1 INTRODUCTION

The proposal and development of a research project reflect the inseparable relationship between subject and object and promote transformations in both. The personal history of the researcher and their unique social, professional, and educational experiences, in the Academy and outside of it, imprint marks in the process of investigation, giving it a "face", without thereby compromising processes and procedures required to ensure the scientific nature of the process. Access to new theories and new data, unexpected situations in the field, denied interviews or, on the contrary, narratives that exceed expectations, are examples of unforeseen or uncontrolled deviations of the planned course, generating, however, new learning and requiring decisions.

The present work inscribes itself in this perspective. In the introduction we present the reasons that led to the reading exercise announced by the title, and then we address analytically, from the curriculum and language perspective, the aspects involved in the naming of curricular components, many of which tend to go unnoticed. The working contingencies of one of the researchers provided insights into the importance of scientifically studying the epistemological and pedagogical aspects of the complex conceptual universe of tourism and that of interdisciplinarity, central to the rethinking of the pedagogical practice of teachers from other areas teaching undergraduate programs in Tourism.

The first of these contingencies occurred while teaching an undergraduate program in Tourism and as a member of the Teaching Structuring Nucleus (NDE in the Portuguese acronym), where she and some colleagues were given the task of designing, for later implementation, interdisciplinary projects. For this task, meetings were held with teachers in the program, in order to make them aware of the proposals and provide a forum for discussion of theoretical conceptions and pedagogical practices that could arise.

The dichotomy between theoretical and practical courses/activities, as well as the difficulty of identifying pedagogical models and linking them to epistemological assumptions were some of the issues addressed in these meetings. Irrespective of the understanding of the always provisional nature of the knowledge produced, and because it was a discussion about interdisciplinary projects, it drew attention a diffuse contraposition between disciplinarity and interdisciplinarity, the latter frequently circumscribed to the idea of juxtaposition of areas present in the curriculum “grid”.

In addition to these findings of theoretical non-alignment, at the meetings it was evident an insufficient perception, by teachers in the program with training in different areas of knowledge, that interdisciplinarity - as the prefix "inter" denotes - requires dialogue between areas, or between the theoretical fields involved. In other words, in the present case, it would require, from a dialogical perspective, conceptual incursions in the field of Tourism and, consequently, the rethinking of usual pedagogical practices, in which, as a rule, tourism as an activity or concept tends to be a one-way street, i.e. only object of analysis through the theoretical lenses of these areas

The work in terms of bringing these aspects to light with their respective pedagogical implications presented difficulties and, at times, the attainment of the objectives seemed impossible.

One the one hand, if this experience was a catalyst for concerns it could not, per se, be a basis for generalization. On the other hand, these concerns pointed to the epistemological-pedagogical dimension of interdisciplinarity, directly and indirectly referred to in the National Curriculum Guidelines (DCNs in the Portuguese acronym) for undergraduate programs in Tourism.

The legal text explicitly states in Item IV, Paragraph 1, Article 2, that, among the structural elements of the pedagogical projects of undergraduate programs in Tourism, there must be forms of interdisciplinarity. At the completion of the program students will have received an interdisciplinary approach (Article 3), which is also identified in the set of 19 skills and abilities listed in Article 4. The assessment of the exit profile and skills and abilities is reflected in the design of the National Student Performance Exam (Enade).

Faced with this, the thinking journey led to the question: How in other programs would this dimension be contemplated? What elements, within the undergraduate program, would be indicative of dialogical relations of other areas with the area of ​​Tourism, which as a rule make up the curricular structure in these programs? Thus, the first draft of the research question was drawn up, and to answer it we developed a methodological framework. First, to widen the knowledge base, we conducted an online survey of curricular structures of other undergraduate programs in Tourism in Brazil at that time. Despite possible lags between propositions constituting projects and the way they are operationalized in everyday life (explicit and implicit curriculum), it was understood to be pertinent to identify how interdisciplinarity was documented in pedagogical projects, both in conceptual terms and in the proposition of pedagogical, methodological, or even evaluation practices. From the data obtained, the research directions were thus defined.

