Submitted by JOSÉ RADAMÉS BENEVIDES DE MELO null (radamesbenevides@hotmail.com) on 2017-06-19T03:23:07Z No. of bitstreams: 1 TESE - JOSÉ RADAMÉS BENEVIDES DE MELO Final.pdf: 2615521 bytes, checksum: 233b3ef29e09e466ce63b5e68e8095c4 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Luiz Galeffi (luizgaleffi@gmail.com) on 2017-06-19T14:43:46Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 melo_jrb_dr_arafcl.pdf: 2615521 bytes, checksum: 233b3ef29e09e466ce63b5e68e8095c4 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-19T14:43:46Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 melo_jrb_dr_arafcl.pdf: 2615521 bytes, checksum: 233b3ef29e09e466ce63b5e68e8095c4 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-04-20 / Diário do hospício e O cemitério dos vivos são textos escritos por Lima Barreto durante sua segunda internação no Hospício Nacional de Alienados, e a partir dela, no Rio de Janeiro, entre 25 de dezembro de 1919 e 2 de fevereiro de 1920. O primeiro é tido como anotações para a elaboração do segundo, um romance inacabado, cujo processo de produção foi interrompido pela morte do autor (1/11/1922). O objetivo geral desta pesquisa é analisar a constituição de vozes sociais sobre a loucura e a psiquiatria – por meio das relações dialógicas, do discurso bivocal (polêmicas aberta e velada) e do autor – no diálogo entre Diário do hospício, O cemitério dos vivos, de Lima Barreto, outros enunciados e outras vozes sociais. Os objetivos específicos são: 1) identificar as vozes sociais com as quais dialoga Lima Barreto no processo de constituição dos enunciados que integram o corpus de pesquisa e descrever como se estabelece o diálogo entre esses enunciados limabarretianos; 2) examinar a bivocalidade polêmica no diálogo entre Diário do hospício e O cemitério dos vivos, no que diz respeito: i) à polêmica aberta estabelecida entre esses enunciados e os discursos da ciência psiquiátrica de sua época; e ii) à polêmica velada entre a fala limabarretiana e outras falas literárias do início do século XX; 3) perscrutar, ao compreendermos o autor como posição de autor, autor-criador/atividade de autor, autor puro e posicionamento de autor, os movimentos desses diálogos no processo de constituição autoral e das diversas vozes sociais sobre a loucura e a psiquiatria, no diálogo dos enunciados objetos deste estudo. Esta pesquisa está fundamentada nos pressupostos teórico-metodológicos propostos e desenvolvidos pelo Círculo de Bakhtin, Medviédev e Volochínov e nos desdobramentos teórico-metodológicos que a eles se coadunam. Os resultados mostram que a constituição das vozes sociais sobre a loucura e a psiquiatria no diálogo entre Diário do hospício, O cemitério dos vivos, outros enunciados e outras vozes sociais se dá por meio de alguns processos complexos como a autoria e a polêmica. Isso quer dizer que a constituição dessas vozes sociais é mediada pelo processo de autoria, cujas quatro dimensões (auto puro, autor criador, posição de autor e posicionamento autoral) exercem papel fundamental. Além disso, como a autoria, nesses enunciados, se dá de modo significativo por meio da bivocalidade polêmica, entende-se que as polêmicas aberta e velada são partes constitutivas do processo de formação dessas duas vozes sociais. Mas não é só isso, falar em autoria e em bivocalidade polêmica como processos constituidores de vozes sociais é tocar, necessariamente, na questão da atividade humana e de seus vínculos com a linguagem. A constituição dessas duas vozes mobiliza ainda duas esferas de criação ideológica, a literária e a psiquiátrica. Na relação com as esferas, o posicionamento de autor é construído num movimento direcionado para o interior da própria esfera literária e num movimento direcionado para uma outra esfera, a psiquiátrica. / Diário do hospício and O cemitério dos vivos are texts written by Lima Barreto during his second admission in Hospício Nacional de Alienados, , and from there respectively, in Rio de Janeiro, between December 25, 1919 and February 2, 1920. The first is taken as annotations to development of the second, an unfinished novel, whose production was interrupted by the death of the author (1/11/1922). The overall objective of this research is to analyze the constitution of social voices about madness and psychiatry – through dialogical relations, polemical double-voiced discourse