Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film
Citations
18 citations
18 citations
Cites background from "Story and Discourse: Narrative Stru..."
...In those studies which treat speech and thought separately, perception is still not given a separate consideration, but is often discussed as an aspect of thought presentation; that is, as part of FIT (Ikeo, 2007; Teranishi, 2007: 24, 32, 34).5 Finally, in contrast to these two positions, several critics have presented NP (or its equivalent term) as a distinctive technique which shares some features with FID/FIT but also has its own peculiar characteristics, and hence can be examined separately (Banfield, 1981; Brinton, 1980; Cohn, 1978: 111, 133–134; Fehr, 1938; Fludernik, 1993: 305–309, 311)....
[...]
...This may be due to the fact that perception is often included in discussions of ‘free indirect discourse’ (hereafter FID) on account of the stylistic similarities between NP and FIT noted earlier....
[...]
...Other scholars do include perception within the discourse presentation paradigm, and where NP is concerned, three slightly different positions are adopted: in most cases, perception is classified together with speech and thought within the broader category of FID (Chatman, 1978: 203; Gunn, 2004: 48; McHale, 1978: 278; Palmer, 2004: 49; Pascal, 1977: 20, 59; Ron, 1981: 18; Sotirova, 2004: 232)....
[...]
...…concerned, three slightly different positions are adopted: in most cases, perception is classified together with speech and thought within the broader category of FID (Chatman, 1978: 203; Gunn, 2004: 48; McHale, 1978: 278; Palmer, 2004: 49; Pascal, 1977: 20, 59; Ron, 1981: 18; Sotirova, 2004: 232)....
[...]
...NP has also received other names: ‘substitutionary perception’ (Fehr, 1938; Hernadi, 1972; McHale, 1978: 280), ‘represented perception’ (Banfield, 1981; Brinton, 1980) and ‘free indirect perception’ (Chatman, 1978: 204; Palmer, 2004: 48)....
[...]
18 citations
18 citations
18 citations