I said.... (Dialogue Tags)


“The school,” he mumbled.
Her eyes widened at his words. It was hard for him to think because she kept tugging the sides of her pleated skirt with her fingertips, causing the hemline to slowly rock across the front of her thighs. Not only that, but her arms kept nudging up against the outside perimeters of her round apples.
Pausing to moisten up his drying mouth, he swallowed before continuing.
“Shouldn't you be wearing gym shorts under your skirt? The school has to have some kind of regulations,” he solidly asked her.
Her eyes reflected the received question. She quit rocking her fingers about the skirt's hemline, which was good, because the continuing visual effect was beginning to make his stressed muscles feel bothersome.
“Oh. Yes, Mr B,” came her nodded response, a bit of guilt reflecting off her eyes,” We do have to wear those awful shorts.”
She paused, letting her words sink into his brain. She brought her arms up to her torso crossing her wrists just under her breasts to gently nudge at their undersides, bending her waist slightly a little towards him.
“Truthfully though,” her feathery tone grew a bit quieter.
He didn't realize it himself but her lowered tone had caused him to take a step closer, also slightly leaning his chest forward into the conversation.
“Those shorts are little too restricting. I prefer the feel of my cotton panties when practicing my cheers,” she explained.
Frank's blood pressure elevated to nigh near heart failure. Suggestive movies of panties clinging about her rear as her thighs worked under her skirt flitted on his brain.
“Sometimes Mr. B,” the feathers in her voice grew even fainter as she leaned in more.
Sometimes?
She clenched her tongue between her front teeth, her intense gaze locked straight onto his.
“I don't like to wear anything.”

Some problems, though. The "solidly asked" is both jarring and unclear, and the other two marked aren't dialogue slugs and produce run-on sentences.
 
Hm. Gotcha. Well I'll work on it. I think maybe after writing everything I'll look around for some proofreaders. Admittingly it's hard to catch every detail.
 
I like to use the "action" method myself. It not only avoids the dreaded "he said/she said" effect, but it also gives the reader something to visualize:
I like that.

To enrich my writing, I like to use a combination of all of the comments mentioned in the thread above:

1). You definitely need to simple tags from time to time, which (as Ogg said) is almost unnoticed by the reader.

2). I always add a few more colorful tags: interrupted Fred, yelled Harry, whispered Mary, etc.

3). My favorite - action based.
"Oh no!" The shock was in her eyes. "That's too big for me..."
"Is this what you wanted to see?" She unclipped her bra...
Etc.
 
My favorite is "said," for reasons I spelled out here: https://www.literotica.com/s/9-steps-to-sexier-stories

Dialogue tags are distractions. Don't use them at all, when possible. When needed to identify who is speaking, the word that should get the reader's attention is the identity of the speaker. Don't upstage that word with some fancy synonym for "said."

Occasionally it's useful to reveal how something was said, so go ahead and use "laughed," "growled," or "giggled" when needed. But please don't use words like "proferred" or "enunciated." Trying to impress readers with your vocabulary simply disrupts the flow of a story.
 
Occasionally it's useful to reveal how something was said, so go ahead and use "laughed," "growled," or "giggled" when needed. But please don't use words like "proferred" or "enunciated." Trying to impress readers with your vocabulary simply disrupts the flow of a story.

"laughed" and "giggled" aren't good dialogue tags. Words can't really be voiced when you're laughing or giggling, and dialogue tags are for voiced lines. "Proferred" is a legitimate dialogue tag, and I could see where it would be used to illuminate character. "Enunciated" wouldn't be very good for a tag; it could be used in a further descriptor sentence, though.

Whether to use a tag and what tags to use are two different issues, and what tags are legitimate for dialogue are more restricted than some seem to think. Your character would have to be able to verbalize a line that was illuminated by the tag--or the image you are going for should be put in a separate sentence.
 