However, before presenting the data obtained, a caveat is in order. It goes beyond the scope of these reflections to deepen the concept of interdisciplinarity by referring to the multiple scholarly definitions, and thus to multiple perspectives of corresponding repercussions in pedagogical practice. Operationally, considering the empirical and reflexive frameworks that gave rise to the first questions, as well as the preliminary literature surveys for data collection, the approach was restricted to the identification of possible indicators of processes of "scientific dialogue" "inter" specific fields of study (Tourism and other areas of knowledge that integrate the curricular structures in the governmental and institutional areas related to undergraduate programs in Tourism), seeking to identify, through syntactic-semantic reading⁴ of course names, possible symmetries and/or asymmetries between these areas. We must remember that the word "dialogue", etymologically, is composed of the Greek prefix "dia", which means "through" and "logos", which originally meant "word" in Greek. Therefore, dialogue refers to the idea of ​​circulation of the word, of meanings, and, in the present case, between the areas.

For a possible operational definition, the theoretical approach is made from ^{Charaudeau (2010}), for whom interdisciplinarity

…consists in establishing real connections between concepts, analysis tools and modes of interpretation of different disciplines. It is not enough to add disciplines on the same object of analysis; various disciplinary skills need to be confronted to make these concepts and analysis tools more relevant, or to extend the scope of the interpretations based on results themselves from common analysis protocols. (p. 197)

In this regard it should be noted that, consistent with the initial objective and object proposed for the study, the very option for syntactic-semantic reading as a tool of analysis originating from the competences of Text Linguistics and enunciative analysis provided an opportunity to extend the field of interpretation of the results, contributing to establish, in an interdisciplinary way, other/new conceptual connections.

The documentary research carried out in October 2015, on the website of the National [Brazilian] Institute of Educational Studies and Research Anísio Teixeira (INEP), was not as fruitful as expected, since the number of projects found was small. Of the total of 340 programs in operation (disregarding offers from the same program in different locations), only 6 educational projects were available online (1.7%). On the other hand, we had access to 74 curricular structures (considering that the same program structure was maintained in different offers). The available information was mostly the list of courses that comprised the programs, semester schedules, and credits. Access to menus and respective teaching plans was limited.

Therefore, we had to find another perspective for our study. In this new approach the course names in the curricular structures became the new object of reflection, in which the area of Tourism was somehow related with other areas.

This decision was based on two basic assumptions. The first - which will be unfolded in the next item - concerned the curriculum conception and the intrinsic relation between the intangible and tangible dimensions, that in the present case was materialized in the Pedagogical Project (PPC), of which the curricular structure and the curricular components are constitutive elements. Because this is a college document, we assumed the course names were carefully selected in order to be consistent with the underlying assumptions guiding the PPC, in particular, the epistemological and pedagogical perspective that points to interdisciplinarity.

The second assumption was that language is not neutral; it contains discursive marks associated to the different contexts of enunciation, in which the subject enunciator (the one who enunciates) and enunciatee (to whom the enunciation is addressed) and the links with the enunciated object are instituted. In considering the guiding role of the PPC and the understanding that grammatical/linguistic structures and functions assume significant nuances in the scope of discourse, the syntactic-semantic description and analysis of course names that relate Tourism to other areas of knowledge could indicate possible configurations of dialogue between them.

A literature review on the terms “Estrutura curricular” and "análise sintático-semântica", in Portuguese for national publications, and "Curriculum Structure", "Curriculum Grid" and "Syntactic-Semantic analysis" associated with the term "Tourism", for international search. The documentary sources were as follows: periodicals linked to graduate programs in Tourism in Brazil, annals of the Seminar of Research in Tourism of Mercosur (Semintur) and Seminar of the National Association for Research and Graduate Studies in Tourism (ANPTUR); and the international database Scopus.

We did not find any occurrences for the analytical criterion syntactic-semantic aspects of denominations.

2 DENOMINATION OF CURRICULAR COMPONENTS: FROM CURRICULUM CONCEPT TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTANGIBLE AND WRITTEN DIMENSIONS

Matrix, structure, grid, component are terms that, in formal education, are regularly qualified by the adjective "curricular", constituting binomials whose frequency is such that they tend to be employed tacitly, without attention being turned to conceptual referents that may be present, either in relation to each of the terms or to the relations of meaning between them. Anyway, what is common to these binomials is the qualifying element that derives from "curriculum".

