Narrating and Arguing. From plausibility to local moves

CARRANZA, ISOLDA E.

Handbook of Narrative Analysis

Wiley-Blackwell

Lugar: Hoboken, New Jersey; Año: 2015; p. 57 - 75

The search for ways in which narrating and claim‐backing interpenetrate has led to the examination of significant manifestations: on the one hand, the dispute over interpretation of the past, and on the other, the presentation of a local claim that suspends the narrative in progress. The former has been shown in a sample text that features the interplay of two factors: The causal connection between the initial and the final episodes is deliberately absent, and the adversary's section of the tale is overtly evaluated and, in this case, rejected. These two facts reduce narrativity because they detract from the "transfer of experience" and increase argumentativity because they make apparent the evaluative ideological stance. This evidence supports the general contention I posit here: that, notwithstanding the potential for interrelations between them, in any single argumentative narrative text, argumentativity and narrativity cannot be equally dominant. Secondly, insights from the analysis of rhetorical questions enable us to address the double fact that they can be found in narratives and are particularly abundant in a specific genre. Three central aspects of rhetorical questions seem to account for that. They offer a two‐part structure into which ideational material is organized. This is the reason why they can be used to advance the narrative action or to introduce an argumentative move. They also induce the target audience to satisfy the relevance conditions created through them by anticipating a certain answer. Finally, they allow for planning opportunities in the process of discourse production. The surface manifestations of the narrative and argumentative modes of discourse we have reviewed in a single genre are ultimately related to underlying assumptions and values circulating in the domain of a given social practice.