Abstract
RESUMO O objetivo do artigo é realizar uma análise comparativa da divulgação científica no Brasil e na Rússia. Os fundamentos teórico-metodológicos dessa comparação foram construídos na confluência entre a teoria bakhtiniana e a análise comparativa de discursos, esta presente nos trabalhos dos pesquisadores do Cediscor. A partir desses fundamentos, construímos um corpus de enunciados das edições brasileira e russa da revista Scientific American e pudemos observar, por um lado, grandes semelhanças nos gêneros artigo e reportagem de divulgação científica nas duas comunidades etno-linguísticas, e, por outro, diferenças no que concerne à relação com o discurso alheio e o uso de tempos e modos verbais.
Highlights
The objective of this article is to conduct a comparative analysis of scientific popularization in Brazil and in Russia
The project has been organized in the following way: we start with the explanation of the relevance of Bakhtin’s theory for comparative discourse analysis; we expose the principles of “comparative discourse analysis” made by researchers from Cediscor (“Centre de recherche sur les discours ordinaires et spécialisés” – Sorbonne Nouvelle) in order to articulate their principles with the foundations of Bakhtin's theory; and we carry out a comparative analysis of scientific popularization set out in Portuguese and Russian in order to show the validity and productivity of the proposed theoretical framework
Since the comparison of scientific popularization in Brazil and Russia focus on units of speech communication, we first define the theoretical foundations of our proposed analysis and, secondly, prove that it contains relevant elements for a comparative discourse analysis
Summary
Since the early 2000s, a group of researchers has assembled around the same object, culture. 17 In order to overcome the major challenge of articulating the individual with the collective by thinking the discourse in culture and culture in discourse, von Münchow proposes Van Dijk’s concept of “mental models,” comprising the subjective representation of contexts by interactants. These representations evolve over time and are culturally variable. 20 In the original text: “catégories interprétatives fiables, permettant de relier les résultats de la description à des valeurs culturelles répertoriées.” Another important methodological issue is the place of the researcher in comparative analyses. In the analysis of oral interactions in different cultures, the researcher is faced with unexpected events that call into question his expectations and knowledge, which proves his place as an interpreter and enhances his ability to challenge evidences
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