In its etymology there is the Latin term curriculum, -i, in the sense of race, career, place where one runs (^{Faria, 1962}), running, course, and small shortcut (Dicionário Aulete Digital, n.d.). The etymological perspective already suggests the process dimension of curriculum, of movement towards a target horizon, which carries, throughout the course, traces of the "place in which one is running", in which multiple and continuous starting points are marked. Therefore, thinking about the curriculum at different levels of education requires referring to a mapping of paths that intersect and permeate internally and externally the institutions.

Even though these theoretical insights on curriculum are not the object of these reflections, some proposals of scholars on the subject already suggest the multidimensionality of the concept and its repercussion in the use of the adjective "curricular".

According to the introduction of the topic "The curriculum question", which encompasses the educational themes of the Observatoire Éducation et Territoires (n.d.), as well as to different literature sources, particularly in the 1960s, the curriculum became an object of study in the field of Education and Sociology. Two major analytical approaches stand out: the first is the didactic approach, "…in which form and content are the result of the characteristics of the disciplines taught, the modalities of didactic transposition (Chevallard, 1985) and pedagogical conceptions"; the second is the sociological approach, "…in which the curriculum appears as a social construct translating ideological positions and relations of power". This sociological approach, from the point of view of M. Young mentioned in the text, would draw the attention to the modes of selection, organization, and legitimation of the knowledge embodied in school curricula.

According to ^{Sacristán (1999}), the curriculum is not only the link established between culture and the society outside school and education, but also between inherited knowledge and culture and student learning; it is the link between theory (ideas, assumptions, and aspirations) and possible practice, provided certain conditions are observed. Similarly, ^{Braslavsky (2011}, p. 4) considers that "…the curriculum relates to the connections between the goals of education and everyday life in learning institutions, schools, colleges, and universities".

In the same vein, among those selected by Pierre-Yves ^{Roux (2011}) “to clarify the notion of curriculum” (p. 21), document 8 refers:

The curriculum is, above all, the instrument of an educational policy, in the intersection of pedagogical intentions in terms of the view of man therein expressed and the didactic intentions, being the rationalization of a global teaching project. The curriculum is, therefore, subject to primary educational choices that are related to values and goals of a society's educational system, and to the view society has of itself and of man in becoming. (^{Roux, 2011}, p. 21)

The curriculum conception thus goes beyond the formal dimension and its bureaucratic correlates, supported by legal documents, institutional policies, and projects (written curriculum), entering the field of the lived, "real" or even "hidden" curriculum of everyday pedagogical practice.

In this line, ^{Moreira (1997}) emphasizes the existence of two usual meanings of the word "curriculum": (a) knowledge that is pedagogically and didactically treated by the school to be learned and applied by the student, or (b) a set of experiences to be lived by the student, under the guidance of the school. In other words: the conception of curriculum entails, although varying in emphasis, the presentation of knowledge and learning experiences to promote the assimilation and reconstruction of this knowledge. In the first case, the emphasis is on contents or written document, and corresponds to what is conventionally called formal curriculum; in the second case, the process or the effective school practice is emphasized, i.e., the so-called curriculum in action or real curriculum. Another concept Moreira (1997) borrows from Apple (1982), is that of "hidden curriculum", that is, "…norms and values ​​that are implicitly, but effectively, taught in schools and that are not usually talked about in teachers’ statements of ends or goals" (p. 14). In the concept of curriculum we must therefore consider "…plans and proposals (the formal curriculum), what actually happens in schools and classrooms (the curriculum in action), as well as the rules and norms that are not explicit that govern the relationships established in classrooms (the hidden curriculum)” (Moreira, 1997, p. 15) - this one is mentioned by ^{Tribe (2008}, p. 78) when bringing to the discussion the concept of curriculum. The spotlight here falls "not just on the explicit aims and objectives of the curriculum, but also on the implicit values ​​that accompany it. Exponents of the hidden curriculum point to the significance of what is left out of the curriculum as well as what is put in" (Tribe, 2008, p. 78).

In addition, because they coexist in the educational context, the way the hidden curriculum and formal curriculum are related to each other and are implemented, their asymmetries and symmetries, deserve permanent critical vigilance on the part of the actors involved, considering their political-social, cultural, administrative, and pedagogical repercussions, as well as tensions that may arise therefrom.

