Erro ortográfico e singularidade: a relação entre os significantes no funcionamento linguístico-discursivo

Abstract

This work brings a reflection about the singularity of the spelling error in the linguisticdiscursive working. It focuses on the relationships that the errors can keep with other errors present in the discursive materiality and the signs of subjectivity in dialogues transcribed from a process of writing in act. The main question in this research is: What leads the child to make mistakes in writing in such a way that after writing correctly, s/he returns and writes the same word in different wrong ways? The corpus of this dissertation is composed of the school handwriting collection produced by 15 students from a Public School in Maceió, when they responded to proposes of rewriting of fairy tales and rewriting of their own tales written individually or in pairs, and followed by the recording of the evolution of one of the productions in act. Taking as starting point the studies of cognitive bias (ZORZI, 1997; MORAIS, 1995, 1998; REGO & BUARQUE, 2003; among others) that consider the comprehension of regularities and irregularities of the spelling error as a kind of linguistic knowledge possessed by a subject who controls it. This perspective is discussed looking for support in the area of Language Acquisition, a theoretical place that recognizes the individual subjected to the language operation and designed to be faulty, destinated to the misconception (MILNER, 1987). ). In the analysis, the axes of the language operation are considered, as well as the metaphoric and metonymic processes advocated by Jakobson (1975) from the rereading of Saussurean syntagmatic and associative chains. These processes have been re-elaborated by Lemos (1997, 1999) in his theory about the changes in the child's position in relation to the language, and also considered in studies of authors affiliated with that area (CALIL, 1998, 2000; CALIL and FELIPETO 2008; LOPES 2005) as a different way to see the error that is justified not only by cognitive criteria, but also by the way it shows itself: questioning us, demanding from us a look to the subjectivity of the writing process and speaking of a subject who is a consequence of the meaningful laws. In this sense, the singularity of the spelling error is present in the analysed data by the metaphorical slippage of signifiers, sometimes brought from the textual surface, sometimes brought from the dialogue of the person who writes it.