Narrative Analysis Frameworks
Fielder-White’s Narrative Classification Matrix
Jonathan Fielder-White’s Narrative Classification Matrix (February 2026) extends the work of William Bascom and C. Scott Littleton by mapping two independent dimensions: the authority a narrative carries within a reception community and the kind of world in which that community understands it to be set.
A position describes a particular social reception of a narrative. The same narrative can have several positions across communities and periods, with uncertainty or disagreement made explicit.
The two axes
Both dimensions are assessed in relation to an identified reception community. The matrix uses qualitative judgements supported by evidence.
| Reference | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Vertical axis · Narrative authority | The degree of socially enforced epistemic commitment: how strongly a community expects acceptance of the narrative and treats it as binding. High authority can involve ritual or institutional obligations; lower authority permits optional, playful or fictional reception. This measures social weight rather than factual accuracy or a teller’s private sincerity. |
| Horizontal axis · Ontological setting | The perceived continuity between the narrative’s world and the community’s ordinary world-order. Placements range from primordial or cosmological settings, through transitional settings, to this-world settings. The age of a document or the presence of supernatural beings does not determine the position by itself. |
Reading the matrix
Narrative authority ↑
Place each documented reception separately
Ontological setting →
What the extension adds
The paper develops a method for representing the contextual distinctions in Bascom and Littleton, with particular attention to ambiguous cases and change.
| Reference | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Separate authority from setting | Assess the two dimensions independently. A socially authoritative narrative can be set in an ordinary world, while a fictional telling can preserve a cosmological setting. |
| Represent multiple receptions | Associate a placement with a community and period, allowing different receptions of the same narrative to coexist. Genre is an outcome of those relationships rather than an inherited property of a plot. |
| Make transformation visible | Compare documented placements across time and communities to examine changes such as sacralisation, desacralisation, fictionalisation or euhemerisation. A changed placement makes a comparison visible; the explanation for the change still requires evidence. |
| Retain ambiguity and disagreement | Use labelled alternatives or a range when the evidence is mixed. Explain differing interpretations instead of forcing a single definitive point. |
| Separate historical enquiry from genre | The paper treats academic history as an evidential mode of enquiry rather than another folklore genre. Questions about what occurred can be investigated alongside questions about how a community receives and authorises the story. |
Applying the matrix
The following steps summarise the application principles in the paper. They support later narrative analysis on this website.
| Reference | Explanation |
|---|---|
| 1. Identify the reception community | Specify who receives and authorises the narrative, where and when, and the relevant religious, political, scholarly or other social context. Distinguish subgroups where receptions differ. |
| 2. Document both dimensions | Cite evidence for social authority and perceived setting separately, using relevant texts, performance contexts, ritual practice or institutional statements. |
| 3. Label and justify the placement | Record the narrative version, community, period, interpretation and evidence. Positions are qualitative assessments; this reference does not impose numerical scores or genre thresholds. |
| 4. Compare receptions and changes | Add separately documented placements for other communities or periods. Describe the continuity or change without assuming that every difference proves a historical transformation. |
| 5. Review uncertainty | Compare independent readings where possible. Keep disagreement, alternative placements and gaps in the evidence visible, and revise the interpretation as documentation improves. |
Using this reference
Use the matrix alongside close textual, ethnographic and historical work. A narrative synopsis may offer too little evidence about social reception to justify a placement.
Bascom already recognised that the same tale could function as myth, legend or folktale in different contexts. Fielder-White’s contribution is to make the relevant dimensions explicit and provide a mapping method for comparing ambiguity, plurality and transformation.
The paper presents the matrix as a heuristic methodological extension of Bascom and Littleton. Its usefulness in a particular corpus should be assessed through documented applications and comparison of researchers’ judgements.
Each heading has a stable link for citation and future cross-referencing. Narrative associations will follow later analysis.
Sources and further reading
Fielder-White, Jonathan. “Myth, Legend, and Folktale as Categories of Folklore: A Heuristic Extension of Bascom and Littleton.” February 2026. Available on Academia.edu.
- Jonathan Fielder-White: read the paper on Academia.edu
- Bascom (1965): The Forms of Folklore: Prose Narratives
- Littleton (1965): A Two-Dimensional Scheme for the Classification of Narratives
The explanations are concise editorial summaries. Published identifiers are distinguished from this page’s reference headings and suggested recording practices.
If you wish to get access to data for projects and research, then please contact us, we do our best to help
How to cite: Fielder-White, Jonathan (2026). The Folklore Database. https://folkloredatabase.com
0009-0006-1672-4451
Please cite the relevant sources, catalogues, and classification systems, including the Folklore Database, Berezkin-Duvakin Catalogue, ATU, Thompson, alongside the page accessed and the last time accessed. Please respect copyright and licenses.
Editorial annotations and database enhancements © Jonathan Fielder-White licensed under CC BY 4.0. Berezkin-Duvakin derived narrative and metadata licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Full rights information can be found here.
All rights are reserved in the database structure, selection, arrangement, metadata, classifications, software, interface design, and original editorial content.
Important: The Folklore Database expressly reserves all rights in relation to text and data mining, automated extraction, scraping, machine learning, dataset creation, and the training, development, validation, or improvement of artificial intelligence technologies or systems. No part of this website or database may be scraped, copied, reproduced, harvested, downloaded in bulk, or otherwise used for AI training or commercial data extraction without prior written permission.
Designed and Developed by Jonathan Fielder-White.
© 2024–2026 Crecganford / Jonathan Fielder-White. All rights reserved.