Reflecting on curriculum theory, what it is and why it is important, ^{Young (2014}) acknowledges two fundamental aspects: education as a practical activity and as a specialized activity. As a practical activity, education "…is about doing things to and with others" (p. 196), that is, it is concerned with enabling people to "…acquire knowledge that takes them beyond their personal experience and they would be unlike to acquire it if they did not go to school or college" (p. 196). On the other hand, while remaining a practical activity, the author considers that "…education has become increasingly specialized. Curricula are the form of this specialized educational knowledge, which largely defines the kind of education people get" (p. 197). Thus, Young (2014) argues that it is from understanding curricula as forms of specialized knowledge that we can develop better curricula and improve learning opportunities. And, as a direct corollary, the questioning about the knowledge that should make up the curriculum, "…not in the absolute sense of true knowledge, which is better termed belief, but in the sense of the ‘best knowledge we have in any field’" (Young, 2014, p. 187).

Still, according to the author, knowledge is specialized in two ways:

Curriculum designers should focus on its purpose: "… what is it trying to do or support teachers in doing?" (^{Young, 2014}, p. 200). In Young's understanding (2014), the purpose is to promote "epistemic ascent" (p. 200).

The curriculum, thus, contains in itself a journey of becoming, which take us back to the etymological roots of the term. In ^{Braslavsky's words (2011}), the curriculum is a process whose development shapes its intangible dimension. In addition, "The curriculum development is understood as a process implying a wide range of decisions concerning learning experiences taken by different actors at very different levels" (Braslavsky, 2011, p. 5). The researcher refers, respectively, to politicians, experts, teachers; at the national, provincial, local, school, and, increasingly, international levels.

On the other hand, if the curriculum, from this perspective, is an intangible process, it has a material expression in the form of diverse documents that serve (to varying degrees, according to their use) to produce meaning and guide the learning and teaching processes in educational institutions (^{Braslavsky, 2011}). Thus, curricular documents include official legal texts, institutional and programs documents, as well as documents prepared for the classroom (or for the many other spaces reached by digital resources).

Given the main object of this study, the Pedagogical Project of the Program (PPC ) is highlighted. The curriculum is central to this document in which, consequently, the legal, ethical-political, educational, sociocultural, epistemological, technical-scientific, methodological, and didactic-pedagogical dimensions are referents for the development of teaching and learning activities; institutional contextual elements are taken up; the objectives and the exit profile are defined. Also, the PPC outlines basic and complementary "specialized" knowledge as well as the evaluation processes for learning, teaching and the PPC itself.

The organizational dimension takes shape in the design and materialization of the curricular structure⁵, with the selection and designation of the curricular components, as well as in the mapping of the predicted flows, a design that is balanced by other dimensions and, at the same time, assuring unicity to the project. Therefore, the analysis, by focusing on curricular components is equally emphasizing other elements and dimensions of the Project - which supports the purpose of surveying, describing, and analyzing the curricular components of undergraduate programs in Tourism, to uncover possible underlying interdisciplinary conceptions.

3 DENOMINATION OF CURRICULAR COMPONENTS AND THE LINGUISTIC-TEXTUAL MATERIALIZATION OF THIS PROCESS: EMERGENCE OF A MULTIPLICITY OF MEANINGS

We are language beings. Immersed in it, we utter ourselves and we utter the world around us. And how do we say what we want or can say? Through texts, because, as ^{Bakhtin and Volochinov (1986}) argue, "the actual reality of language-speech is not the abstract system of linguistic forms, not the isolated monologic utterance… but the social event of verbal interaction…" (p. 123). That is, the text is the place of the interaction of social subjects that, through linguistic, cognitive, and social actions, construct meanings.

In the concept of text, the interactive nature of language is emphasized, since the text is a unit of meaning in use. We speak to someone for some purpose, and to that end we make choices of a linguistic-social nature.

If we communicate and interact through texts, curricular structures (also referred to as curriculum matrix or grid) are also texts that circulate in a human activity sphere, the educational sphere. Here, we should note that curricular structures are the result of a social construction, historically circumscribed; these structures arise from a way of conceiving and present curricular components in an educational institution, in this case, colleges. Therefore, a textual genre, which presents a compositional unity, style, and thematic content, is a relatively stable type of utterance (^{Bakhtin, 2011}).

