If construal decides what can appear in a narrative, relationality decides how phenomena connect.
Liora’s journey through the forest provides a living example of how relational structures shape the intelligibility of story worlds.
1. Relational Axes: Identification and Classification
Languages differ in how they mark relations:
-
Identification: Who or what is this entity? What is its role in the scene?
-
Classification: How is it grouped with others? What type of entity or phenomenon is it?
For Liora at the pool:
-
English-style identification: “Liora paused by the pool. A small creature hovered above it.”
-
Clear subject/object identification; minimal classification.
-
-
Participant-heavy relational construal: “The forest’s secret eyes watched Liora; one shimmered just above the still water.”
-
Classification and relational marking enrich narrative texture; entities are defined through their web of relations.
-
Relationality here shapes what the reader understands as coherent — not through explicit description of “roles” but by marking which entities interact, influence, or anchor meaning.
2. Possession and Narrative Anchoring
Possession is a potent relational axis. Languages vary in how possession is coded, and this influences story focus:
-
Direct possession: “Liora’s hand brushed the moss.”
-
Relationally distributed: “The moss and dew seemed to lean toward her touch.”
-
Implications: Distributed relationality can give environments, objects, or abstract elements agency in the narrative, creating rich, interwoven story ecologies.
In Liora’s forest, the distinction affects whether the narrative is Liora-centred or forest-ecology-centred — even without changing the events themselves.
3. Connection: Networks of Interaction
Relationality also governs interaction networks:
-
Which entities influence which others?
-
How are cause-effect, attention, and responsiveness encoded?
Example:
-
Event-centric: “Liora touched the water; it rippled.”
-
Distributed relational: “The water shimmered at her touch, sending tremors through moss and dew, and the forest itself seemed to acknowledge her presence.”
The latter encodes a network of responsive participants, giving the narrative a relational depth beyond linear events.
4. Relationality as Semiotic Ecology
Relational axes are not optional narrative decorations. They:
-
Stabilise the intelligibility of participants and phenomena
-
Define which interactions are central to the story
-
Shape tension, expectation, and narrative texture
In ecological terms: a narrative is only coherent because relationality constrains and coordinates the possible interactions.
Liora’s scene shows how relationality expands narrative potential: entities do not merely exist; they interact, respond, and anchor each other within the narrative horizon.
5. Liora in Action: Relational Contrasts
Compare two semiotic ecologies in the same scene:
Minimal relationality:
Liora bent toward the pool. The creature hovered. A ripple moved across the water.
Rich relationality:
Liora leaned close; the creature mirrored her motion. Moss and dew shimmered, responding to the ripple. The forest held its breath, as if the whole scene recognized her presence.
Notice:
-
Minimal relationality keeps focus tight on agent and event.
-
Rich relationality distributes coherence across participants, environment, and events.
-
Both are licensed by the respective semiotic ecology, not by cognitive determinism.
Next Post
Next, we will explore Perspective in Narrative: how viewpoint, epistemic access, and alignment shape what phenomena are foregrounded or backgrounded, and how suspense, empathy, and knowledge asymmetry are generated.
Liora’s forest adventures will continue to illustrate how narrative ecology unfolds across different axes.
No comments:
Post a Comment