Revisiting discourse boundaries: The narrative and non-narrative modes

Abstract

The article has a programmatic aim, namely to critically review the main assumptions of research on discourse boundaries and propose a viable way around current pitfalls. Discourse distinctions by mode can be a useful antidote to text classifications based upon genre, text-external or text-internal factors, or the spoken versus written dichotomy. While narrative figures in all classifications by mode, studies of modes other than narrative have so far remained fragmented and artificially separated. Furthermore, although classificatory frameworks assume a symmetrical relation between modes, the primacy of narrative in communication needs to be taken into account. Our proposal for a systematic treatment of the narrative and non-narrative modes rests on the conceptualization of mode as a level above that of genre that serves as both a text- and context-organizing tool, providing speakers and writers with rhetorical resources that can be strategically drawn upon in discourse. This view avoids the polarization that has led to a depreciation of non-narrative and overvaluing of narrative texts, and allows us to recognize the relative importance of each mode by reference to textual analysis. In particular, the distinction can be operationalized in terms of prototypical features relating to configurations of spatial, temporal, and personal relations, as well as aspects of interpersonal management. Prerequisites for the further systematization of the distinction include the exploration of the respective prototypical cases and the study of their hybridization and interaction in such contexts as computer-mediated communication or institutional discourse

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 34 citations exist upstream.