and the author-creator – in the dialogue between Diário do hospício and O cemitério dos vivos, works of Lima Barreto. The specific objectives are: 1) identify the social voices with which Lima Barreto dialogues in the process of formation of statements that make up the corpus of this research and describe how the dialogue between these limabarretianos statements is established; 2) examine the polemical double-voiced in the dialogue between Diário do hospício and O cemitério dos vivos, regarding to: i) the open polemic established between these statements and speeches of psychiatric science of his day; and ii) the veiled polemic between limabarretiana speech and other literary discourse of the early twentieth century, through his utterances; 3) search, to understand the author as an author’s position, author-creator/ author’s activity, pure author and author’s positioning, the movements of these dialogues on process of authorial formation procedures and the different social voices about madness and psychiatry, in the dialogue utterances of objects of this study, other utterances and other social voices. This research is grounded in the theoretical and methodological principles proposed and developed by Circle of Bakhtin, Medvedev and Voloshinov and the theoretical and methodological developments regarding to them. The results show that the constitution of social voices about madness and psychiatry in the dialogue between Diário do hospício, O cemitério dos vivos, other utterances and other social voices occurs through some complex processes such as authorship and polemic. This means that the constitution of these social voices is mediated by the process of authorship, whose four dimensions (pure author, author-creater, author’s position and author’s positioning) play a fundamental role. Moreover, as authorship in these statements occurs in a significant way through polemical double-voiced discourse, it is understood that the open and veiled polemics are part of the process of formation of these two social voices. But it is not only this, to speak in authorship and in polemical double-voiced discourse as processes that constitute social voices is to touch, necessarily, on the question of human activity and its links with language. The constitution of these two voices still mobilizes two spheres of ideological creation, literary and psychiatric. In relation to the spheres, the author's positioning is constructed in a movement directed to the interior of the literary sphere itself and in a movement directed to another sphere, the psychiatric.

Alfred de Musset polémiste ? Le sujet a de quoi étonner quiconque connaît un tant soit peu l’oeuvre du poète, qui n’a cessé de revendiquer son indépendance à l’égard des partis et son refus d’être « pamphlétaire » ou d’endosser la posture hugolienne de « l’homme du siècle et de ses passions », ou quiconque s’en tient à l’image stéréotypée de « poète léger » et de citoyen indigne longtemps véhiculée par ses détracteurs et les manuels scolaires. Et pourtant, une bonne partie de son oeuvre, poésie, théâtre et prose, fait le procès de son époque, fustige les nouveaux dogmes et les clichés du siècle, et retrouve la tradition de la satire classique.La posture de retrait qu’adopte Musset à l’égard des écoles ennemies, néoclassiques et romantiques, est plus largement une posture polémique, et en même temps Musset opte là aussi pour l’écart : il polémique tout en niant polémiquer. Cette dimension agonistique apparaît particulièrement dans les OEuvres en prose de Musset, et notamment dans ses articles critiques et ses chroniques journalistiques, mais elle parcourt aussi, à la façon d’éclairs fugaces et incandescents, ses romans (La Confession d’un enfant du siècle est aussi condamnation du siècle), tandis que ses Nouvelles et ses Contes retrouvent les chemins de la satire classique.La présente étude se propose d’interroger les liens qui unissent, chez Musset, polémicité et généricité. Elle opte pour une approche stylistique de l’oeuvre, une oeuvre riche en formes et en genres dont l’analyse est inséparable de la prise en compte du contexte de leur production (la monarchie de Juillet et la « bataille romantique ») comme de celle du support journalistique qui les accueille : les Mélanges de littérature et de critique comptent des formes et des genres où Musset se fait écrivain