Operational comparison against domain vocabulary

Narratology distinguishes story, discourse and presentation; cognitive accounts examine event models, perspective and memory; NLG separates content planning, discourse planning and realization. Use these distinctions to ask different practical questions: what material to select, what order to present, what the reader is likely to infer, and what wording to produce. Their terms retain their disciplinary meanings; FPF supplies additional distinctions only where a claim needs them.

For an incident explanation, selecting only events that support the desired conclusion can produce a fluent but misleading story. Selecting the reader’s question together with the relevant events, including an unresolved alternative, yields a draft that can be compared with its source. This DPF combines the source-selection and communication distinctions above for that use. The extra comparison costs effort, so keep it to relations that could change the account or its use. A free fictional invention has a different source obligation: preserve its chosen premises rather than pretend to report an actual event.

Hoffmann’s “The Tensions of Scientific Storytelling” shows that scientific story construction can organize attempts, mechanisms, and unresolved tensions for readers; Schmid’s Narratology: An Introduction and Chihaia’s Introductions to Narratology: Theory, Practice and the Afterlife of Structuralism show that presentation and audience-facing narrative traditions differ by source tradition; Castricato et al.’s “Towards a Formal Model of Narratives” supports explicit narrator-to-reader information flow, reader story-model evolution, and uncertainty; Dahlstrom and Ho’s “Ethical Considerations of Using Narrative to Communicate Science” warns that communicative purpose can become persuasion risk. The DPF uses audience and purpose to guide source selection, and makes temporal posture, mediation and participant distinctions explicit when they affect the narrative’s use. When a purpose, reader-use, science-storytelling, teaching, future-scenario, or persuasion-risk claim depends on a cited source basis, name that source basis and keep the claim within its boundary.