Reported Speech in the Construction of the Ethos : Discursive-Argumentative Analysis of The Country of Carnival

The aim of this paper is to present a discursive-argumentative analysis of the novel The Country of Carnival, by Jorge Amado, focusing on the categories of reported speech and discursive ethos. It is assumed that the novelist's ethos is built on the dialogue between “his” discourse and the ideological positions and values of the speech of other. Thus, the concept of reported speech postulated by the Bakhtin Circle is articulated with the concept of enunciative heterogeneity formulated by Authier-Revuz, in order to understand the mechanisms of construction of the discursive ethos: a way of saying and being socio-historically recognized that legitimates the inscription of the discourse in a particular discursive formation. Therefore, it is intended to infer the ideological positioning of the author Jorge Amado in the controversy among the discourses which attempt to explain the meaning of life in The Country of Carnival.


Reported Speech in the Construction of the Ethos: Discursive-Argumentative Analysis of The Country of Carnival, by Jorge Amado / O discurso citado na construção do ethos: análise discursivoargumentativa de O país do carnaval, de Jorge Amado
Eduardo Lopes Piris  Darling Moreira do Nascimento 

ABSTRACT
The aim of this paper is to present a discursive-argumentative analysis of the novel The Country of Carnival, by Jorge Amado, focusing on the categories of reported speech and discursive ethos.It is assumed that the novelist's ethos is built on the dialogue between "his" discourse and the ideological positions and values of the speech of other.Thus, the concept of reported speech postulated by the Bakhtin Circle is articulated with the concept of enunciative heterogeneity formulated by Authier-Revuz, in order to understand the mechanisms of construction of the discursive ethos: a way of saying and being socio-historically recognized that legitimates the inscription of the discourse in a particular discursive formation.Therefore, it is intended to infer the ideological positioning of the author Jorge Amado in the controversy among the discourses which attempt to explain the meaning of life in The Country of Carnival.KEYWORDS: Reported speech; Ethos; Novel; Jorge Amado RESUMO O objetivo deste trabalho é apresentar uma análise discursivo-argumentativa do romance O país do carnaval, de Jorge Amado, focalizando as categorias do discurso citado e do ethos discursivo.Parte do pressuposto de que o ethos do romancista é construído com base no diálogo entre o "seu" discurso e as posições e valores ideológicos do discurso alheio.E assim articula o conceito de discurso citado postulado pelo Círculo de Bakhtin e o conceito de heterogeneidade enunciativa formulado por Authier-Revuz, para compreender os mecanismos de construção do ethos discursivo: um modo de dizer e de ser sócio-historicamente reconhecido, que legitima a inscrição do discurso numa determinada formação discursiva.Desse modo, pretende-se depreender o posicionamento ideológico do autor Jorge Amado na polêmica entre os vários discursos que tentam explicar o sentido da vida em O país do carnaval.PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Discurso citado; Ethos; Romance; Jorge Amado

Introduction
Reflecting on argumentation in the literary discourse -both in its fictional genres (the novel and the short story, for example) and in its non-fictional genres (literary criticism, preface etc.) -or in other discourses, such as the political (parliamentary statements), the journalistic (editorials), the religious (homilies), raises questions about the particularities of one"s adherence to the various discursive practices.
In the case of the novel, we cannot state that the discursive adherence is related to the construction of the reader's assent to the theses presented by the novelist through his narrator, his characters or a particular character portrayed as the alter ego of the author.That is so because such statement would mean that the novel has an explicit argumentative intention (AMOSSY, 2011), i.e., that the novel could be considered a discursive genre whose primary purpose is to convince the reader about a particular point of view.
That is an issue which poses a problem if we consider historical novels, thesis novels, crime novels, biographies and autobiographies, as the strong recurrence to the "reality effects" (BARTHES, 1988) in the narrative construction in such genres gives the reader an illusive return to the empirical world without his/her noticing that he/she is before the projection of a world discursively constructed by the author (as a discursive principle) according to the semantic categories and the axiological framework implied within the discursive formation in which "his/her" discourse belongs.
The title of Jorge Amado"s novel, The Country of Carnival, for example, alludes to a referent that takes the reader to a place in the empirical world, Brazil.This novel also presents several historical-geographical referents which allow it, despite its literary nature, to be taken as a source for studies by historians and geographers, among others.