journaliste malgré son aversion pour la presse. Musset retravaille ces formes et ces genres au gré des polémiques qu’il y insère, et réciproquement adapte les formes du polémique, le degré même de polémicité, au genre investi. Il refuse de se faire âpre polémiste mais recourt à divers procédés et intertextes propres aux registres polémique et satirique. Il polémique paradoxalement contre les polémiques et opte pour un éthos de « dandy bouffon », volontiers railleur et désinvolte, pariant sur la connivence avec le lecteur, et méfiant envers la violence du langage des formes polémiques contemporaines.Maître ironiste, habile à subvertir les genres de l’intérieur par une fictionnalisation des formes journalistiques et par la polémisation de genres a priori non polémiques, à réfuter les contre-discours aussi bien au moyen de la parodie et du pastiche qu’à celui d’une rhétorique subtile de réfutation, Musset laisse cependant entendre derrière la dérision une voix ambigüe, désenchantée et duelle, où l’énoncé s’en prend à l’énonciation au point de brouiller parfois la lisibilité de la polémique, dans une logique d’ironie « dix-neuvièmiste ». En définitive, le polémique mussétien s’attaque au « prêt à penser » de son époque, mais se retourne bien souvent aussi contre le Moi, cet « enfant du siècle », dans la logique d’une ironie romantique. / Alfred de Musset polemicist? The subject could surprise anyone who knows the slightest bit of the work of the poet, who has continued to assert his independence from the parties and his refusal to be a "pamphleteer" and to endorse the hugolian posture of “the man of the century and its passions”, or anyone who sticks with the stereotypical image of "light poet" and unworthy citizen long mediated by his detractors and scholar textbooks. And yet, a good part of his artwork, poetry, drama and prose, makes the trial of his era, denounces new dogmas and cliches of the century, and joins to the tradition of the classic satire. Withdrawal posture adopted by Musset against enemy schools, neoclassical and romantic’s one, is more widely a controversial posture, and at the same time Musset opts there also for the distance : he’s involved in controversy while denying argue. This agonistic dimension appears particularly in the prose works of Musset, and particularly in his critical articles and journalistic chronicles, but it crosses also, like lightning fleeting and glowing, his novels (The Confession of a child of the century is also a harsh condemnation of the century), while his Short-Stories and his Tales get back to the paths of the classic satire. The present study proposes to examine the links that bind, in Musset’s works, polemicity and genericity. It opts for a stylistic approach of the work, which is rich in forms and genres whose analysis is inseparable from taking account of the context of their production (the July monarchy and the "romantic battle") as of the journalistic media that welcomes them: Mixtures of literature and criticism are forms and genres where Musset turns out to be a “writer- journalist” despite his dislike of the press. Musset reworks these forms and these genres according to the polemics he inserts, and reciprocally adapts forms of the controversy, even the degree of polemicity, with the invested genre. He refuses to be bitter controversialist but uses various stylistic devices and intertexts specifics to polemical and satirical modes. He paradoxically attacks the controversies and opts for an ethos of "jester dandy", willingly mocking and flippant, betting on the connivance with the reader, and suspicious of the violence of the language of contemporary polemic’s forms.Master ironist, adept at subverting the genres from the inside by a fictionnalisation of journalistic forms and by the polemisation of a priori not polemical genres, to refute the counter-discourse as well through parody and pastiche as a subtle refutation’s rhetoric, Musset suggests however behind derision an ambiguous, disenchanted and dual voice, where the utterance lashes out against the enunciation to the extent of blurring sometimes the readability of the controversy, in a logic of "nineteenth’s" irony. As it emerges, Musset’s controversy tackles "ready to believe" of his time, but often also turns against himself, this “child of the century”, in the logic of a romantic irony.

