The Figures in Argumentation: the Case of the 2018 Electoral Debate

In this paper, we analyze the rhetorical figures that equip the arguments of six candidates for the presidency of the republic in the context of the pre-electoral debates of the 2018 presidential race. We assume that figures are not only ornaments of language, but real persuasion equipment. For this purpose, we developed three research questions: a) how do figures equip language? b) how can figures build persuasion in deliberative political discourse? c) how do figures integrate argument types to equip them? We base our research in the domains of rhetoric, argumentation and discourse, particularly in the works of Aristotle (2013), Barthes (2001), Perelman and Tyteca (2014), Fiorin (2020), Plantin (2008), Amossy (2020), Abreu (2009), Ferreira (2015) and Courtine (1990). Methodologically, the research has a bibliographic-documental character, of a descriptive and explanatory nature. Our corpus is composed of excerpts from the speeches of the six candidates for the republic in the televised pre-election debate on RedeTV, held on August 17, 2018 and available on the video sharing platform Youtube. With regard to the results, we demonstrate that the presence of certain figures of rhetoric -such as metaphor, metonymy, personification, comparison, etc. -contributed to the intensification of the arguments of these candidates, increasing the effectiveness of the arguments and, consequently, contributing to the adhesion of spirits.