Lesson 4 A sociolinguistic model of narrative Labov

Lesson 4 A sociolinguistic model of narrative: Labov (1972)

A framework for natural narrative • • • Well this person had a little too much to drink And he attacked me And the friend came in And she stopped it (Labov 1972: 360) • [Prompt: recollect an experience where you felt you were in real danger]

• • • Just a skeleton What lacks? Contextualization (who, where, when, how…) Sense of closure/finality Dramatic or retoric embellishment • -> so what? ? ?

• Labov’s narrative model was elaborated on the basis of a spoken corpus of hundreds of stories told in the context of everyday conversation • He identified six core recurrent features (categories) underpinning a fully formed natural narrative • Each category addresses one Wh question (what is this story about? , where did the story take place? ). i. e. each category fulfils a different function in the story

Evaluation • Beginnings, middles, and ends of narratives have been analyzed in many accounts of folklore or narrative. But there is one important aspect of narrative which has not been discussed—perhaps the most important element in addition to the basic narrative clause. • That is what we term the evaluation of the narrative: the means used by the narrator to indicate the point of the narrative, its raison d’être: why it was told, and what the narrator is getting at. • There are many ways to tell the same story, to make very different points, or to make no point at all. Pointless stories are met (in English) with the withering rejoinder, “So what? ” Every good narrator is continually warding off this question; when his narrative is over, it should be unthinkable for a bystander to say, “So what? ” Instead, the appropriate remark would be, “He did? ” or similar means of registering the reportable character of the events of the narrative. (Labov 1972 a: 366)

• this was terrifying, dangerous, weird, wild, crazy; or amusing, hilarious and wonderful. . . that is, worth reporting. • Evaluative devices include direct statements, but more importantly, they include also: – responses to the action presented as part of the story [I closed my eyes and thought I was going to die]; – intensifying devices both of sound and word choice, including repetition; – "comparators"--negatives, futures, modals, questions, commands, comparatives, and others. Generally speaking, "a comparator moves away from the line of narrative events to consider unrealized possibilities and compare them with events that did occur. "

Types of evaluation • With external evaluation, the narrator turns to the listener directly and tells him/her “what the point is”, thus interrupting the flow of the narrative in order to do so. • One of Labov’s examples is part of a secretary’s account of a hair-raising plane trip “in which the plane almost didn’t get over the mountains”. Her narrative is punctuated with comments such as: – and it was the strangest feeling – because you couldn’t tell – if they were really gonna make it

Types of evaluation • Embedded evaluation involves the narrator describing his sentiments as if they occurred at the time of the happening, rather than at the time of the telling, or attributing them to a third party who acts as observer. Labov’s examples include one of a narrator “quoting himself as addressing someone else”: – I say, “Calvin, I’m bust your head for that!’

Types of evaluation • Evaluative action is where the narrator describes “what people did rather than what they said”; in other words, the evaluation is dramatized. • This includes “actions that reveal the tensions of the actors”. • Labov gives an example of this from the story of the plane trip mentioned earlier: – …and then everybody heaved a sigh of relief

Labov’s model and literary narratives • Appreciated by stylisticians because it enables comparisons between literary and everyday narratives • Generally applied to short narratives (about 100 words) • E. g. narratives within narratives.