Considerando a Música Popular Brasileira (discurso verbomusical brasileiro) enquanto prática discursiva, o objetivo principal deste trabalho é analisar, na dinâmica identidadealteridade, os processos polêmicos de construção identitária do sujeito discursivo revelados nas canções do compositor Belchior, em diálogo com outras produções musicais brasileiras, mais especificamente com a obra dos compositores Caetano Veloso, Chico Buarque e Gilberto Gil. Situando-me no domínio dos estudos discursivos, tomo como base a perspectiva da Retórica Clássica, segundo Aristóteles; da Nova Retórica e das Teorias da Argumentação, a partir de Perelman, Olbrechts-Tyteca, Meyer, Plantin, Amossy e Mosca; da Análise Dialógica do Discurso, de acordo com o Círculo de Bakhtin; e da Análise do Discurso Francesa orientada por Maingueneau. Fundamento-me também nas pesquisas sobre o discurso polêmico, apoiada em Charaudeau, Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Angenot e Maingueneau; e por fim nos trabalhos sobre o gênero canção e a música, conforme Hirschi, Wisnik e Tatit. A partir da articulação desses campos do saber, faço uma reflexão para a análise das relações polêmicas na instituição da identidade de Belchior no campo da música brasileira. A hipótese central da tese é a de que a polêmica empreendida pelo artista cearense em sua produção musical de 1974 a 1993, embora envolva diversos antagonistas, pode ser bipolarizada em dois nomes, o de Belchior (o polemizador) e o de Caetano Veloso (principal destinatário da mensagem polêmica). Na defesa dessa hipótese, investigo como os elementos discursivos gênero, cenografia, ethos e código de linguagem investidos pelos cancionistas Caetano Veloso, Chico Buarque e Gilberto Gil articulam-se de modo reflexo nas canções de Belchior para a construção de um posicionamento individual polêmico, bem como os tipos de argumentos utilizados pelo cantor no estabelecimento dessas relações polêmicas. Defendo na tese de forma geral que a junção de todos esses investimentos interdiscursivos e gestos retóricos produz uma natureza específica ao discurso de Belchior, um exemplo que comprova a manifestação da retórica do discurso verbomusical brasileiro, que pode ser resumida por meio da noção de um investimento identitário polêmico / Considering the Brazilian Popular Music (Brazilian verbomusical discourse) as a discourse practice, the main target of this work is to analyze, upon the duality identity-alterity, the polemical processes of identity construction of the discourse subject revealed in the songs by the composer Belchior, in dialogue with another Brazilian music productions, especially the works of the composers Caetano Veloso, Chico Buarque and Gilberto Gil. My theoretical perspectives will be the Classical Rhetoric, according to Aristotle; the New Rhetoric and the Theories of Argumentation, according to Perelman, Olbrechts-Tyteca, Meyer, Plantin, Amossy and Mosca; the Dialogical Analysis of Discourse, according to the Circle of Bakhtin and the French Analysis of Discourse (A.D.) led by Maingueneau. Another theoretical basis are the researches about the polemical discourse based on Charaudeau, Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Angenot and Maingueneau and also based on the works about music and song, according to Hirschi, Wisnik and Tatit. From the articulation of these studies, I will point out the polemical relations on how the identity of the composer Belchior was established within the field of the Brazilian music. The main hypothesis is that his polemical relations configured between 1974 and 1993, although involves several antagonists, aims at two names Belchior himself (the polemics source) and Caetano Veloso (the polemics aim). In pro of this hypothesis, I will investigate how the elements of the discourse genre, scenography, ethos and language code are invested by Caetano Veloso, Chico Buarque and Gilberto Gil and reflected on the songs of Belchior in order to figure an individual polemical positioning, as well as the types of arguments used by the singer within those polemical relations. Generally speaking, I assume that the interdiscourse investments and the rhetorical gestures altogether configure a specific nature to the discourse of Belchior as an example of the rhetoric of the Brazilian verbomusical discourse, summarized by the notion of a polemical investment of identity

