ANÁLISE CRÍTICA DE TRANSITIVIDADE DE REPRESENTAÇÕES DISCURSIVAS DO MINISTRO DA ECONOMIA PAULO GUEDES SOBRE PRIVATIZAÇÃO

Abstract

This work aims at performing an analysis of a piece of speech from the current economy minister, Paulo Guedes, in an interview given to CNN Brazil in November, 2020, by adopting a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) approach. The motivation to do so came from the influence that discourse as a social practice and social event might exert on Brazilian society. In order to achieve this, we used the tools from Halliday and Matthiessen’s Systemic-Functional Grammar (SFG) to observe the TRANSITIVITY system choices used by the interviewed and used in the analyzed material. In addition, we made use of Fairclough (2015) and Fairclough and Fairclough (2012) to investigate how the argumentative process, interwoven with the representations from the discursive realization, contributed to the construction of this argumentative legitimation. Lastly, we observed whether and how the representation and argumentation influence power relations, in accordance with Lukes’ (2005) tridimensional view and with Fairclough’s (2015) and Fairclough and Fairclough’s (2012) concepts of power in discourse and power behind discourse. We cross-referenced characteristics concerning the neoliberal hegemony process in Brazil based on Marinho, Castro and Vieira (2016) to verify possible traits of this economic ideology in the minister’s speech. We concluded that the representations used by the interviewed are utilized for the materialization and construction of the actors negatively represented as real, tangible threats. Participants that were negatively represented usually occupying the position of actor were found when constructed as detrimental, whereas the government, in the position of goal in relation to these processes and actors, was construed as a victim. As for the practical argumentation, we concluded that the structure of the analyzed speech is solid within the perspective used, except for the absence of the “counter-argument” and “negative consequences” elements. The concept of the second dimension of power (LUKES, 2005) was especially present, and its influence might contribute to the development of the third dimension (from the perspective of the same author) should an eventual discourse naturalization occur. About the economic ideological traits, we found two main characteristics: privatization of public enterprises and the use of privatizations as a way to control public debt.