in personalization of the character (reader). Personalized characters can also be members of a category, but this is not the focus of their description. Reading a text involves building up either categorized or personalized characters, but information subsequently encountered in the text may change their status and possibly decategorize or depersonalize those charactersaracters are to a certain extent predictable. On the basis of some data, we can usually expect certain actions or behaviour from a character. In a sense, every character is more or less predictable, as we can predict how a character will act or behave on the basis of his or her profession, sex, external factors, the genre of the work, etc .; however, so-called round characters are less predictable than flat onesand Meaningcan be seen as entities in a storyworld. However, this should not be understood to mean that characters are self-contained. On the contrary: they are at the same time devices in the communication of meaning and serve purposes other than the communication of the facts of the storyworld as well. This matter was discussed above in the relation between character and action. In many forms of narrative, however, action is not the organizing principle, but a theme or an idea, and the characters in these texts are determined by that theme or idea. An extreme example is personification, i.e. the representation of an abstract principle such as freedom or justice as a character, as found in allegorical literature. Another example is certain dialogue novels, where the characters role is to propound philosophical ideas. On the other hand, even the most life-like characters in a realistic novel can often also be described in light of their place in a thematic progression. Thus, Phelan (1987) has proposed to describe character as participation in a mimetic sphere (due to the characters traits), a thematic sphere (as a representative of an idea or of a class of people), and a synthetic sphere (the material out of which the character is made). In his heuristic of film characters, Eder (2007, 2008) adopts a similar breakdown, but adds a fourth dimension relating to communication between the film and the audience: (a) the character as an artifact (how is it made?); (b) the character as a fictional being (what features describe the character?); (c) the character as a symbol (what meaning is communicated through the character?); and (d) the character as a symptom (why is the character as it is and what is the effect?). The difference between characters as part of storyworlds and the meaning of character can not be aligned with the difference between (narratological) description and interpretation because elements of a character or the description of a character are often motivated by their role in thematic, symbolic, aesthetic and other networks.Traitsprominent attempt to analyse character views them as a sum of traits. Chatman, for example, views a character in terms of a paradigm of traits (1978: 126): a character exists in a paradigmatic relationship with the plot, which is syntagmatic. Another scholar who holds this view is Rimmon-Kenan (1983), to whom a character is a construct of traits. These traits, according to her, are hierarchically arranged; she also views characterization in terms of how the network of character traits, in reference to a particular character, is created.Chatman (1978) and Leitch (1986), characterization can be analysed through an analysis of routine behaviour, which can be defined, in my view, in terms of the repeated appearance of certain dynamic traits associated with a character. In this light, Chatman (1978), has noted that tiredness is not a trait unless persistent. A persistent trait may become a habit: we can further note that only habitual traits are significant in the analysis of characterisation, and not those which are temporary., It has been noted that character traits are not, after all, physical objects to be drawn like trees (1978), and Leitch, while agreeing with Chatman, believes that some characters become memorable through the subtraction, and not the addition of traits: some minor characters, for example, are memorable because they lack certain common human traits.omission of traits is also noticeable in film characters; we do not know, for example, about the film characters introspective traits, unless the character tells us about them through voice-over narration.and real-life people have unique attributes called traits. This table is devoted to the most popular traits of the fiction characters which can be noted in narratives.
HonestExcited Bright Unselfish Humble Ambitious Light-heartedInventiveConsiderate Patriotic Bossy Adventurous LeaderThrillingClever Reserved Curious Daring DemandingSadUgly Quiet Tireless Friendly BravePoorHandsome Cheerful Able Witty KeenRichFunny Timid Reserved Pleasing HappyTallSuccessful Shy Busy Dark...
