Search

This paper aims to analyze the topics and verbal attacks that were presented in the call for the March on April 2, 2016 on Twitter and Facebook. It studies the protest discourse of this demonstration through its slogans, slogans and hashtags that were part of the call. It seeks to account for the increase in tension through the discursive record of verbal violence and how this intensified opposition, outrage and this gave way to direct polarization through strategies such as demonization. From a discursive perspective with a rhetorical and multimodal focus, the use of the argumentative modality of polemics is evidenced as a dominant strategy in the confrontation established by the opponents of the government and the Peace Agreement in Colombia. The statements of the protest speech were studied from a selection of publications on Twitter and Facebook from February 1 to April 2. The analysis allows for evidence of the construction of antagonism and opposition to the government with a violent dimension paradoxically in a peace process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Taking into account the importance of the media for society and the role of the academy in the training of reflexive and critical subjects, this article of reflection, derived from a doctoral tesis that is still under construction in the teaching of understanding of texts of argumentative typology, intends to identify, from a historical-hermeneutic análisis and in a corpus of more than 543 opinion columns, whose theme revolves around higher education in Colombia during the post-conflict period (2016-2018), the main argumentative tendencies that stand out there and those used by several of the authors of the two must important newspapers of mass circulation in Colombia (El Tiempo and El Espectador). The results of the investigation show the predominance of certain types of reasonings (pragmatic, cause-effect, authority, example and probable) that are analyzed considering ancient and neo-rhetoric; thanks to them, the authors seek to gain the adhesión of the members of the discursive communities to which they are directed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of GIST: Education & Learning Research Journal is the property of Institucion Universitaria Colombo Americana (UNICA) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article presents the methodology and results of a study on writing within the discipline and academic literacy, completed in 2016 at Universidad Escuela de Administración y Negocios, in Bogota, Colombia. The study's strategy consisted of working with seven defined subjects, in order to add a component of critical reading and argumentative writing. Activities were designed for each subject and data were compiled through an analysis of the documents produced, interviews with participating teachers, and focus groups with students. The results show contradictory conceptions of writing, in addition to findings regarding the educational or professional use of certain textual genres and teachers' considerations of the specificgenres of their academic disciplines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Prolegómenos Derechos y Valores is the property of Prolegomenos Derechos y Valores and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Lenguaje is the property of Universidad del Valle and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Prolegómenos Derechos y Valores is the property of Prolegomenos Derechos y Valores and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

From the perspective of Chaïm Perelman's theory of juridical argumentation, the text shows the first result of the research about the premises of the argumentation and the argumentative techniques used by the Colombian Constitutional Court in concrete and real cases that could be catalogued as "hard cases." The theoretical frame is constituted by Chaïm Perelman's theory of juridical argumentation, which is a rhetorical and descriptive approach. The result that now we present shows a part of the construction of that theoretical frame and its application in regards to the question about how the Courts have established their models of judicial justification and how they can be interpreted from a theory of the argumentation based on Perelman. The conclusion reached is double: on the one hand, it has been shown another perspective of approaching the problem of the judicial decisions; and, on the other one, it has been presented the bases of Perelman's theory of argumentation and their effective application to concrete and real cases of the national reality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article evaluates argumentation premises in three sentenced pronounced by Colombian Constitutional Court. From the argumentation theory, it should be stated the way how argumentation premises are faced and the way how such premises are selected for solving some "tutela" cases. It is particularly interesting to show how confrontation of different premises arises; that is, those related to facts confronted to those related to definitions and presumptions. The idea of "auditorio" is evaluated from cases proposed for indicating the concept of "auditorio" referred to in these sentences. This research is expected to show that Perelman's argumentation theory is a tool for understanding judicial decisions. This theory also allows making an analysis of what is commonly called a "difficult case. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article arises in the development of the research project named "Legal Reasoning in the Colombian High Courts" within the line of constitutional and society justice of the group of studies of Public Law under the direction of Professor Lina Marcela Escobar Martínez, PhD, in which the researchers are: Germán A. González Herrera, Vicente F. Benítez Rojas, Tomás Bustamante Bohórquez, Juan David Solorza Martínez, Julián Daniel González Escallón, and Mario E. Vargas Gutiérrez. It is a review article that shows some advances as for the theoretical frame and its application to the concrete case of the judgments of the Colombian Supreme Court of Justice; thus definite results from the theoretical and practical point of view are not presented here; the research began in January of 2007 and is sought to be finished in 2008 and has been financed by Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas of Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. The article is divided into four main parts: the first one is dedicated to outline the imaginary of the judge and the judiciary; the second one shows the results found in the judgments of the Supreme court as for interpretation and argumentation; the third one explains the judicial ethics, while the last one confronts reality with the text of the norm, taking as an example a few cassation judgments in the Civil Law room of the Supreme Court. It is important to highlight that the complete research deals with an analysis of the judgments given by three rooms of cassation (civil, penal and labor) between 2002 and 2006; however, for practical effects, in this article we only exemplify civil cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article we deal with the debate, manifest in the printed press, concerning the pliable and accommodating use of figures and numbers during President Uribe's administration. The vulnerability of the Colombian statistical system, subjected as it is to a policy which demands favorable figures, is proved via authorized opinions, and analyzed based on a theory of argumentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]