And what, then, of the crime novel The Da Vinci Code?The narration and argumentation carried out by the characters of this bestseller explore the historical references and the reality effects with such intensity that lead the reader to believe that he/she is facing a revisionist thesis.In these two cases and in many others, the striking recurrence to the reality effects projects the illusion that the literary text is a "fictionalized" historical account.
In the theoretical perspective presented by Ruth Amossy (2011), who considers argumentation as a branch of French Discourse Analysis, we can understand that discourses have two distinct levels of argumentation: an argumentative dimension and an argumentative intention.All kinds of discourse belong in the first level, since argumentation is conceived as a constitutive dimension of language itself, in which the act of saying necessarily implies a particular argumentative orientation, a position, an adherence to a discourse and not to so many others that oppose it.
Regarding literary discourse, besides the argumentative dimension, there is the argumentation that manifests itself in the voices of characters in the prosaic genres, such as the short story and the novel, as we note that, from the enuncive standpoint, the characters of the narrative plot present an explicit will to convince one another, which Amossy calls argumentative intention, whereas from the enunciative standpoint, we can recognize the argumentative dimension established between subjective instances of the author and that of the reader.Thus, the meaning of the literary work emerges not only from the relationship between utterance and enunciation, as in any discourse, but also from the relationship between the dimension and the argumentative intention present in the literary work.
Therefore, assuming that the voices of the characters in the literary text are meant to be simulacra of social voices, ideologically and historically placed, and are to be conveyed by discourse with their value appreciation, the issue we intend to address in this work focuses on (i) the implication of the inter-relation between authorial context and reported speech and among reported speeches in the argumentative dimension, which supports the production of meanings in the literary work, and (ii) the role played by that argumentative interdiscursivity in the construction of the author"s image: the discursive ethos.

Argumentation in discourse
According to Amossy (2011, p.129), French Discourse Analysis, by describing the operation of discourse in concrete enunciation contexts, must also take into account the argumentative dimension of discourse, even if they are discourses conveyed by discourse genres that are not characterized by an argumentative purpose.The literary novel is an example of that, for it exerts its influence on the reader"s ways of seeing and thinking, without explicitly aiming to his/her being convinced of anything.
Argumentation, seen as synonymous with rhetoric, can be understood as an agent of change, reorientation and strengthening of the worldview caused on the audience.That implies conveying messages in a certain way and thus cause the other to act.Assuming a dialogical perspective of language as advocated by the Bakhtin Circle, Amossy (2011) considers that the argumentative analysis does not even need to seek the opposite position presented in its entirety, since "the word is always a response to the word of the other, a reaction to what was previously said that it confirms, modifies or rejects"1 (AMOSSY, 2011, p.131).
In this theoretical context, the argumentative dimension of discourse is characterized by the author as one that uses a strategy of indirect -and sometimes not admitted -persuasion.That strategy may be presented in order to describe, narrate or register experiences (AMOSSY, 2011).Thus, the analyst will examine argumentation in discourse, tackling not the logical sequence of arguments, but the projection of points of view constructed by means of discursive, linguistic and enunciative resources, such as argumentative connectors, the deictic, assumptions, stereotypy, ambiguity, polysemy, metaphors, repetition, rhythm, etc.
In order to accomplish that, it is also necessary to take into account the particular situation of utterance -i.e., "who is speaking to whom, in what places, what is the status of each of the participants, what are the exact circumstances of exchange, what are the time and the place in which it occurs"2 (AMOSSY, 2011, p.133) -and the discourse genres, with their rules and restrictions.It is noticeable, therefore, that it implies taking argumentation in its institutional, social, historical and cultural dimension, which highly connects argumentative analysis to the approach proposed by the French Discourse Analysis.
Making this relationship between argumentation and discourse a little closer, Amossy (2011) also highlights that "argumentation is inscribed not only in discursive materiality [...], but also in interdiscourse" 3 (2011, p.133).That means that the constitutively heterogeneous nature of discourse also hints at argumentation in discourse, which leads us to observe the argumentative dimension, for example, of the forms of reported speech (direct discourse, indirect discourse, quasi-direct discourse etc..), among others.