As far as the compositional unit is concerned, a curricular structure is recognized by its form: visually the reader of this genre is traditionally faced with a table with vertical and horizontal lines with information about semester, course names, credits (or number of hours), prerequisites, among other elements institutions may adopt (which correspond to the thematic content). Visually, the still predominant form of the curricular structure of different institutions is of a "grid", the name by which curricular structures became popularly known. In line with other pedagogical concepts, there are also structures with different designs, such as modules, teaching units, representing the way the programs are designed - all of them ideologically marked forms.

Finally, the third component of the genre is style, which refers to the linguistic choices we make to say what we want to say (enunciative will), or what we can say. These choices are lexical (vocabulary), syntactic, and semantic.

^{Bakhtin (1986}), at different times, reiterates the dialogic and dynamic character of language. By marking its social character, he does not disregard its other constituent elements (morphology⁶, phonetics⁷, syntax and semantics). On the contrary, for him, problems of syntax are of great importance for the understanding of the language, because the syntactic forms are the ones that approach the real conditions of speech.

These postulations serve as a foundation for different linguistic studies, in special to those promoted by the field of Applied Linguistics and enunciative theories (approach followed, in this article, for the analysis of course names in curricular plans).

^{Antunes (2005}), a researcher that perform textual analysis based on the Bakhtinian assumptions, argues that the choices that occur on the textual surface "signal the conceptual connections that underlie this surface; …if there are connections on the surface it is because they exist within the scope of meaning and intended interactions "(p. 48).

The course designations presuppose these choices, which allows us to hypothesize, from the syntactic constructions identified, how the scientific dialogue between the areas was conceived or shaped. Of course, these are hypotheses based on the written document, without any correspondence with the curriculum/project in action/real/lived - which is outside the scope of the current stage of research development.

5 SOME ANALYTICAL AND INTERPRETATIVE REMARKS

Geography was used as an illustration, aiming to identify changes in meaning due to the use of prepositions or linking elements between the components of the syntactic structures. It is also important to mention the set of other courses, whose denominations have these syntactic structures. Table 1 presents the frequencies and the percentages of occurrences.

In a first reading of the data, the percentage of occurrences of syntactic construction X aplicado ao Tourism stands out with the highest value. In this case, in terms of transitivity, tourism establishes itself as object of X, indicating a one-way direction from X, as well as a relational asymmetry (tourism looked from the perspective of X). Considering the previous observations on the syntactic construction X no Tourism, one of the possible readings is that a transitivity is also implied, giving the term "tourism" the connotation of object/example/ field of application of the other area. Moreover, although in the syntactic construction X em Tourism, the preposition em, as mentioned above, establishes a certain relational vagueness between tourism and other areas, there remains the perspective of transitivity and the locative aspect. Thus, by adding up the respective percentages, they reach 60 per cent.

On the other hand, with 16.6 per cent, the syntactic construction X do Tourism and the previous syntactic-semantic readings that were made of it, another relational mapping emerges, from which tourism could be breaking the unidirectionality of the look of X (new "inter" disciplines paths?). The percentage of the syntactic construction using the coordinating conjunction, X e Tourism, is 23.1 per cent. This opens a mutuality perspective, in a dialogical relationship of symmetrical character, in which X and Tourism could be both subject and object. In this case, it would be possible to imply that the denomination of the subject would be expressing this view. However, the relational symmetry cannot be ensured either, in view of the other connotations that the same conjunction may assume and the very position of X in the syntactic structure, as mentioned above.

Other readings are possible, on the one hand, the Bakhtinian assumptions already mentioned regarding the relationships between the choices that are made in the textual surface regarding the meanings and the intended interactions and conceptual connections underlying that surface (^{Antunes, 2005}); and, on the other hand, the assumption that the syntactic structures of course designations would materialize these choices suggest possible forms of dialogue and transit between the areas. From the percentage of occurrences of syntactic constructions, we can also see signs of prevalence of the understanding of tourism as "activity"; in the same way, signs of the condition of the object that tourism assumes from the perspective of other areas, - which, immediately, would lead one to ask: Can one glimpse an "effective interdisciplinary dialogue" as recommended by the National Curricular Guidelines?

