Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton August 2, 2017

“I love homosexuals like I love gangsters”: epistemics and evidentiality in a Brazilian hybrid television news interview

  • Edvan P. Brito

    Edvan P. Brito received his PhD in Linguistics from Georgetown University and is currently Assistant Professor of Portuguese at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. He also holds an MS in Linguistics from Georgetown University and an MA in Mass Communication and Media Studies from Howard University. His research interests include discourse analysis, language and identity, sociolinguistic variation, and Portuguese as a foreign language.

    EMAIL logo
From the journal Text & Talk

Abstract

This paper analyzes how interlocutors express evidentiality (Chafe 1986), epistemic stance and epistemic status (Heritage 2012) in their moment-by-moment interactional moves (Goffman 1981) in order to set the grounds for the argumentative dialogue they have during a hybrid television news interview. The data were extracted from an episode of the Brazilian television show De Frente Com Gabi ‘Facing Gabi’, which featured a discussion on religion and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) rights, focusing on adoption. In looking at the progression of the epistemic devices used by the participants, the analysis takes into account not only the sources or domains of knowledge presented by them but also issues related to access and rights to this knowledge. The analysis of the data shows that the interaction in question does not meet the expectations of a news interview discourse, in which interlocutors usually perform their roles as questioners and answerers according to a set of pre-established institutional norms. With this in mind, this study highlights the importance of viewing institutional discourse as a dynamic type of interaction that can be adapted by interactants in order for them to meet both institutional and interactional goals.

About the author

Edvan P. Brito

Edvan P. Brito received his PhD in Linguistics from Georgetown University and is currently Assistant Professor of Portuguese at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. He also holds an MS in Linguistics from Georgetown University and an MA in Mass Communication and Media Studies from Howard University. His research interests include discourse analysis, language and identity, sociolinguistic variation, and Portuguese as a foreign language.

Appendix 1. Transcription conventions

((words))

inaudible

[

overlap between utterances

(.)

noticeable pause

word.

falling intonation

word?

rising intonation

word,

continuing intonation

=

latched utterances by the same speaker or by different speakers

wo-

self-interruption

WORD

very emphatic stress

wo::

vowel or consonant lengthening

@

laughter

word!

