Submitted by Automa??o e Estat?stica (sst@bczm.ufrn.br) on 2015-11-26T13:12:52Z No. of bitstreams: 1 AlexandroTeixeiraGomes_TESE.pdf: 22462974 bytes, checksum: 869b89b9949816c057b96f691600957d (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Elisangela Moura (lilaalves@gmail.com) on 2015-11-26T14:23:30Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 AlexandroTeixeiraGomes_TESE.pdf: 22462974 bytes, checksum: 869b89b9949816c057b96f691600957d (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-11-26T14:23:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 AlexandroTeixeiraGomes_TESE.pdf: 22462974 bytes, checksum: 869b89b9949816c057b96f691600957d (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-08-15 / Coordena??o de Aperfei?oamento de Pessoal de N?vel Superior - CAPES / A An?lise Textual dos Discursos tem sua origem no ?mbito da Lingu?stica Textual e se prop?e a estudar a produ??o co(n)textual de sentido fundamentada na an?lise de textos concretos, oferecendo elementos para o entendimento do texto como uma pr?tica discursiva analisado ? luz de determinados planos ou n?veis de an?lise lingu?stica. Nesse sentido, ? nosso prop?sito, nesta investiga??o, estudar o fen?meno da responsabilidade enunciativa na senten?a judicial condenat?ria. Para tanto, seguimos os aportes te?ricos da An?lise Textual dos Discursos (ADAM, 2011) e da Lingu?stica Enunciativa, a partir de v?rios autores, entre eles, Rabatel (2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2010), N?lke (2001, 2005, 2009, 2013), N?lke, Fl?ttum e Nor?n (2004), Guentch?va (1994, 1996, 2011) e Guentch?va et al. (1994). Nessa dire??o, investigamos a responsabilidade enunciativa, atrav?s de uma escala que compreende o fen?meno a partir de quatro grada??es, cada uma com um tipo de ponto de vista (PdV) e com elos que podem marcar a assun??o ou o distanciamento do ponto de vista. No que concerne ? abordagem jur?dica da tese, nossa ancoragem te?rica segue v?rios autores, entre eles, Petri (1994), Soto (2001), ?lvarez (2002), Alves (2003), Cornu (2005), Albi (2007), Bittar (2010), Asensio e Polanco (2011), L?pez Samaniego (2006), Montol?o e L?pez Samaniego (2008), Montol?o (2002, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013), Colares (2010), Prieto (2013), Louren?o e Rodrigues (2013) e Rodrigues, Passeggi e Silva Neto (2014). Nosso corpus se constitui de 13 senten?as condenat?rias provenientes de processos criminais oriundos da comarca de Currais Novos-RN, conclu?dos no ano de 2012. Os resultados revelam como o juiz, a partir de v?rias inst?ncias enunciativas, constr?i a senten?a judicial, o que nos permitiu compreender a configura??o da (n?o) assun??o da responsabilidade enunciativa no g?nero discursivo / textual senten?a judicial condenat?ria. Como conclus?es, percebemos que as unidades discursivas s?o perspectivadas ora, a partir da assun??o, ora, a partir da n?o assun??o dos PdV pelas inst?ncias enunciativas, o que orienta a organiza??o argumentativa do produtor do texto e seus prop?sitos comunicativos. Com isso, o juiz cria e/ou modifica valores e cren?as, induz e/ou orienta seu interlocutor podendo demonstrar objetividade e/ou preservar sua face atrav?s de constru??es mediatizadas ou podendo engajar-se pelo dito atrav?s da assun??o da responsabilidade enunciativa do conte?do proposicional do enunciado. Pelo exposto, reafirmamos nosso entendimento de que a (n?o) assun??o da responsabilidade enunciativa se configura como mecanismo argumentativo fortemente marcado pelo produtor do texto com vistas a seus prop?sitos comunicativos. A senten?a, portanto, constr?i-se nesse jogo de assun??o e/ou n?o assun??o dos enunciados de acordo com a orienta??o argumentativa e com os objetivos do produtor do texto. / The Textual Analysis of Discourse has its origin in Text Linguistics and it aims at studying the co(n)text meaning production based on the analysis of concrete texts by offering elements to the understanding of the text as a discourse practice throughout the plans or levels of linguistic analysis. In this perspective, we intend to investigate the enunciative responsibility phenomenon in the sentencing court judgment. To do so, we review the theoretical contributions of Textual Analysis of Discourse (ADAM, 2011) and the Enunciative Linguistics from various authors, among them, Rabatel (1998, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2010), N?lke (2001, 2005, 2009, 2013), N?lke, Fl?ttum and Nor?n (2004), Guentch?va (1994, 1996) and Guentch?va et al. (1994). In this direction, we investigate the enunciative responsibility through a range that comprises the phenomenon from four gradations, each one with a kind of point of view (PoV) and with links that may mark the assumption or the distance from the point of view. Regarding the legal approach of the thesis, our theoretical anchoring follows several authors, among them, Petri (1994), Soto (2001), Alvarez (2002), Alves (2003), Cornu (2005), Albi (2007), Bittar (2010), Asensio and Polanco (2011), L?pez Samaniego (2006), L?pez Montol?o and Samaniego (2008), Montol?o (2002, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013), Sterling (2010), Prieto (2013), Lawrence and Rodrigues (2013) and Rodrigues, Passeggi and Silva Neto (2014). Our corpus is composed of 13 sentences from criminal cases arising from the district of Currais Novos-RN, completed in 2012. The results reveal how the judge, from various enunciative instances, builds the court decision, which allowed us to understand the configuration of (non) assumption of enunciative responsibility in the sentencing court judgment discourse genre. In conclusion, we perceive that the discourse units are envisaged or through the assumption, or the non assumption of PoV by the enunciative instances, what guides the producer organization argumentative text and his (her) communicative purposes. With that, the judge creates and/or modifies values and beliefs, induces and/or guides his (her) interlocutor by being able to demonstrate objectivity and/or preventing his (her) face through the mediated constructions or engage through the assumption of the enunciative responsibility of the propositional content of an utterance. In short, we reaffirm our belief that the (non) assumption of the enunciative responsibility configures as an argumentative mechanism strongly marked by the producer of the text with a view to their communicative purposes. The sentence, therefore, is constructed in this game of taking and/or not taking of statements according to argumentative orientation and the objectives of the text producer.