Last edited:
Eh, not all laughter is helpless belly-laughter. It's perfectly possible to say a thing laughingly (for which I'd generally take "he/she laughed" to be shorthand) and still voice the words; Jimmy Fallon runs a clinic on this in almost every taping of his show.
 
Eh, not all laughter is helpless belly-laughter. It's perfectly possible to say a thing laughingly (for which I'd generally take "he/she laughed" to be shorthand) and still voice the words; Jimmy Fallon runs a clinic on this in almost every taping of his show.

That's sort of true in a simplistic look at it. But a trained editor wouldn't let you laugh a line of dialogue, using "laughed" as a dialogue tag. They'd force the "laughed" in a separate sentence or clause, e.g., "You went where, wearing what?" Felicia said, sputtering the words through tinkling laughter.

There just are levels of what words you can use in the context of characterizing a spoken line, and the uses can get subtle. Try it with an editor who has actually been trained to the job and watch what happens.
 
Can't you substitute "laugh" with synonyms like "chuckle" or "giggle"? For example:

"That tickles", she said, attempting not to giggle.
 
Can't you substitute "laugh" with synonyms like "chuckle" or "giggle"? For example:

"That tickles", she said, attempting not to giggle.

Yes, that would be a way of getting the laugh in, but that's not using any of the problematic words as dialogue slugs. The dialogue slug here is "said."

Really, you can use any word you like here for a dialogue slug. This is just Literotica. I'm pointing to it not being so simplistic in the real world of publishing.
 
Can't you substitute "laugh" with synonyms like "chuckle" or "giggle"? For example:

"That tickles", she said, attempting not to giggle.


"Stop! That tickles." She giggled, attempting to suppress her laughter; wiggling and squirming to get away from his playful fingers.👠👠👠Kant
 
I like that better. ;)

You are the author of your story. Sure there are grammatical guidelines, but there is no set standard and only one single way to tell a story. Otherwise the authors today wouldn't be looking to find their own style that appeals to a wide range of readers. If you like what I wrote above, by all means use it:)
 
"Stop! That tickles." She giggled, attempting to suppress her laughter; wiggling and squirming to get away from his playful fingers.👠👠👠Kant

Each time I'm tempted to use verbs like laughed/shrugged/giggled/etc (incorrectly), yours is an example of how I change it. Using the period then showing the action.

If someone used it as the actual tag, such as...

"Don't do that," he laughed.

...I do understand what's happening there. No one can laugh words, or shrug words, but it conveys the message. But it IS wrong. This has been something I've watched myself on, because as you say there is a difference between style and being grammatically wrong.
 
Honestly, the writing style I use is pretty rough originally. Simple sentence structures, that sorta thing. It's only when I go over and over it repeatedly, exchanging words for better descriptions that the story sounds better. Guess that's my writing style and I;m fine with it.
 
I wasn't able to find the article again last time I looked, but I read something about this once.

It's known in some circles as "saidbooking" after an old book full of words to use as alternatives to "said". The article went on to call it a discredited fad, as using all those alternative words constantly is more distracting than just using "said", which the brain tends to gloss over anyway.

I think the lesson is that some variety is good, but don't go overboard with it. As some have pointed out already, in a decent back-and-forth between two people you can often reduce the "said" or similar references, or drop them altogether, as the paragraph breaks and context will tell the reader who is talking.
 
Honestly, the writing style I use is pretty rough originally. Simple sentence structures, that sorta thing. It's only when I go over and over it repeatedly, exchanging words for better descriptions that the story sounds better. Guess that's my writing style and I;m fine with it.

I tend to do the same thing once I have finished the initial draft of my stories/chapters - going back to substitute better words and add more description where it is needed. Sometimes I find myself embellishing the "I said" dialogue tags, occasionally it gets reduced to the basics.👠👠👠Kant
 
I am of the less is more thought process. repetition of any word, including said, drives me up a wall. I do agree with the folks saying that fancy tags have a tendency to distract from the story, so I drop them and go with the action no-tag theory whenever possible. I use said, often, but if a word pops up on the same paperback page more than 2-3 times (yes depending on the word) its there too often.
 
