Ponto de vista e responsabilidade enunciativa em sentenças de pedido de falência

Abstract

The main objective of our doctoral thesis is to study the point of view (PDV) and commitment in the discursive genre judicial sentence concerning bankruptcy of companies. The study of the PDV and commitment was carried out in a textual-enunciative perspective, by which it takes the enunciation as a factor of construction of the sense of the text (enunciative cohesion). We set as specific objectives of our research to identify, describe, analyze and interpret linguistic marks in the text from the selected textual and enunciative categories. Our research is part of a study of legal discourse in the field of language sciences, a field of studies that is still little explored, but which receives more and more attention from researchers every day. The research is based on the linguistic studies of the text, based on the Textual Analysis of Speeches (ATD), as proposed by Adam (2011), derived from Text Linguistics, and based on Linguistics of Enunciation. In this way, our theoretical framework focuses on four general axes (text, gender, enunciation and discourse) and two categories of analysis (PDV and Commitment). We adopt Bakhtin's (1996) conception of discourse genre, which is followed by Adam (2011), also by other theorists, such as Bazerman (2006) and Miller (2012). Rabatel's (2008, 2009, 2013, 2015) studies about Point of View (PDV) and Commitment studies are adopted as the general theoretical basis of the enunciation analysis and what we postulate as "textual construction of point of view". The corpus of the investigation is constituted by 13 judicial sentences resulting from the filing of bankruptcy by a creditor against a debtor. The investigation was based on the textual construction of the judge's decision (L1 / E1) on the defendant's decree of bankruptcy (e3) requested by the author (e2). The analysis of the corpus points out that the construction of the PDV by the judge is carried out by several linguistic, textual and discursive mechanisms, which show that the Commitment is sometimes assumed by L1 / E1, sometimes imputing this responsibility to other enunciators, especially the enunciators: author and defendant. The use of mediated frameworks (GUENTCHÉVA, 1994, 1996, 2011, 2014) has been verified, whereby the judge does not assume the Commitment for propositional content and impute it to other enunciators. It was observed from the construction of the judge’s PDV (L1 / E1) that there was a recurrence of the assumption of Commitment by the judge (L1 / E1), in the legal substantiation and issue of orders section while in the facts section the imputation predominates. In the perspective of the enunciative cohesion proposed by our thesis, it was verified that the judge's PDV is constructed, in the dimension of the agreement-disagreement, in a variable way according to each part of the text plan of the judicial sentence (neutrality in the facts section; agreement or disagreement in the legal substantiation section; performance or agreement or disagreement in the issue of orders section). Finally, the agreement is made in these sentences in many cases by mechanisms of co-construction of the PDV (co-enunciation, super-enunciation and sub-enunciation) between the judge and second enunciators, mechanisms that are manifested predominantly in the part of legal substantiation section of the judicial sentence.