animated speech tone

Appendix 2. Transcription in Portuguese

LinhaMarília GabrielaSilas Malafaia
1Olha
2eu vou fazer um p- propor um problema a você,
3que é contra inclusive a: o aborto,
4a legalização do aborto.
5Supondo que nasça uma criança
6e que a mãe dessa criança não vá poder criá-la.
7Um casal homossexual se dispõe a criar essa essa criatura,
8que senão vai ficar jogada à disposição do que seja
9numa instituição que vai tratá-la mal.
10Você acha que ainda assim um casal homossexual não pode ter essa criança
11e fazer dela uma um belo cidadão, e uma bela cidadã
12e criar um ser humano digno
13com todos os seus direitos
14com toda a sua inteligência,
15com toda a sua mori- amor o amor,
16com todo seu amor e compaixão pelo outro?
17Primeiro,
18tem mais na fila casais héteros
[Não, eu não tô perguntando isso pra você.esperando crianças [do que homo.
19Ué ué ((unintelligible))
20Eu tô perguntando conceitualmen-.
21[Eu tô falando das novas famí-.[Não acredito.
22Venha cá.Não.
23EU NÃO ACREDITO que dois homens possam criar uma criança perfeita no sentido total que você quer, como se-
24Não acredito!
25Porque eu acredito que Deus criou homem e mulher.
26[Ô SilasEsses seres [é que se completam. =
27= E outra,
28na França ninguém chamou de
[Ô Silas!fundamentalista, [hein?
29Ninguém chamou de
fundamentalista.
30As famílias as famílias [mudaram mudaram.=[Eu não acredito nisso.
31A sociedade como um todo
32mudou.
33Mudou tudo, Silas.Não.
34Querida, (.) vamos ver daqui a cinquenta sessenta anos o que que vai acontecer.
35Daqui a cinquenta sessenta anos.
36[É vamos ver.
Mas daqui a cinquenta [sessenta
37anos, o que é pode acontecer?O que que pode acontecer?
38Crianças que agora,
39que essa história de adoção é agora
nova
40dez anos doze anos,
41não tem mais do que quinze anos isso no mundo.
42Então, não adianta agora vim com fotografia de jornal
43e mostrar dois caras com uma criança feliz.
44Essa história pra mim [não me
[Não tô falando só disso.convence.
45[Eu não acredito que dois homens e
Eu tô falando de [duas mulheres ou dois homens.duas mulheres tenham capacidade para desenvolver um ser humano.
46Não acredito.
47Eu acredito que um homem e uma mulher.
48Eu não acredito nisso.
49
Eu conheço muitas pessoas que[Daqui a uns trintas anos você pode
50foram criadas [dessa forma.me dizer alguma coisa
51porque por enquanto não.
--- (84 linhas de transcrição
--- (84 linhas de transcriçãoomitidas) ---
omitidas) ---
135Concordar com uma uma prática é uma coisa,
136amar a pessoa é outra.
137Eu amo (.) os homossexuais,
138mas discordo cem por cento de suas
práticas.
139
140Então repita isso por favor.Eu amo.
141Isso eles sabem.
142
143Não di- diga com de boca cheia.Querida, não.
144Eles sabem.
145Eles não são bobinhos não.
146Eles sabem.
147
148Então diga.Eu amo os homossexuais
149como eu amo os bandidos,
150amo assassinos.
151[Vambora.
152[@@@ Cê tá ce tá botandoEu eu aumento o leque.
153Eu amo porque é o ser humano.
154Oh Gabi,
155o ser humano é a coisa [mais
[Você tá colocando.importante.
156
Veja, você tá colocando homossexual ao lado de bandido,
157assassino,
158porra!Nã:o.
159Não tô colocando não.
160Eu amo eu amo to::das as pessoas.
161Não, mas pra dizer, olha
162eu não gosto de uma prática
163então eu tô dizendo pra você.
164
165Peraí,
166vamos lá, vamos parar aqui
porque nós temos mais um bloco
167pela frente
168e eu juro que não vou bater nele[Não não @@
[e ele não vou deixar que bata em
169mim não.
Estamos terminando mais um bloco De Frente com o pastor Silas
170Malafaia.
Nós voltamos já já.

References

Agar, Michael. 1985. Institutional Discourse. Text 5(3). 147–168.10.1515/text.1.1985.5.3.147Search in Google Scholar

Chafe, Wallace. 1986. Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. In Wallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, 261–272. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar

Clayman, Steven. 2010. Questions in broadcast journalism. In Alice F. Freed & Susan Ehrlich (eds.), Why do you ask? The function of questions in institutional discourse, 256–278. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195306897.003.0012Search in Google Scholar

Clayman, Steven & John Heritage. 2002. The news interview: Journalists and public figures on the air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511613623Search in Google Scholar

Clayman, Steven & Jack Whalen. 1988/9. When the medium becomes the message: The case of the Rather-Bush encounter. Research on Language and Social Interaction 22. 241–272.10.1080/08351818809389305Search in Google Scholar

Drew, Paul & John Heritage (eds.). 1992. Talk at work: Interaction and institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Edelsky, Carole. 1981. Who’s got the floor? Language in Society 10(3). 383–421.10.1017/S004740450000885XSearch in Google Scholar

Ehrlich, Susan & Alice F. Freed. 2010. The function of questions in institutional discourse. In Alice F. Freed & Susan Ehrlich (eds.), Why do you ask? The function of questions in institutional discourse, 3–19. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195306897.003.0001Search in Google Scholar

Ekström, Mats & Asa K. Ludell. 2011. Beyond the broadcast interview: Specialized forms of interviewing in the making of television news. Journalism Studies 12 (2). 172–187.10.1080/1461670X.2010.493328Search in Google Scholar

