CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 231Narrative Theory and AnalysisRhetoric and Communication StudiesLinguistics and Discourse Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Narrative theory: core concepts and critical debates

Open access
David Herman, James Blackwell Phelan, Peter J. Rabinowitz, Brian Richardson, Robyn Warhol·2012·Choice Reviews Online
DOI 10.5860/choice.50-0710
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

As rhetorical narrative theorists, we look at narrative primarily as a rhetorical act rather than as an object.That is, we see it as a purposive communication of a certain kind from one person (or group of persons) to one or more others.More specifically, our default starting point is the following skeletal definition: Narrative is somebody telling somebody else, on some occasion, and for some purposes, that something happened to someone or something.every part of this definition after "is" deserves further commentary-and we will provide such commentary in the following chapters.Before we do so, however, we'd like to start out by identifying six main principles that underlie our approach.1. Narrative is often treated as a representation of a linked sequence of events, but we subsume that traditional viewpoint under a broader conception of narrative as itself an event-more specifically, a multidimensional purposive communication from a teller to an audience.The focus on narrative as purposive means that we are interested in the ways in which the elements of any narrative (e.g., character, setting, plot structure) are shaped in the service of larger ends.The focus on narrative as multileveled communication means that we are interested not simply in the meaning of narrative but also in the experience of it.Thus, we are as concerned with narrative's affective, ethical, and aesthetic effects-and with their interactions-as we are with its thematic meanings.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5860/choice.50-0710

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Herman, D., Phelan, J. B., Rabinowitz, P. J., Richardson, B., & Warhol, R.
ORCID
Venue
Choice Reviews Online
Publisher
American Library Association
Published
2012-10-01
Volume
50
Issue
02
Pages
50-0710-50-0710
ISSN
  • 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-8253
DOI
10.5860/choice.50-0710
OpenAlex
W1556120649
Cited by
230
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
Type
book review
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Choice Reviews Online (publishedVersion)
  • The Knowledge Bank (The Ohio State University) (submittedVersion)
  • Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Narrative Theory and Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Rhetoric and Communication Studies
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
Keywords
narrative theory, narrative meaning, narrative structure, character, setting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-12 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review