“Clareza, brevidade e objetividade”: ideologias linguísticas e regimes metadiscursivos em manuais de trabalho acadêmico

Abstract

This research aims to identify and problematize how the metapragmatic discourses of contemporary academic writing/work manuals frame, regulate and stipulate academic production and writing standards, placing them within the modern/colonial world system with regard specifically to language ideologies and knowledge production. Thus, the corpus of analysis of this research consists of four manuals of academic writing/work, which are: Como escrever e ilustrar um artigo científico (2017) de Björn Gustavii; Produção textual na universidade (2010) de Désirée Motta Roth e Graciela Rabuske Hendges; Fundamentos de Metodologia Científica (2015) de José Carlos Köche; Metodologia do Trabalho Científico (2016) de Antônio Joaquim Severino, that were (re) interpreted through a documentary analysis seeking to link the metadiscursive regimes of contemporary manuals to the processes and ideologies through which they were constructed, mainly, to the constitution of the modern /colonial world system and to eurocentric rationality. For this purpose, this research carried out an articulation between the theoretical contributions of studies on Academic Literacy (LEA; STREET, 2006; LILLIS; SCOTT, 2007), especially with regard to academic writing conventions/norms as socio-historical constructions, together with theories about Metadiscursive Regime (BAUMAN; BRIGGS, 2003; MAKONI; PENNYCOOK, 2007), Metapragmatics (SILVERSTEIN, 1993, 2006), Linguistic Ideologies (SILVERSTEIN, 1979; IRVINE; GAL, 2000; KROSKRITY, 2004) and theories of Studies of modernity/coloniality (CASTRO-GOMÉZ, 2007; MIGNOLO, 2010; QUIJANO, 2007a, 2007b). In addition, we have chosen to review these manuals from two broad categories. The first category is the relationship between knowledge, science, research and academic writing, in order to show how the metadiscursive regimes of these contemporary manuals define knowledge and research, and how these conceptualizations are constituted from a eurocentric rationality that we associate with Modernity. The second category of analysis, on the other hand, aims to problematize the norms and conventions of academic writing and how they are historically constituted and socially reproduced through these contemporary manuals. In this sense, it addresses in a more specific way the way in which the explicit / implicit metapragmatics triggered in these manuals constitute these metadiscursive regimes when triggering linguistic ideologies and broader modern /colonial ideologies