrique Imbruniz
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Master's Dissertation |
| Press: | São Paulo. |
| Institution: | Universidade de São Paulo (USP). Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas (FFLCH/SBD) |
| Defense date: | 2020-01-20 |
| Examining board members: |
Manoel Luiz Goncalves Correa;
Emerson de Pietri;
Sirio Possenti;
Pascoalina Bailon de Oliveira Saleh
|
| Advisor: | Manoel Luiz Goncalves Correa |
| Abstract | |
This work starts its investigation into how writing was taught in Brazil from 1930 to 2002,considering, at first, an ensemble of sixteen Portuguese textbooks. The theoretical framework consists of the articulation between the French Discourse Analysis (PÊCHEUX, 2014 [1975];COURTINE, 2014 [1981]) and theoretical foundations coming from the fields of History (LE GOFF, 2013 [1977]; NORA, 2013 [1979]) and Sociology (HALBWACHS, 1990 [1950]).Understanding the textbook as a variable and unstable object (BATISTA, 1999), the aim of this work is to establish a discursive memory of the teaching of writing from the material form of eight textbooks methodically selected among the sixteen textbooks chosen before - intended for the last year of the first cycle of secondary education (generally directed at fourteen-year-old students). This material form, shaped by society and history, evokes the socio-political turbulence of the period between 1930 and 2002, allowing an investigation into enduring phenomena, anticipatory movements, and erasures of what was conceived of as language, writing and the teaching of writing in that period. From a methodological point ofview, I examine a set of eight textbooks, whose representativeness for each decade was established by means of two criteria: the authorial-editorial one and the enunciative-discursive one. The authorial-editorial criterion considers the editorial data of each book as statements in ruin of the discursive event of its production/circulation/reception; in turn, the enunciative-discursive criterion takes into account the elements of the speech genre: thematic content, style and compositional construction (BAKHTIN, 2016 [1979]). Considering the analysis carried out from an emphasis given to the elements of the speech genre, which resulted,between 1930 and 1960, in a prevailing emphasis on the thematic content, and, between 1970 and 2002, in an emphasis on the compositional construction, I propose two categories to constitute a discursive memory of how writing was taught between 1930 and 2002: (i) the proposal-syntagma, which was found, mainly, in books published between 1930 and 1960; and (ii) the proposal-script, which was found, mainly, in books published between 1970 and 2002. The results obtained show that the alternation between the proposal-syntagma and the proposal-script is the result of two different conceptions of work (both in general terms and regarding school activities) that, between 1930 and 2002, succeeded in particular historical contexts. Those conceptions of work determined conceptions of language, writing and the teaching of writing. In the case of the proposal-syntagma, based on large (invocation of semiophores) and small themes (which, in some way, ask the subject to describe itself as part of culturally ritualized experiences); and, in relation to the syntax of the language, there is a predominance of a conception of work in which speaking or writing is enough to perform an action, while in the proposal-script, characterized by the presence of instructional content and use of discursive markers of sequencing, there is a predominance of a conception of work in which it is necessary for the mediator to guide the student. The analysis of these categories, aiming at the conceptions of language, writing and the teaching of writing led to the constitution of elements of a discursive memory of the teaching of writing between 1930 and 2002. Existing under different emphases throughout the decades, the material forms of the activities keep preconstructed discursive elements on what society recovers or projects as work for the generations that will follow: for those who will have to occupy positions and talk about them and for those who will have to know how to perform an action, without any certainty as to whether they will only succeed in reproducing a ritual of preparation or whether they will actually find their positions in the projected, promised and expected place. For writing and the teaching of writing, the coexistence of different material forms, synthesized in this dissertation, in the proposal-syntagma and in the proposal-script, seems to point towards contradictions, which, if they are linguistically marked by the conceptions of language, writing and the teaching of writing, they can also be referred, as material forms of their socio-historical existence, to national projects linked to specific sociopolitical conjunctures. (AU) | |
| FAPESP's process: | 17/24562-9 - Writing handbooks and teaching writing from 1930 to 2002: a linguistic-discursive study |
| Grantee: | Cristian Henrique Imbruniz |
| Support Opportunities: | Scholarships in Brazil - Master |