Considerando a Música Popular Brasileira (discurso verbomusical brasileiro) enquanto prática discursiva, o objetivo principal deste trabalho é analisar, na dinâmica identidadealteridade, os processos polêmicos de construção identitária do sujeito discursivo revelados nas canções do compositor Belchior, em diálogo com outras produções musicais brasileiras, mais especificamente com a obra dos compositores Caetano Veloso, Chico Buarque e Gilberto Gil. Situando-me no domínio dos estudos discursivos, tomo como base a perspectiva da Retórica Clássica, segundo Aristóteles; da Nova Retórica e das Teorias da Argumentação, a partir de Perelman, Olbrechts-Tyteca, Meyer, Plantin, Amossy e Mosca; da Análise Dialógica do Discurso, de acordo com o Círculo de Bakhtin; e da Análise do Discurso Francesa orientada por Maingueneau. Fundamento-me também nas pesquisas sobre o discurso polêmico, apoiada em Charaudeau, Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Angenot e Maingueneau; e por fim nos trabalhos sobre o gênero canção e a música, conforme Hirschi, Wisnik e Tatit. A partir da articulação desses campos do saber, faço uma reflexão para a análise das relações polêmicas na instituição da identidade de Belchior no campo da música brasileira. A hipótese central da tese é a de que a polêmica empreendida pelo artista cearense em sua produção musical de 1974 a 1993, embora envolva diversos antagonistas, pode ser bipolarizada em dois nomes, o de Belchior (o polemizador) e o de Caetano Veloso (principal destinatário da mensagem polêmica). Na defesa dessa hipótese, investigo como os elementos discursivos gênero, cenografia, ethos e código de linguagem investidos pelos cancionistas Caetano Veloso, Chico Buarque e Gilberto Gil articulam-se de modo reflexo nas canções de Belchior para a construção de um posicionamento individual polêmico, bem como os tipos de argumentos utilizados pelo cantor no estabelecimento dessas relações polêmicas. Defendo na tese de forma geral que a junção de todos esses investimentos interdiscursivos e gestos retóricos produz uma natureza específica ao discurso de Belchior, um exemplo que comprova a manifestação da retórica do discurso verbomusical brasileiro, que pode ser resumida por meio da noção de um investimento identitário polêmico / Considering the Brazilian Popular Music (Brazilian verbomusical discourse) as a discourse practice, the main target of this work is to analyze, upon the duality identity-alterity, the polemical processes of identity construction of the discourse subject revealed in the songs by the composer Belchior, in dialogue with another Brazilian music productions, especially the works of the composers Caetano Veloso, Chico Buarque and Gilberto Gil. My theoretical perspectives will be the Classical Rhetoric, according to Aristotle; the New Rhetoric and the Theories of Argumentation, according to Perelman, Olbrechts-Tyteca, Meyer, Plantin, Amossy and Mosca; the Dialogical Analysis of Discourse, according to the Circle of Bakhtin and the French Analysis of Discourse (A.D.) led by Maingueneau. Another theoretical basis are the researches about the polemical discourse based on Charaudeau, Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Angenot and Maingueneau and also based on the works about music and song, according to Hirschi, Wisnik and Tatit. From the articulation of these studies, I will point out the polemical relations on how the identity of the composer Belchior was established within the field of the Brazilian music. The main hypothesis is that his polemical relations configured between 1974 and 1993, although involves several antagonists, aims at two names Belchior himself (the polemics source) and Caetano Veloso (the polemics aim). In pro of this hypothesis, I will investigate how the elements of the discourse genre, scenography, ethos and language code are invested by Caetano Veloso, Chico Buarque and Gilberto Gil and reflected on the songs of Belchior in order to figure an individual polemical positioning, as well as the types of arguments used by the singer within those polemical relations. Generally speaking, I assume that the interdiscourse investments and the rhetorical gestures altogether configure a specific nature to the discourse of Belchior as an example of the rhetoric of the Brazilian verbomusical discourse, summarized by the notion of a polemical investment of identity

