Following Peirce, an argument is a complex sign formed by the structure of other signs. The complex sign has as its interpretant a meaning larger than the sum of the signs. It is the structure of the argument that adds meaning.
For Peirce, description is a Secondness, a rhematic sign. A possible quality is coupled to a sign. Argument is a Thirdness, as the structure adds meaning to the signs.
Following Branigan (and others), a narrative is more than plain description. It is a selection of events that are linked by a strong causal logic.
It is true for both narrative and argument that the sequence of the discourse is irrelevant for the story of argument to come true. We know this from rhetoric, from modern literature, and from hypertext.
Maybe narrative is just a form of argument, in Peirce's terms? A signifying structure where the structure adds meaning to the complex of signs?
<< Previously in Surftrail:
pizza and interactive
Next: >>
narrative abstraction