Erickson, Frederick. 2004. Talk and social theory: Ecologies of speaking and listening in everyday life. Malden, MA: Polity Press.Search in Google Scholar

Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Media discourse. London: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Fairclough, Norman. 1996. Technologisation of discourse. In Carmen Caldas-Coulthard & Malcolm Coulthard (eds.), Texts and practices: Readings in critical discourse analysis, 71–83. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Ford, Cecilia E. 2010. Questioning in meetings: Participation and positioning. In Alice F. Freed & Susan Ehrlich (eds.), Why do you ask? The function of questions in institutional discourse, 211–234. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Freed, Alice F. 2010. I’m calling to let you know! Company-initiated telephone sales. In Alice F. Freed & Susan Ehrlich (eds.), Why do you ask? The function of questions in institutional discourse, 297–321. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195306897.003.0014Search in Google Scholar

Goffman, Erving. 1959. The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday Anchor.Search in Google Scholar

Goffman, Erving. 1986 [1974]. Frame analysis: An assay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper and Row.Search in Google Scholar

Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Search in Google Scholar

Goodwin, Charles. 1994. Professional vision. American Anthropologist 96(3). 606–633.10.1525/aa.1994.96.3.02a00100Search in Google Scholar

Hamo, Michal. 2006. Caught between freedom and control: ‘ordinary’ people’s discursive positioning on an Israeli prime-time talk show. Discourse Society 17(4). 427–445.10.1177/0957926506062361Search in Google Scholar

Heritage, John. 2012. Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(1). 1–29.10.1080/08351813.2012.646684Search in Google Scholar

Heritage, John & Steven Clayman (eds.). 2010. Talk in action: Interactions, identities, and institutions. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781444318135Search in Google Scholar

Hultgren, Anna K. & Deborah Cameron. 2010. How may I help you? Questions, control, and customer care in telephone call center talk. In Alice F. Freed & Susan Ehrlich (eds.), Why do you ask? The function of questions in institutional discourse, 322–342. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hutchby, Ian. 2011. Non-neutrality and argument in the hybrid political interview. Discourse Studies 13(3). 349–365.10.1177/1461445611400665Search in Google Scholar

Johnstone, Barbara. 1986. Arguments with Khomeini: Rhetorical situation and persuasive style in cross-cultural perspective. Text 6(2). 171–187.10.1515/text.1.1986.6.2.171Search in Google Scholar

Kantara, Argyro. 2012. Adversarial challenges and responses in Greek political interviews: A case study. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines 5(2). 171–189.Search in Google Scholar

Meehan, Eileen R. 2005. Why TV is not our fault: Television programming, viewers and who’s really in control. Laham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Search in Google Scholar

Rautajoki, Hanna. 2012. Membership categorization as a tool for moral casting in TV discussion: The dramaturgical consequentiality of guest introductions. Discourse Studies 14(2). 243–260.10.1177/1461445611433637Search in Google Scholar

Sarangi, Srikant & Celia Roberts (eds.). 1999. Talk, work and institutional order: Discourse in medical, mediation, and management settings. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110208375Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1988/9. From interview to confrontation: Observations of the Bush/Rather encounter. Research on Language and Social Interaction 22. 215–240.10.1080/08351818809389304Search in Google Scholar

Thussu, Daya K. 2007. News as entertainment: The rise of global infotainment. London: SAGE.Search in Google Scholar

Tracy, Haren & Jessica Robles. 2009. Questions, questioning, and institutional practices: An introduction. Discourse Studies 11(2). 131–152.10.1177/1461445608100941Search in Google Scholar

Van Dijk, Teun. 2012. Discourse and knowledge. In James Paul Gee & Michael Handford, The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis, 587–603. London: New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2017-8-2
Published in Print: 2017-8-28

© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 19.3.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/text-2017-0019/html
Scroll to top button