Par le terme « théâtre polémique » on désigne la production dramatique telle qu’elle s’est structurée au cours de la première moitié du XVIIIe siècle dans le cadre du contexte politico-économique de concurrence, dans lequel se trouvent à opérer les trois théâtres parisiens, la Comédie Française, la Comédie Italienne et les Théâtres de la Foire. La pièce polémique se caractérise par la mise en œuvre d’un dispositif allégorique, fondé sur la tension dynamique entre procédé de fictionnalisation et renvoi à la référentialité. Elle appartient à la catégorie de la littérature de circonstance ou d’actualité, et elle peut s’inscrire dans l’univers des « pratiques transtextuelles ». L’auteur polémiste prend la parole, ou la plume, en réaction à un événement défavorable (une interdiction, une défense, une censure, etc.), et contre son adversaire; cet événement, qui se situe dans ce que l’on peut appeler le « hors-texte », est élaboré au moyen d’une fiction ; par cette fiction, l’auteur essaye de modifier le cours de l’histoire, d’inverser le rapport de forces, d’agir finalement sur le spectateur en gagnant son soutien. La place que le spectateur occupe dans la polémique détermine le passage d’une histoire en forme anecdotique, et donc marginale, vers une histoire qui touche un espace publique. On dira que bien loin d’« historiser le théâtre », le théâtre polémique « théâtralise l’histoire ». L'objectif de cette étude est de déterminer, dans la dialectique polémique, une des causes de l'affaiblissement du système des privilèges et de son corollaire esthétique, c’est-à-dire le principe de hiérarchisation et différenciation des genres dramaturgiques. / The term «polemical theatre» indicates the dramaturgical production which developed during the first part of the 18th Century, within the specific political-economic competitive framework that involved the three most active theatres in Paris at that time: the «Comédie Française», the «Comédie Italienne» and the «Théâtres de la Foire». The «polemical text» relies on an «allegorical device», which is based on the dynamical interaction between the fictionalisation and the relation to the referent. It belongs to the domain of the «littérature de circonstance» or «littérature d’actualité», and it can be considered a «trans-textual practice». The polemical author speaks or writes in reaction to an unfortunate event (interdiction, censorship, etc.), and to oppose a rival writer. This event, occurring outside of the text, becomes the subject of a theatrical fiction through which the author tries to modify the history path, to reverse the force relationships and to act on the audience in order to gain its consent. The role that the audience plays in the polemical comparison, makes the plot evolving from an anecdotal (and thus marginal) story to a public interesting one. So we could say that, far from «historicizing theatre», the polemical theatre does «dramatize History». In conclusion, my work aims at looking on polemical dialectics as one cause of the weakening of a system based on privileges, whose esthetical corollary is the precept of hierarchization and separation of the theatre genres. / Con il termine «teatro polemico» si designa la produzione drammaturgica che si sviluppa nella prima metà del XVIII secolo all’interno di uno specifico contesto politico-economico di concorrenza tra i tre teatri operanti a Parigi, la Comédie Française, la Comédie Italienne e i Teatri de la Foire. Il testo polemico si caratterizza per la messa in atto di un dispositivo allegorico, basato sulla tensione dinamica tra elementi finzionali e elementi referenziali. Esso appartiene, inoltre, alla categoria della letteratura di circostanza, o di attualità, e s’inscrive all’ambito delle “pratiche transtestuali”. L’autore polemico reagisce in reazione a un avvenimento sfavorevole (un’interdizione, una censura etc.), e contro un avversario; tale avvenimento, che si situa in una dimensione extra-testuale, costituisce la materia della finzione teatrale attraverso la quale l’autore cerca di modificare il corso della storia, di invertire il rapporto di forza, di agire infine sullo spettatore per guadagnare il suo consenso. Il ruolo che lo spettatore occupa nel confronto polemico determina il passaggio da una storia in forma aneddotica, et dunque marginale, a una storia di “interesse pubblico”, in cui si mobilitano strategie persuasive, attraverso l’individuazione dei portavoce legittimati a reclamare et gestire la controversia. Si può dire, infine, che invece che “storicizzare il teatro”, il teatro polemico, “teatralizza la storia”. L’obiettivo del nostro studio è di individuare nella dialettica polemica una delle cause dell’indebolimento del sistema dei privilegi e del suo corollario estetico, quello del principio di gerarchizzazione e differenziazione dei generi teatrali.

