ABSTRACT
This work is a contribution to the study of emotions in discourse and its socio-interative impact, considering emotions as constitutive of exchanges, in a discoursive approach. From the analysis of verbal interactions observed and assimilated in a French-speaking context (DE OLIVEIRA 2014DE OLIVEIRA, P. A expressão linguística de emoções: um estudo discursivo do sentimento de aborrecimento na troca de informações em contexto francófono. 2014. 60f. Tese (Pós-Doutorado em Linguística Aplicada) - Faculdade de Letras, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2014. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://bit.ly/2WFsZi7
. Acesso em: 31 maio 2019.
https://bit.ly/2WFsZi7...
, 2015DE OLIVEIRA, R. The relationship between negation and impoliteness in the exchange of information in French. Alfa-Revista de Linguística, Araraquara, v. 29, 2015. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://bit.ly/2ESK7qk
. Acesso em: 31 maio 2019.
https://bit.ly/2ESK7qk...
), (i) we associate the right dislocation construction (LAMBRECHT 1994LAMBRECHT, K. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press , 1994. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620607
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/...
, NØLKE 1997NØLKE, H. Note sur la dislocation du sujet: thématisation ou focalization? In: KLEIBER, G.; RIEGEL, M. (ed.). Les formes du sens: études de linguistique française, médiévale et générale offertes à Robert Martin à l’occasion de ses 60 ans. Louvain-la-Neuve: Duculot, 1997. p. 281-294. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3917/dbu.kleib.1996.01.0281
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3917/...
) with the speaker’s annoyance (PLANTIN, DOURY, TRAVERSO 2000PLANTIN, Chr.; DOURY, M.; TRAVERSO, V. Les émotions dans les interactions. Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon, 2000., PLANTIN 2011PLANTIN, Chr. Les bonnes raisons des émotions: principes et méthodes pour l’analyse de la parole émotionnée. Berne: Peter Lang , 2011.); (ii) demonstrate how this linguistic behavior (global → particular) is incompatible with the principle of cooperation (GRICE 1975GRICE, H.P. Logic and Conversation. In: Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3, Speech Acts, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan. New York: Academic Press 1975, 41-58.), and (iii) postulate the negative consequences of this behavior in the relations between the participants of exchanges (JOUBERT 2010JOBERT, M. L’impolitesse linguistique: vers un nouveau paradigme de recherche? Lexis, Lyon, Spécial 2, p. 5-20, 2010. Doi: https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.777
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4000/...
, KERBRAT-ORECCHIONI 2010KERBRAT-ORECCHIONI, C. L’impolitesse en interaction: aperçus théoriques et étude de cas. Lexis, Lyon, Spécial 2, p. 35-60, 2010. Doi: https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.796
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4000/...
). The linguistic markers of the discursive subject’s presence make it possible to speculate about the image he gives of himself (BROWN and LEVINSON 1987BROWN, P.; LEVINSON, S. C. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/...
). Primarily based on Applied Linguistics, this proposal aims to promote the awareness of speakers about the power and the impact of language in everyday practices.
KEYWORDS:
emotional statement; argumentation; linguistic impoliteness; face theory; cooperation contract