This work analyses, anchored in Discourse Analysis of French parentage, which has in Pêcheux its author of reference, which discursive positions are occupied by subjects-students of the last year of high school when they are asked to produce an argumentative-dissertative text. We consider, through the discursive perspective, that the act of argue is seen as a discursive position that the subject may or may not occupy. We investigated, thus, the implications for these subjects-students of how the argumentation has been treated in the Portuguese textbooks, once the circulation of the journalistic discourse is used as a model of argumentative text to be followed by the students. We believe that argumentation is an essential knowledge in the life of any subject, being useful not only in the case of the learning of the mother tongue, but also in various other fields of knowledge and everyday life in general. We can also confirm the importance of this argument when we think discursively about it, so we understand that "the act of arguing, that is, to steer the discourse towards certain conclusions, constitutes the fundamental linguistic act, because all discourses underlie an ideology ".

 Even so, not despising the theories about arguing, on the contrary, we believe that since the first studies on the rhetoric, that we consider as the "faculty of observing in each case, what can be used to create persuasion ", the argument has established itself as a highly relevant knowledge, endowed with features and useful for life in society. Therefore, we advocate its teaching as student’s rights and see how much relevant can be a work that specifically investigate the teaching of argumentation in school, because this is a knowledge which is often seen as too complex, so its teaching is delegated to the school last year. This postponement seems to be supported by a discourse that promotes the idea that only after the "total" comprehension of language, the subject would be able to work with writing in an argumentative way, which actually can be configured as an underestimation of students' ability to cope with a more elaborate knowledge.

Furthermore, we understand that it is the role of school when it comes to working with textual production - especially in the case of argumentative production – to offer different types of texts and discourse genres to students and promoting discussion, and the “dispute by discourse’s object”. We also know that there is a lot of power’s relations that underlie language teaching, especially in the case of writing. This is because even in a reality where access to school has been enlarged, we can say that the language, in Brazil, is still available to a small part of the community. It is noteworthy that we understand the school as a space in which various discourses circulate from different genres and to position us for the circulation of theories about arguing, we are also advocating that scientific discourse on argumentation should circulate in schools, even by the textbooks. There is therefore no question of condemning the presence of journalistic discourse, for example, because we understand that all types of discourse should be in the school. We just criticize the exhaustive presence of certain genre, while the most important ones has been silenced.

ARISTÓTELES. Retórica. Tradução de Edson Bini. São Paulo: EDIPRO, 2011. GINZBURG, C. Sinais: Raízes de um Paradigma Indiciário. IN: GINZBURG, C. Mitos, emblemas, sinas: morfologia e história. Tradução de Federico Carotti. 2. ed. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2002. GNERRE, M. Linguagem, escrita e poder. 4. ed. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1998. KOCH, I. G. V. Argumentação e linguagem. 13. ed. São Paulo: Cortez, 2011. MAINGUENEAU, D. Novas tendências em análise do discurso. Tradução de Eni Pulcinelli Orlandi. 3. ed. Campinas: Pontes; Editora da Universidade Estadual de Campinas, 1997. MOSCA, L. L. S. (org.). Retóricas de ontem e de hoje. São Paulo: Humanitas Editora, 1999. ORLANDI, E. P. Discurso fundador: a formação do país e a construção da identidade nacional. São Paulo: Pontes, 1993a. PACÍFICO, S. M. R. Argumentação e autoria: o silenciamento do dizer. 2002. 190 f. Tese (Doutorado em Psicologia Educacional) - Faculdade de Filosofia, Ciências e Letras de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto. PÊCHEUX, M. Semântica e Discurso: uma crítica à afirmação do óbvio. Tradução de Eni Puccinelli Orlandi [et. al.] 2. ed. Campinas: Editora da UNICAMP, 1995. PÊCHEUX, M. Ler o arquivo hoje. IN: ORLANDI, E. P. (org.). Gestos de leitura: da história do discurso. Tradução de Bethania S. C. Mariani. 3. ed. Campinas: Editora da UNICAMP, 2010. ROJO, R. Gêneros de discurso/texto como objeto de ensino de língua: um retorno ao trivium? IN: SIGNORINI, I. (org.). [Re]discutir texto, gênero e discurso. São Paulo: Parábola editorial, 2008.