"Stop! That tickles." She giggled, attempting to suppress her laughter; wiggling and squirming to get away from his playful fingers.👠👠👠Kant

That works fine, and is an example of how you can attribute speech without actually using a speech tag.

Although, that semicolon should be a comma.
 
I wasn't able to find the article again last time I looked, but I read something about this once.

It's known in some circles as "saidbooking" after an old book full of words to use as alternatives to "said". The article went on to call it a discredited fad, as using all those alternative words constantly is more distracting than just using "said", which the brain tends to gloss over anyway.

A more general term is "thesaurus humping". There's a fine line between having a rich vocabulary, and overdoing it!
 
I am of the less is more thought process. repetition of any word, including said, drives me up a wall. I do agree with the folks saying that fancy tags have a tendency to distract from the story, so I drop them and go with the action no-tag theory whenever possible. I use said, often, but if a word pops up on the same paperback page more than 2-3 times (yes depending on the word) its there too often.

I agree with the repitition of words thing. It gets on my nerves when I’m editing my stories and discover I’ve used a certain word too many times in a short period of time. Here lately, I’ve tried to restrain myself from using words such as : like, that, very, and really unless they’re absolutely necessary. It doesn’t always work out as planned, though. 🌹Kant👠👠👠
 
I've probably said this before, but .... Someone (Elmore Leonard, perhaps?) used to say that the only tags the author, the storyteller, can honestly use are 'he said/she said'. How he or she said it is up to the character. The dialogue should tell the reader how the character spoke; not the author. And 90 percent of the time that works for me.

This is my general rule, but I don't follow it all the time. A plain tag like "said" puts the emphasis on the dialog itself, which I view as a good thing. I see the overuse of descriptive tags as akin to the overuse of adverbs; it draws attention to the wrong part of the sentence.

I tend to overuse "said," though, and I've been trying to be more diligent about taking tags out altogether where they're not needed to make it clear who's speaking.

SamScribble's right that Elmore Leonard is the author of that bit of advice, or advice similar to it. It's in this article, which has a lot of good advice: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2010/feb/24/elmore-leonard-rules-for-writers. I can't say I scrupulously follow of his advice, but I'm sure my writing would be better if I followed it more closely. Leonard is a good writer and a good guide.
 
I don't hunt to have dialogue. I don't like it much. Too much of it is used and it's awkward. The idea is to tell a story, not to be fancy with dialogue. When dialogue is used it should be special. I think excessive dialogue wrenches my head around and I lose interest in the story because I'm caught up with interpreting the dialogue. Most good writing has a rhythm and dialogue often destroys that. I like to think the dialogue I use has meaning e.g. it conveys something like the mood. I wonder how much dialogue people like Dickens, Fitzgerald, Steinbeck, Hemmingway and White etc used. As I remember it isn't a lot. I also think a lot of people use dialogue to give the impression that "It's real", but in fiction that is a little contradictory. Sometimes I have thought the best writing is used in comedy. Good comedy depends on good language use and timing. I think all good writing is similar. One of the best pieces of comedy was in the form of a letter asking the boss for his job back after he'd had a bugger of a time moving bricks up to where they were needed using something like a winch. I can't remember the title but I don't remember it had any dialogue. Too much dialogue is, in my humble opinion, direlogue.
 
I'm not a fan of dialogue, and I feel I'm not much good at it (writing or speaking) -- so I'm trying to improve.
In a story I'm trying to finish up today (or soon) I have a girl who often whispers and isn't above muttering in public.

Once she broke the kiss, she looked into my eyes and whispered, "yes, I'm ready", so I took her backpack and led her out to the car.

"Take me to bed, lover", she whispered breathlessly, "fuck me and make me come. It feels so good when you make me come."

"You're a naughty boy", she whispered.

I heard her mutter, "naughty boy", as she entered the store.
 
Back
Top