Psychosocial frameworks of the argumentative discourse in the migratory ecology towards Chile
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15381/lengsoc.v22i1.23901Keywords:
Phychosocial framewoks, point of view, argument, immigration, speechAbstract
In recent years, the trend of subcontinental migration to Chile – due to its economic dynamism – has reached figures never before recorded and modified the demographic context of the country. In this sense, the work analyzes the psychosocial representations of the speakers of this new discursive ecology and its relationship with the flow of argumentative discursive information that they generate. The results show that Chilean speakers have mostly activated certain psychosocial frameworks and, consequently, generate argumentative sequences with a point of view against with preference for ad misericordiam arguments. Immigrant speakers have less activation of psychosocial frameworks and, consequently, generate a point of view in favor based on arguments of justice.
References
Adam, J. (1992). Les textes: types et prototypes. Récit, description, argumentation, explication, et dialogue. Éditions Nathan.
Ajzenman, N., Domínguez, P. y Undurraga, R. (2020). Inmigration, crime and crime (mis) perceptions. Discussion paper N°IDB-DP-00808, Inter-American Development Bank. https://publications.iadb.org/publications/english/document/Immigration-Crime-and-Crime-MisPerceptions.pdf
Aristóteles. (1990). Retórica. Centro de Estudios Constitucionales.
Aristóteles. (1982). Tratados de lógica (Órganon). Gredos.
Baytelman, A. y Duce, M. (2004). Manual de litigación en juicios orales. Centro de Estudios de Justicia de Las Américas.
Falcón, P. y Esquivel, J. (2020). Actitudes lingüísticas de migrantes andinos en áreas sociodemográficas de lenguas en contacto. Lengua y Sociedad, 19(2), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.15381/lengsoc.v19i2.22305
Firbas J. (1964). On defining the theme in functional sentence analysis. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague, 1, 267-280.
Goffman, E. (2006). Frame analysis: Los marcos de la experiencia. Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas.
Hammer, L. y Noemi, C. (2015). Relación entre pensamiento crítico y complejidad discursiva en estudiantes universitarios. Onomázein, 2, 184-197.
Hample, D. (2005). Arguing: Exchanging Reasons Face to Face. Erlbaum.
Hample, D., Warner, B. y Young, D. (2009). Framing and Editing Interpersonal Arguments. Argumentation, 23, 21-37.
Jackson, S. (1992). ‘Virtual standpoints’ and the pragmatics of conversational argument. En F.H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J.A. Blair, and C.A. Willard (Eds.), Argumentation illuminated (pp. 260-269). Sic Sat.
Noemi, C. (2013). Aproximación teórica a la noción de complejidad argumentativa. Logos: Revista de Lingüística, Filosofía y Literatura, 23(2), 256-271.
Noemi, C. (2022). Textura discursiva-argumentativa de la ecología migratoria hacia Chile. Logos: Revista de Lingüística, Filosofía y Literatura, 3(2), 231-245.
Noemi, C. y Rossel, S. (2022). Reedición argumentativa en adultos mayores. Nueva Revista del Pacífico, 76, 20-39.
Organización de los Estados Americanos. (2021). Comunicados de prensa. https://www.oas.org/pt/CIDH/jsForm/?File=/es/cidh/prensa/comunicados/2021/263.asp
Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos. (2021). International Migration Outlook 2021. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/29f23e9d-en
Perelman, Ch. y Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1989). Tratado de la argumentación: la nueva retórica. Gredos.
Plantin, Ch. (1996). L’argumentation. Le Seuil.
Quintiliano, M. (1919). Instituciones oratorias. Librería de Perlado y Páez.
Rastier, F. (2005). Semántica interpretativa. Siglo XXI.
Rest, W. (2013). Cuestionario de Problemas Socio-morales D.I.T. Darwf.
Secades, A. (2015). A Computational Model of Pragma-dialectics as a Tool for its Analysis and Appraisal. Informal Logic, 35(3), 342-377.
Tomasello, M. (1999). Los orígenes culturales de la cognición humana. Amorrortu Editores.
Toulmin, S. (1958.) The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press.
Van Eemeren, F. y Grootendorst, R. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. The Pragma-dialectical Approach. Cambridge University Press
Van Dijk, T. y Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. Academic Press.
Walton, D. (1996). Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Walton, D., Reed, C. y Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Cristian Noemi, Sebastián Rossel
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
AUTHORS RETAIN THEIR RIGHTS
a. Authors retain their trade mark rights and patent, and also on any process or procedure described in the article.
b. Authors can submit to the journal Lengua y Sociedad, papers disseminated as pre-print in repositories. This should be made known in the cover letter.
c. Authors retain their right to share, copy, distribute, perform and publicly communicate their article (eg, to place their article in an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in the journal Lengua y Sociedad.
d. Authors retain theirs right to make a subsequent publication of their work, to use the article or any part thereof (eg a compilation of his papers, lecture notes, thesis, or a book), always indicating its initial publication in the journal Lengua y Sociedad (the originator of the work, journal, volume, number and date).
