What @Shadowfax said, but really it doesn't change between "grammatical person vs narrative mode". My use of the shortcut, "who's telling the story" caused confusion. My apologies. In the two OP sentences, it was implied someone was telling us the story: "The thunder is crashing with such force the house is shaking." "The thunder crashes with such for that the house shakes."While first or third person is built into the sentence structure, both of those can be either first or third without changing the sentences depending on who the narrator is. "The thunder is crashing with such force the house is shaking. John goes to the window." "The thunder crashes with such for[ce] that the house shakes. John goes to the window." "The thunder is crashing with such force the house is shaking. I go to the window." "The thunder crashes with such for[ce] that the house shakes. I go to the window."
I suspect it's all academic to everyone by now (speak up if not), although I'm still a little confused by: What doesn't change exactly? I think we both have different ways of understanding the same thing, but I'd view them as distinct entities, in that a narrative mode can use a combination of grammatical persons: "You make your own choice. I won't risk it. She might though..." (first person narrative) Ruminating on that, I suppose there is a hierarchical relationship in that: - if only third grammatical person is used, it could be any narrative mode (as was the case with the original examples in this thread) - if second and third grammatical are used, it could be first or second narrative - if all three are used, it can only be first person narrative mode That's just an empiric thought that someone may be able to refute. Anyway, in line with @cutecat22 's comment, I understand it unconsciously and never actually think like this when I read/write. It just piqued my interest when my reductionist response to a specific query came a bit unstuck, and now I can't stop shaking it until all the nitpicketty details fall out. "You don't truly understand something until you can teach it," or whatever the adage is. Thanks for the discussion @GingerCoffee .
Nothing prevents a first person narrator from stating a third person sentence. It doesn't change either. I suppose it gets a bit semantic here. If I, as a first person narrator, use a third person sentence in my narration, neither the sentence I used nor my narration change from first person to third or vice versa. Just as the writer doesn't make everything first person because one wrote the sentence. Take your example: "You make your own choice. I won't risk it. She might though..." (first person narrative) The fact that is first person narrative doesn't make, "She might though" first person. The sentence, "She might though", doesn't change the narrative to third person. By itself, "She might though", is third person. Thus the same rules apply for grammatical person and narrative mode.
I'm a little confused. If the above is dialogue, the narrative could be first, second, or third person. The actual quote is Second person ("You make your own choice.") AND First person ("I won't risk it.") AND Third person ("She might though...") Maybe that was your point. But I can't tell.
@GingerCoffee : Hmm, I agree with your examples here, although not necessarily with the conclusion in your last sentence. I know I've read pieces that have seemed like third person narratives, but as a sting-in-the-tail they've included some first person sentences near the end of the story, to reveal that the narrator was actually part of the scenario the whole time, rather than some disembodied voice. I'd say that this is an instance where use of grammatical person does indeed change the narrative mode. But it doesn't work the other way (first person narrative mode turning into third person, as per your most recent examples), which is the basis of the hierarchy I mentioned in my last post. After you'd read the whole piece, you'd conclude that it was a first person narrative, but prior to reading the few sentences of first grammatical person, you'd have thought it was third person narrative. Footnote: I'm not claiming this type of 'surprise narrative mode shift' is a good technique. I've groaned when I've seen it, and can't actually remember the names of any examples. Perhaps it just hasn't been done well though... @ChickenFreak : That wasn't intended as dialogue - just as part of a narrative. The quotation marks were just highlighting it as an example, but they confused the issue. Sorry about that. I suppose what I'm contending is that narrative mode is the 'person' of a piece, while grammatical person is the 'person' of an individual sentence. Macroscopic vs microscopic. They operate very similarly, but I consider them distinct entities. Anyway, I'm happy that I've reached my own resolution here, but I'll certainly continue discussion if others wish
@ChickenFreak, narrative or dialogue, it's not written as three separate dialogues. If I say, "She is an odd one," it's first person speaking a third person sentence. If a third person narrator says, "She is an odd one," it's a third person narration. In neither case does "She is an odd one" become first person. In both cases one knows if the narrator is first or third person by the rest of the piece. If an author is going for a special effect, I'd have to see an example to be able to comment on what you are referring to.
@GingerCoffee : I think your first sentence is the crux of what I'm getting at. A piece has an overall person (narrative mode), which is determined by consideration of the person (grammatical person) of its constituent sentences. As in, there are two different types of 'person', and they don't always correlate. I'll try to write out an example of the narrative mode shift I was trying to describe (I might cringe while doing it): --- The woman staggered from the noisy bar and set off down the footpath. After a drunken left onto Renshaw Street, narrowly avoiding the dog muck soiling the pavement, she made it halfway to Bluestone Terrace before deciding the going would be easier without stiletto heels, freezing ground be damned. At a faster pace, it was only another three minutes before she ducked under the willow branches overhanging the ill-kept driveway leading up to number 55. She fumbled with her key for a moment, creaked the old door open and entered the bedroom to the right of the front hall. --- Third person narrative mode, right? Now read the next paragraph: --- It was only when she dropped her wig that I realised there was more to her than I'd initially suspected, and not to my taste. Fortunately, the night was still young and full of other windows for me to look through. I decided to try a different bar. --- The overall piece is revealed to have a first person narrative, and the narrative mode shift from the first paragraph forms the reveal that the story is about a transvestite being stalked.
That's not different from what I was talking about, a first person related a narration about a third person. I think I figured out what the problem is here where the communication is getting muddled. People are trying to apply first, second and third person to sentences that have no person and call it grammatical person. All verbs have a tense, they don't all have 1st, 2nd, or 3rd person. Going back to the OP sentences: "The thunder is crashing with such force the house is shaking." "The thunder crashes with such for that the house shakes." If you don't add any elements to those sentences, they can be either first or third person. We don't know from the sentences as they are written. First, Second, and Third Person To illustrate the problem, take a look at this, I think it will help clarify the problem: Unconvention First Person Perspective Inanimate Object Poem
Are you saying that grammatical person doesn't exist, or that it's something other than my interpretation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_person By my understanding, the OP sentences could be part of a first, second or third person narrative, but with the sentences considered in isolation they are in third person, as you could replace both "The thunder" and "the house" with "it" (a third person pronoun). It's nothing to do with the verbs: we're agreed. My example isn't different from what you were talking about, but only when you consider it as a whole piece. Had I posted only the first paragraph, I expect you'd have called it a third person narrative. So the surprise in the second paragraph is that it's actually a first person narrative. The point was to demonstrate that narrative mode can be fluid as one reads a piece: in my example, it's only in hindsight that you can say, "That was a first person narrative," because until the second paragraph it wasn't. You never know whether there may be a larger Russian doll you're yet to observe (unless you've already identified a first person narrative, as there's no bigger doll/zero person). Narrative mode is the size of the largest doll in a set, while grammatical person is the size of whichever doll you care to examine. Grammatical person refers to a specific subject or object without regard to the overall piece. I don't understand the relevance of Unconvention First Person Perspective Inanimate Object Poem. It seems to be a standard first person narrative that uses both first and third grammatical persons. Have I missed your point?
Grammatical person absolutely does exist. The sentences are in the third person singular. Without grammatical person, we wouldn't know how to conjugate our verbs. You'll notice grammar girl says first person POV. That's the difference. Grammatical person and narrative POV are two separate things.