The question becomes more relevant when other information is examined, namely, the distribution of occurrences of the different syntactic constructions by regions in which the programs are offered, as shown in Table 2.

When analyzing the occurrences of the syntactic constructions X aplicado ao Tourism, X no Tourism, and X em Tourism and their respective percentages, by region, considering the semantic approximation between them, we observe that three of the regions present values higher than 60 per cent in the total of the 751 denominations, as shown in Table 3.

The frequencies and percentages, from this analytical perspective, draw our attention to the mentioned implied meanings of the preponderant understanding of tourism as an "activity" and on the one-way looking at other areas in relation to tourism. A similar situation occurs when we examine the courses with the 15 highest occurrences of the syntactic constructions using the linking words aplicado ao , no , and em , as shown in Table 4.

Only five of the 17 courses have values below 64.3 percent, standing out seven courses with values above 90 percent, four of which with 100 percent occurrences. The courses with fewer occurrences of these syntactic constructions are distributed mainly in the construction X do Tourism (Sociology and Anthropology) and X e Tourism (Environment, Patrimony), and Technology only in the latter case.

If, on the horizon of interdisciplinary dialogue, previous analysis revealed a one-way movement of other disciplines toward Tourism, another aspect draws attention, which can also be illustrated through Anthropology. In a total of 15 occurrences, the course designation is distributed in all the syntactic constructions listed, which points to the multiplicity of conceptions and forms of interdisciplinary dialogue, and, consequently, to the relevance of making it an object of study - and, particularly, considering the existence of undergraduate programs in Tourism in all Brazilian regions and, as already mentioned, the National Curricular Guidelines regarding interdisciplinarity.

On the one hand if, by its very nature, research draws on theories of reference for their analyses, on the other, the data found can give rise to readings from which new lines of research can be developed. In this sense, course denominations presented in the tables led to new reflections as additional contribution to this research.

As can be seen, three groups are identified in the occurrences of course denominations, in addition to what has already been analyzed: economy and management courses (Management, Administration, Economics, Accounting, Marketing, Statistics, Consumer Behavior), instrumental courses (Informatics, Statistics, and Technologies), and those in the field of social studies. The first group is prevalent, with 51 percent of the denominations; the second, covers only 12 percent, and from the remaining 37 percent, 20 percent are in the fields of Geography, Psychology, and Sociology. Therefore, the predominant educational view is a market-centered approach.

The critical reading is not the focus of this study; however, ^{Tribe’s (2015}) reflections on this market tendency give us some food for thought, while broadening the scope of the analytical dimension.

The author asks: "On what basis do we decide what to teach?" (^{Tribe, 2015}, p. 17). He emphasizes that the world, moving fast and, somehow, beyond our control, is reflected in the curricula. These may have random and hidden features, be only appropriate in one context, be designed for special interests. Referring to Ayikoru et al. (2009), he observes, for example, how often the frequency with which universities are very easy to accept the practices of managerialism and neoliberalism.

The author asks: "On what basis do we decide what to teach?" (^{Tribe, 2015}, p. 17). He emphasizes that the world, moving fast and, somehow, beyond our control, has reflexes in the curricula. These may have random and hidden features, be only appropriate to a reality, be designed for special interests. Referring to Ayikoru et al. (2009), he observes, for example, that the practices of managerialism and neoliberalism are often easily embraced by universities.

An example of the former is the widespread use of league tables, key performance targets and management (and learning) by objectives. Neoliberal agendas similarly incite universities to be competitive, entrepreneurial, market-led, and PR-proficient. So the university curriculum is caught between ‘serving the greater good’ and serving up roughly commodified readily marketable knowledge. Two unintended consequences arise from this: the de-professionalization of academics and the surface learning of students. (^{Tribe, 2015}, pp. 18-19)

In this sense, there is the concern that, in educational processes (in this case in the field of Tourism), decisions on what knowledge to include in the curriculum also need to break down membranes that protect and conceal subliminal aspects (intangible curriculum), which, if perceived , would mobilize thinking, depriving it of justifications based only on what is presented as a truism. And, from another perspective, this leads us to ask: Could such a "truism" not be configured as an intervening variable in the denomination of the curricular components?