It is important to note that Amossy not only approximates concepts of French Discourse Analysis to the context of argumentative analysis, but also promotes the concept of rhetorical notions in a discursive perspective.In this sense, the author emphasizes the importance of two classical components of the Aristotelian rhetoric in the analysis of argumentation in discourse, namely: ethos (building the image of oneself in discourse) and pathos (the discursive construction of the emotion that one intends to cause on the audience) (AMOSSY, 2011, p.133-134).

Reported speech: inscription of heterogeneity in the discursive sequence
It does not seem an exaggeration to say that dialogism is the fundamental thesis postulated by the Bakhtin Circle, since dialogue is, for Vološinov (1973), one of the most important forms of verbal interaction, social phenomenon which is the real substance of language.It is to conceive discourse as a response to other discourses, a response which manifests itself through a kind of dialogue that "responds to something, objects to something, affirms something, anticipates possible responses and objections, seeks support, and so on" (1973, p.95), characterizing the very constitutive nature of discourse.
With regard to The Country of Carnival, debut novel by Jorge Amado published in 1931, we will see that this literary discourse maintains a constitutive dialogue with discourses on the transition between the Brazilian República Velha ("Old Republic") and the new regime, and the transition between the first Modernism and the neoregionalism (DUARTE, 1996, p.39), answering thus two complementary discussions, namely: one, on the character of the Brazilian people; the other, about the purpose of existence before the changes taking place in Brazil (1996, p.42).Between these two, we realize that "the purpose of life", more specifically "the pursuit of happiness," appears to be the major discussion led by the novel.This discussion was represented by confronting theses defended by the opposing characters who seek the meaning of life.In this regard, Duarte summarizes the process of construction of the narrative as follows: "Everything is done to highlight the conflicting concepts, the plot is built to allow the ongoing arguments between the proponents of each of the trends" (DUARTE, 1996, p.42) 4 .
From the discursive-argumentative standpoint, the construction of the narrative plot through arguments between characters sets the simulation of an argumentative dispute -that represents the conflict between the ideological positions which fall within the discursive thread of the novel -about the purpose of life.However, it is a dispute conducted by voices delegated by the narrator of the novel, whose voice also meddles with this controversy.This issue raises the notion of reported speech, which corresponds to the linguistic forms of representation of the speech of other, i.e., the representation of a speech by an enunciator distinct from that which is responsible for the enunciation of the speech.According to Vološinov (1973, p.115, empashis in the original), "reported speech is speech within speech, utterance within utterance, and at the same time also speech about speech, utterance about utterance."We should emphasize, however, that reported speech does not match the ongoing speech of the other, but its simulacrum, which can be valued positively or negatively by the reporting speech, according to its own categories.
Note that the operation of the reported speech is influenced by the discursive genres and by the socio-historical context, i.e., the forms of reported speech are not watertight, given a priori, but suffer variations.It is in this sense that we can understand what Vološinov advocates (1973) about the particularities of the transmission of the word of the other in different discourses, such as the rhetorical and the literary, and about the place that the utterer of the quoted voice occupies in a particular social group: "As distinct from verbal art, rhetoric, owing simply to its teleology, is less free in its handling of other speakers" utterances (1973, p.122).[…].Moreover, the position that a specimen of speech to be reported occupies on the social hierarchy of values must also be taken into account" (1973, p.123).
Let us consider, then, the operation of the reported speech in the literary genre "novel".We have suggested here that the polyphonic concert features the construction of the discussion about the purpose of life in The Country of Carnival, but it is interesting to note that this controversy is introduced through the inner monologue of the main character, Paulo Rigger, the moment he is leaving France for Brazil: He had once discredited happiness.Deep inside, however, Rigger felt he was utterly unsatisfied.He realized that something was missing in his life.What?He didn"t know.That tortured him.And he devoted all his life to the pursuit of the Purpose."Yes, he mumbled at the deck, watching the waves, because all life must necessarily have a Purpose... What purpose?" (AMADO, 1977, p.15) [emphasis added] 5 .
