Sunday, 23 November 2025

Ecological Narratology: 5 Orientation in Narrative: Horizons and Coherence

If construal decides what appears in a narrative, relationality decides how phenomena connect, and perspective decides from where experience is accessed, then orientation decides where phenomena are anchored — spatially, socially, and discursively.

Orientation stabilises the narrative horizon, ensuring that events, participants, and relations remain intelligible over time. Liora’s journey through the forest provides a living illustration.


1. Spatial Orientation

Spatial orientation is fundamental to narrative coherence:

  • It locates entities relative to each other and to the narrator/participant.

  • It shapes movement, attention, and the unfolding of events.

Example — English-style spatial anchoring:

Liora stepped around the moss-covered stone. The pool lay ahead, its surface catching the first light of dawn. The creature hovered above the far edge.

Distributed spatial orientation (participant-rich):

Liora moved through the forest; moss, dew, and stone seemed to respond to her presence. The pool shimmered somewhere within this web of life, a focal node in a shifting landscape.

Spatial orientation can be explicit or emergent, but it always frames narrative intelligibility.


2. Social Orientation

Social orientation situates participants within relationships and hierarchies:

  • Who can influence whom?

  • Which entities are “in the know” or “bound” by social context?

  • Which participants are foregrounded as agents of action?

Example:

Liora hesitated. The creature’s hovering suggested curiosity rather than threat. Somewhere in the forest, unseen eyes followed, marking her movement.

Social orientation enriches narrative tension, guiding expectations about action and reaction.


3. Discursive Orientation

Discursive orientation structures how information is sequenced, foregrounded, and backgrounded:

  • What is topical? What is background?

  • How does attention shift across clauses and sentences?

  • Which phenomena must be explicitly mentioned, and which can be assumed in the horizon?

Example:

Liora’s hand brushed the water. A ripple spread. Dew on nearby leaves glimmered. In the distance, the sun edged above the treetops.

Here, orientation organises attention across multiple focal planes, creating a stable narrative horizon.


4. Orientation as Semiotic Ecology

Orientation is a systemic affordance:

  • Spatial, social, and discursive axes interact to anchor the narrative horizon.

  • Coherence emerges because each phenomenon is placed within this horizon — a relational and semiotic scaffolding.

  • Without orientation, even perfectly construed events and perspectives would feel disjointed.

Liora’s forest scene shows that orientation is dynamic and relational: the forest itself, the pool, the creature, and Liora’s movement all participate in constructing a coherent narrative space.


5. Liora in Action: Comparative Illustration

Minimal orientation:

Liora bent over the pool. Something shimmered above it.

Spatially rich orientation:

Liora moved around the moss-covered stone; the pool ahead caught the light; the creature hovered at the far edge.

Full semiotic ecological orientation:

Liora’s steps pressed lightly into moss; the pool shimmered with reflected dawn; dew and leaves quivered; the creature hovered, curious; the forest, vast and watchful, framed the unfolding scene.

Notice how each version increases the anchoring of phenomena, enriching coherence, attention, and narrative intelligibility.


Next Post

Next, we will integrate all axes — Construal, Relationality, Perspective, and Orientation — to show how a narrative ecology operates as a coordinated system.

We will revisit Liora’s forest scene to illustrate how different semiotic ecologies afford distinct story-worlds and reader experiences.

Ecological Narratology: 4 Perspective in Narrative: Vantage, Epistemic Access, and Alignment

If construal selects what appears in a narrative and relationality decides how phenomena connect, then perspective decides from where and how experience is accessed.

It regulates narrative alignment, suspense, and the intelligibility of events and participants.

Liora’s walk through the forest provides a lens for understanding how perspective functions within semiotic ecologies.


1. Perspective as a Semiotic Axis

Perspective in narrative is not merely “point of view.”
It is a systemic affordance built into language that shapes:

  • Vantage: whose experience is foregrounded

  • Epistemic access: what knowledge or perception is available

  • Alignment: which entities the narrative encourages the reader to identify with

Different languages encode perspective differently — sometimes morphologically, sometimes lexically, sometimes syntactically — creating distinct narrative possibilities.


2. Participant-Centred Perspective

In many languages, the narrative can be anchored tightly to a participant’s experience.

Example — Liora-centred:

Liora bent over the pool. She could see the creature shimmer, though she did not yet understand what it wanted. The forest seemed to hold its breath, waiting for her to act.

  • The narrative aligns the reader with Liora’s perceptual and epistemic horizon.

  • Suspense emerges from the limited access: we know only what Liora knows.

  • Semiotic ecology foregrounds the participant, making events intelligible through her interaction with them.


3. Event-Centred Perspective

Some narratives foreground events themselves rather than participants.

The pool rippled as a faint shimmer rose from its surface. A figure moved, bending close; the forest remained still, holding the moment in suspension.

  • Perspective is distributed: we attend to the unfolding phenomena rather than a single experiencer.

  • This creates a more observational or “objective” alignment.

  • Participants remain semiotic nodes, but the event-network drives the narrative pulse.


4. Multi-Perspectival or Distributed Perspective

Certain semiotic ecologies allow multiple, coexisting perspectives:

Liora leaned forward, unaware that the creature mirrored her motion. The moss shimmered beneath their gaze. The forest, ancient and watchful, seemed to anticipate a change neither could see fully.