The present study examines power relations, textual genre and attitudes to the matching process in the labor market in the employment office’s opinion articles in the period 2009–2014.      The power relations that emerge in the debate articles between employers, job seekers and private employment constitute the study's main question. The theoretical starting points are taken from Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis (1992, 2001, and 2010), where the discursive practice consists of the employment office’s production of opinion articles during a recession. The social practice consists of the laws and regulations that make its actions to reduce unemployment in the society. The method is derived from Halliday’s (1994, 2002) systemic functional linguistics. The analysis is based on the theory of his three metafunctions, with the analysis performed on interpersonal, ideational and textual levels.      The result shows that the employment office has a clear agenda that it wants to convey to the receivers of the polemical articles. The employment office seeks legitimacy for its work by explaining reasons for the lack of results. The employment officealso makes replicas of critical debate by leading politicians and commentators, where they defend their current practices. The polemical articles also describe how unemployment can be reduced in the community if employers and job seekers follow their instructions. The employment office operates their own agenda to the causes of unemployment that they want to convey through its debate articles. / Föreliggande studie undersöker maktrelationer, textuell genre och attityder till matchningsprocessen på arbetsmarknaden i Arbetsförmedlingens publicerade debattartiklar under perioden 2009–2014. De maktförhållanden som framkommer i debattartiklarna mellan arbetsgivare, arbetssökande och privata arbetsförmedlare utgör studiens huvudsakliga fråga.      Studiens teoretiska utgångspunkter är hämtade från Faircloughs kritiska diskursanalys (1992, 2001, 2010), där den diskursiva praktiken består av Arbetsförmedlingens produktion av debattartiklar under en pågående lågkonjunktur. Den sociala praktiken utgörs av de lagar och författningar som utgör statens åtgärder för att minska arbetslösheten i samhället. Metoden är hämtad från Hallidays (1994, 2002) systemisk-funktionella lingvistik. Analysen bygger på teorins 3 metafunktioner, där analysen görs på interpersonell, ideationell och textuell nivå.      Resultatet visar att Arbetsförmedlingen har en tydlig agenda som de vill förmedla till debattartiklarnas mottagare. De söker legitimitet för sitt arbetssätt genom att förklara orsaker till de bristande resultaten. De gör även repliker på kritiska debattinlägg från ledande politiker och debattörer, där de försvarar sitt nuvarande arbetssätt. Debattartiklarna redogör också för hur arbetslösheten kan minska i samhället om arbetsgivare och arbetssökande följer deras instruktioner. Arbetsförmedlingen driver en egen agenda till orsakerna bakom arbetslösheten som de vill förmedla genom sina debattartiklar.

No description available.

This thesis provides an analytical interpretation of the critique Dutch nineteenth-century statesman-cum-historian Guillaume Groen van Prinsterer (1801-1876) articulated of French revolutionary ideology. It achieves an original reading of Groen's thought as Protestant right-order theory. This reading achieves a clarification of the functions that Scripture, 'nature', and 'history' have in his thought, and connects his thinking to that of a small group of contemporary British-based political theologians, notably Oliver and Joan Lockwood O'Donovan, and their minority view on the ontological grounding of justice. Our comparison of Groen's argument of 'history' with that of Edmund Burke achieves original critical leverage on their concepts of 'history', and draws out that Burke's critique of the Revolution purposes to re-affirm English common law, while Groen's is an apologia for Christianity.