ABSTRACT:In this essay we respond to Mari Hatavara’s and Jarmila Mildorf ’s critical engagement with our “Ten Theses about Fictionality.” We explain why we find our rhetorical approach to fictionality more persuasive than their approach; more specifically, we explain why we disagree with their claims that fictionality entails narrative and that the presence in a text of techniques conventionally associated with fiction gives that text a hybrid or fictional status. We also explain why we find the large discursive territory covered by our notion of fictionality to be a theoretical advantage rather than disadvantage.

中文翻译：

---

为什么虚构、叙事和技巧之间没有一对一的对应关系：对玛丽·哈塔瓦拉和贾米拉·米尔多夫的回应

摘要：在这篇文章中，我们回应了 Mari Hatavara 和 Jarmila Mildorf 对我们的“关于虚构性的十条论点”的批判性参与。我们解释了为什么我们发现我们对虚构的修辞方法比他们的方法更有说服力；更具体地说，我们解释了为什么我们不同意他们的说法，即虚构性需要叙事，并且文本中通常与小说相关的技术的存在使该文本具有混合或虚构状态。我们还解释了为什么我们发现我们的虚构性概念所涵盖的大型话语领域是理论上的优势而不是劣势。