6 FINAL REMARKS

If from and in the enunciative act the voices of the subjects who establish themselves as enunciator and enunciatee linked to the enunciated object emanate, what voices could then be inferred from the syntactic-semantic analysis of course names?

There are no categorical answers to this question. However, let us remember that these are components of curricular structures included in the Pedagogical Project of the Program, and, as such, they are a way of materializing a curriculum that was though out, and is, or will be, put into practice in its multiple dimensions by an institution.

Again, it is worth noting: the word is not neutral. This implies also that course names are impregnated with the explicit or implicit marks of those who created them, as well as the marks of those who contact with the names, in different spaces and times. In short, ideologically, and socially marked voices, circumscribed in history, composing the history of each one.

The results also reinforce the idea that the name of a curricular component is not exhausted at the time of its formal registration. In and through the interactive cycle of language, it continuously produces meaning and, as such, requires special attention as of its formulation. In the specific case of designations consisting of syntactic constructions involving two areas of knowledge, it was possible to verify the nodal role played by the choice of linking words influenced by or influencing the conceptual value of the antecedent and subsequent terms. But not only. Through this same interactive cycle, in addition to the "transit" between the areas, with these elements, at the same time, interpretive perspectives would arise between written and lived curriculum.

In short, if the syntactic-semantic analytic reading exercise carried out suggested the possibility of seeking answers to questions about signs that can be deduced from the denomination of curricular components, in an interdisciplinary perspective, focusing on the conceptual movement between (in the present case, one of them, Tourism), or even the possibility of answering questions about concepts or theoretical biases of tourism that could emerge from it, some answers were given, others rehearsed, and some remained unanswered.

And, from a different perspective, broadening the interpretive scope, the course names could also provide clues to possible indicators of academic status that would be conferred on Tourism by other areas of knowledge, which could affect - or are already affecting - the professional status of those with higher education in the area.

In this context, reiterating the supposed non-neutrality of language and giving an essayistic content to the reflections, Tourism, as “object of the gaze of other areas”, tends to be perceived as an "activity" (of a predominantly economic-administrative nature, according to the study results), would assume the prospect of case study of these areas, which would be ratifying the "scientific recognition" given to them by the Academy and the market. On the other hand, it is also necessary to consider the percentage of occurrences concerning the designations expressed by the syntactic construction X do (of) Tourism, whose semantic values ​​related to the contraction “do”, already mentioned, would lead to relational readings in which Tourism would be delimiting these areas, or functioning as a classifying term, or even connoting the idea of ​​"the whole", with which the areas put in relation would constitute dimensions of Tourism itself. This movement towards greater academic and market "recognition" is enhanced with the choice of the syntactic structure X e (and) Tourism. As seen, the coordinating conjunction "e", which marks an addition relationship, would make it possible to presuppose an open path in the sense of a relational symmetry.

In any case, although these two linking words, "do" and "e", from the semantic point of view, are those that could be associated with a greater tendency to engage in collaborative, or more symmetrical, dialogues between areas, this can only be corroborated when examining the course names in the light of the Pedagogical Project and, in it, the respective curricular conception.

Finally, although the focus of this study is neither a curricular analysis of the programs in Tourism in Brazil, nor a comparative study of curricula in Brazil and abroad, the elements derived from the syntactic-semantic analysis of course names in the curricular structures available online may suggest specificities and trends in explicit and implicit academic approaches with regard to scientific knowledge in Tourism and its dialogue with other areas of knowledge that integrate the curricular composition. By extension, these elements contribute to build a framework when the consolidation of tourism as a scientific area is on the agenda. Moreover, besides the understanding of these specificities and trends, it should be noted that, the interdisciplinary dialogue is not only a prerogative of the Tourism area, thus, the analytical procedures developed may be extended to other areas and programs. In the same way, as an additional reference, the set of considerations may assist in the development of proposals or curricular revisions.

To conclude, we presented and discussed some results of this initial stage of research. However, as it is usual in research, the analytical course fulfilled its task in this stage of project development since it provided information to revisit, corroborate, or even revise the formulated problem and the outlined objectives. After disseminating the study, there is room for intersubjective criticism, a key step in the scientific process.