Paulo Rigger was sent to France to study law, but did not take his father"s goal seriously: his father wanted to make him a great national politician and intellectual.The character is described as a blasé type, "contaminated by all the literature that there was before the war, a mind waster [...]" (1977, p.15) 6 .From the excerpt above, we highlight that the underscored fragments consist of occurrences of reported speech, namely: quasi-direct discourse and direct discourse, respectively.In both cases, the interrogative clause constructs the verisimilitude of such character that lives his internal conflicts and is divided between the European and the Brazilian cultures, between the expectations raised by his father and his own will, between what should be and what should not be.
Still regarding the effects generated by the quasi-direct discourse, the erasure of the syntactic and graphic borders between the authorial context and the reported speech of the character designs an enunciative perspective that closely follows Paulo Rigger in his internal conflict. 5All extracts from the novel under review are our translation.The original text follows in a footnote.The original: "Já descrera da felicidade.No fundo, entretanto, Paulo Rigger sentia que era um insatisfeito.Compreendia que faltava qualquer coisa na sua vida.O quê? Não o sabia.Isso torturava-o.E dedicava toda a sua vida à procura do Fim."Sim, murmurava no tombadilho, olhando as ondas, porque toda vida deve ter, necessariamente, um Fim... Qual?"" 6 The original: "[...] contaminado de toda a literatura de antes da guerra, um gastador de espírito [...]".This conflict, however, extends to the other characters in the novel, which expands the number of voices in that polyphonic concert on the meaning of life, shattering the novel into multiple enunciative perspectives and ideological positions: That friendship had become a great consolation for their lives.They were supported by one another.They helped one another and sought the purpose of their existence together.Once he had learned, with Pedro Ticiano, all skeptical attitudes, they began a fight for the right to doubt.They wanted to reach the purpose.Yes, they said, there was a purpose in life (AMADO, 1977, p.36) 7 .
According to Vološinov (1973, p.119), to understand the form of reported speech it is necessary to take into account the relationship between reported speech and its reporting context, i.e., to consider the "interrelationship between the authorial and reported speech" as well as integrate it in the construction of the utterance.
Regarding the statement above, the reporting context not only establishes the controversy but also launches its evaluative appreciation about it and about the human condition of these characters.If, in the reported speech, these friends simply said and asserted that "yes, there was a sense in life," it is the reporting context that appreciates them as a group of unhappy young man, since they sympathized with and comforted each other due to the lack of a purpose in their lives.
However, different responses traverse this melancholic discourse in search for the meaning of life.The skeptic, the romantic, the capitalist, the religious and the philosophical discourses participate in this controversy.Let us detail some of these crossings, just to illustrate our theoretical discussion, without claiming to exhaust the possible meanings of The Country of Carnival.
The voice of the character Pedro Ticiano inscribes the skeptic discourse in the discursive thread of the novel, or a voice that rejects the need to find the purpose of life, disagreeing with the interests of his friends.We might entertain the hypothesis that Pedro Ticiano would even disagree with the proposed theme of the novel.However, as a) The character that represents the discourse of intellectuals, José Lopes: José Lopes thought: -I don"t believe.Naturally, we will have disappointments, annoyances... (AMADO, 1977, p.61) 17 .b) the character that represents the romantic discourse, Ricardo Bras: Ricardo Bras also thought that was little for a lifetime."Work is not enough.You have to love ..." (AMADO, 1977, p.61) 18 .
These two opposing responses are overtly expressed in the form of direct discourse and strengthen the simulacrum of the discussion among friends, accentuating presentification of the characters and the distancing of the narrator of this discussion, as if he were just repeating the arguments of each one of them.
As stated earlier, the phenomenon of reported speech is not restricted to the inclusion of a third person in the discursive surface, for it is also important to consider how this discourse is integrated or translated by what we may also call reporting speech.
In other words, it is not enough to study what voices are simulated by means of reported speech, we need to relate them to the voice of those who speak.
As a result, we note that the characters are not arguing (nor simulating), since, according to the reporting context, dissenting voices emerge in the form of thought.In other words, this passage is one of the examples of that kind of argumentation that develops at the level of enunciation (the argumentative dimension, see Amossy), and not only at the level of the utterance, because the one who is arguing in this case is the author by means of the figure of the narrator.