  • Access is fragmented and layered: the reader simultaneously inhabits multiple experiential horizons.

  • Narrative tension arises from knowledge asymmetry between participants, environment, and narrator.

  • Perspective becomes a relational property of the scene, not just a property of a single observer.


5. Perspective and Narrative Effect

Perspective choices are not cosmetic. They determine:

  • Attention: which entities or events the reader perceives as central

  • Suspense: what remains hidden or uncertain

  • Empathy: which participants are intelligible as experiencing subjects

  • Temporal and causal coherence: how events appear to unfold

In Liora’s forest, shifting perspective changes the scene: from an event unfolding, to a participant’s awareness, to a distributed network of relations — all within the same moment.


6. Liora in Action: Comparative Illustration

Participant-aligned:

Liora watched the pool. The creature hovered just beyond reach. She held her breath.

Event-aligned:

A ripple spread across the pool, catching the light. Above it, something moved. The forest remained silent.

Distributed/multi-perspectival:

Liora leaned close, the creature mirrored her, the water quivered, and the forest seemed to hold its own secret knowledge.

Each construal produces distinct narrative experience, shaped by the semiotic ecology of perspective, not by deterministic cognition.


Next Post

Next, we will explore Orientation in Narrative: how horizons — spatial, social, and discursive — stabilise story worlds and make narrative coherent.

Liora’s ongoing adventures will continue to illustrate how narrative ecology integrates construal, relationality, and perspective into a coherent horizon.

Ecological Narratology: 3 Relationality in Narrative: Classification, Possession, and Connection

If construal decides what can appear in a narrative, relationality decides how phenomena connect.

It governs the web of relations that makes participants, events, and states intelligible in a coherent narrative horizon.

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.

Ecological Narratology: 2 Construal in Narrative: Eventhood, State, and Participant Salience

In narrative, construal is the first act of selection: what counts as happening, who counts as a participant, and which aspects of the scene are brought into structured presence.

A language’s semiotic ecology provides different affordances for construal, which in turn shape storytelling: pacing, suspense, focus, and even what “matters” in a narrative. Liora’s walk through the forest illustrates this beautifully.


1. Event-Centric vs. Participant-Centric Construal

Languages vary in how they cut experience into events and participants.

  • Event-centric languages (like English) foreground actions. The narrative pulse comes from verbs and processes:

Liora stepped lightly over the moss. She paused beside the pool. The surface shimmered.

The emphasis is on what happens. Liora acts; the pool responds; the world unfolds through events. Participants exist largely in relation to the events.

  • Participant-centric or distributed-event languages might foreground characters, objects, or relations, giving them inherent dynamism:

Liora, careful and quiet, hovered at the pool’s edge. Its shimmering surface drew her gaze. The forest seemed to lean closer.

Here, participants themselves carry event potential. Events are distributed across characters and things; action is relational rather than solely verb-driven.


2. State vs. Event Continuum

Another crucial aspect of construal is how languages treat states versus events.

  • English often sharply separates: events (“run,” “melt”) vs. states (“know,” “belong”).

  • Other languages allow a continuum, blending states and events:

    • The pool might be “shimmering” (event) and “still” (state) simultaneously.

    • Liora’s attention can be both act and state of awareness.

Narratively, this affects pacing: event-dominated construals accelerate story flow; state-rich construals slow down, invite reflection, or make environments “alive” in subtle ways.


3. Participant Salience and Story Focus

Which entities are foregrounded is a typological choice, not a universal truth.

  • In event-centric narratives, participants appear in the service of events: Liora acts, the pool responds.

  • In participant-centric narratives, participants are semiotic anchors: the pool, the forest, and Liora each have relational agency.

Liora bent toward the pool. The creature hovered. Moss brushed her hand. The forest held its breath.

Each participant carries potential for action or relational effect, even without verbs explicitly driving the scene.

This construal affects suspense, empathy, and narrative tension: participants can act as semiotic centres even in apparent “stillness.”


4. Construal as Semiotic Ecology

Construal choices are not arbitrary, nor are they reflections of cognition:

  • They are affordances built into the language.

  • They define what can be foregrounded or backgrounded, what can be event or state, and what counts as a participant.

  • They shape the narrative ecology, the space of possible stories.

Liora’s pool scene becomes a laboratory: a single moment, multiple construals.
English-style event-centric construal produces tension through action.
Participant-centric construal produces depth through relational texture.

Both are ecologically coherent in their own systems.


5. Liora in Motion: Practical Illustration

Consider these two construals side by side:

Event-Centric:

Liora knelt beside the pool. The dew on the grass sparkled. A ripple spread across the water as she reached toward it.

Participant-Centric:

Liora, alert and cautious, leaned toward the pool. The water’s surface shimmered. The dew, the moss, and even the hovering light seemed to respond to her presence.

Notice how the same phenomenon is construed differently: events vs. participants, verbs vs. relational texture. Both are systemically licensed by their respective semiotic ecologies.


Next Post

We will turn to Relationality in Narrative: how classification, possession, and connection shape the intelligibility of stories, again using Liora’s adventures as a running illustration.

This will show how narrative coherence is not imposed from outside, but emerges from the language’s relational architecture.