Heterogeneity in the construction of the ethos
Regarding the productivity of the concept of dialogism and the theorizing on the forms of reported speech, we can state that they were brought into French Discourse Analysis thanks to the works of Authier-Revuz, who, based on the thesis of Bakhtinian dialogism and on the thesis of the Lacanian decentering of the subject, elaborates on his concept of enunciative heterogeneity, namely: "all discourses are shown to be constitutively crossed by "other discourses' and by the 'discourse of the Other'" (AUTHIER- REVUZ, 2004, p.69) 19 .
It is our intent to focus, in this work, that, for Authier-Revuz (1990, p.25-26), reported speech is one of the forms of the shown heterogeneity of discourse, i.e., the set of linguistic forms that inscribe the other in the discursive sequence.We are dealing, therefore, with linguistic forms that represent, in different ways, the subject"s negotiation with the constitutive heterogeneity of his discourse.
Thus, we believe that all subjective instances present in The Country of Carnival, represented by the characters discussed above, converge to the construction of the subject-author of the work, whose manifestation occurs when he takes his social place in the literature-institution.
We cannot affirm that Jorge Amado takes one ideological position or another represented by the voice of one character or another, for all his characters fail in their purposes, except the bourgeois characters, who find happiness away from philosophy and literature.What we can infer from that discursive subject is that his way of saying things delegates voice to a narrator who meddles with the characters, revealing himself as in doubt and in search of the purpose of life as Paulo Rigger"s circle of friends.
As our reflection on enunciative heterogeneity and reported speech develops towards operationalizing these concepts with those of ethos and of subject, inserting this work in an analytical perspective that integrates argumentation and discourse, let us discuss the construction of Jorge Amado"s ethos in The Country of Carnival.Maingueneau (1997), by considering that the ethos comprises the image of the enunciator constructed through discourse, integrates the rhetorical ethos into the theoretical framework of Discourse Analysis.He proposes two shifts: (1) not only oral texts, but also written texts are endowed with a tone of enunciation -a way of enunciating, of saying -which calls for the construction of the image of their enunciator, the ethos; (2) the ethos plays not only the role of conquering the co-enunciator"s adherence, but especially the role of legitimizing the discourse enunciation in a given discursive formation.
In the wide range of possible linguistic-enunciative categories for the apprehension of the ethos, the forms of enunciative heterogeneity present themselves as privileged categories of analysis, since the ethos is also revealed through the way different social voices erupt in the discursive thread.Thus, the analysis of the novel The Country of Carnival not only identifies the ideological positioning of the social voices contained in this work, but above all reveals the author"s mode of saying and mode of being in the literary field.
Two enunciative features are to be made explicit here because they are responsible for the reader's adherence to literary discourse, showing how this reader is captured not only by what is said, stated, but also by the game between utterance and enunciation.The ethos is part of that game.
Regarding the quality of the ethos that emerges from this literary work, we can understand that our task is to face a way of saying and being -in other words, a way of behaving and locating oneself in the world, in this case, the world of literature -which legitimizes the enunciation of a literary discourse that seeks its place in a literary school.
We advocate that the meaning of the failure of Jorge Amado"s characters in the novel tends towards the idea that while the ideological positions represented at that time are useful to explain the nature of the Brazilian people -in the same way Macunaímathe hero with no character -does, they do not answer the question about the purpose of life: "what do we want for Brazil and what do we want for Brazilian literature?".
In this sense, we can say that Jorge Amado"s ethos takes strong contours of the modernist project as he identifies himself with one of his main goals: "We may not know what we want, but we know what we do not want."

Concluding remarks
The analytical-theoretical path exposed here could offer us conditions to show how the reported speech and its interrelation with the reporting context inscribe the speech of other in the discursive thread of the novel and reveal ideological positions that are appreciated in their value by the literary discourse of Jorge Amado.In the game between enunciation and utterance, we could show how the argumentative simulation among characters can reveal the argumentative dimension of the literary discourse.We could also observe how the mode of enunciating the reporting context and the reported speech might produce a certain ethos of the subject-author Jorge Amado.
Thus, we realize that The Country of Carnival, by discursivizing the theme of the search for meaning in life builds bourgeois characters who only find unhappiness and failure in their personal and professional dimensions, which gives the novel a wistful tone.The clash of differing ideologies about the end of life does not offer an answer, as if the author let the reader anticipate the outcome to the issue.However, we understand that his answer to the meaning of life is that this is an issue that does not need to have a single answer.