Formatting sign language in dialogue

[PeytonMirabelle]

Something that came up in a discussion between myself and two other writers today and I didn't have a good answer.

If a character is using sign language to communicate, what's the best way to format that? One person in the discussion thought placing the sign-speech in italics was best, though I wonder if that will get confused with internal thoughts. Would you simply establish the person is signing, and format speech as normal, with quotation marks?

* * * * *
Example 1:

Bob shook his head. "What do you think?"
Jill's hands flew. I don't like it.
"Me either."
So what do we do?

* * * * *
Example 2:

Bob shook his head. "What do you think?"
"I don't like it," Jill signed.
"Me either."
"So what do we do?"

* * * * *

Neither of those really look right to me. Is there a better way? Curious what y'all think.

 

[joy_of_cooking]

I would format it like any other dialogue. That's how I handle text messages and statements spoken in other languages.

 

[AlexBailey]

Something that came up in a discussion between myself and two other writers today and I didn't have a good answer.

If a character is using sign language to communicate, what's the best way to format that? One person in the discussion thought placing the sign-speech in italics was best, though I wonder if that will get confused with internal thoughts. Would you simply establish the person is signing, and format speech as normal, with quotation marks?

* * * * *
Example 1:

Bob shook his head. "What do you think?"
Jill's hands flew. I don't like it.
"Me either."
So what do we do?

* * * * *
Example 2:

Bob shook his head. "What do you think?"
"I don't like it," Jill signed.
"Me either."
"So what do we do?"

* * * * *

Neither of those really look right to me. Is there a better way? Curious what y'all think.

My thought is that if you're referring to a signed conversation between characters you should only make a point of them signing enough to establish that it is how they are communicating, then use regular speech tags within the conversation.

Treat it like any other accent or dialect - don't labor on it, suggest it to the readers then focus on the content of the conversation.

If there is a third party who doesn't know sign you can treat it like someone who is hearing any language they don't understand. Unfamiliar language often seems or sounds fast, more punctuated by the emotion than the actual meaning, so if a signer seems agitated their signing is large and animated, if they're relaxed it's more mellow, etc....

I had a partner who was an ASL interpreter and I slowly learned to understand it through context and patience, just as learning to communicate with someone who uses any other language.

 

[ronde]

Since sign language is much the same to most people as any "foreign" language, I'd treat it the same way I treat dialogue spoken in languages other than English. If one character speaks English as well as signs, have that character repeat what the "signer" has said. If neither character does anything except sign, that's probably a story that should be written in 3rd person so the narrator can do the interpretation.

 

[TheRedChamber]

Personally I like example 1 if it's the case that one person is signing and one is speaking.

This is probably the sort of thing you want to check with what the signing community actually thinks is best practice, although I had a quick look and the best I could find was this. Which pretty much suggests either of your examples is okay and there's no agreed standard. There see to be whole other issues with the fact that sign language isn't just 'English with your arms' so you have also to make decisions about how you are representing the grammar of what people say. (e.g. "I go store" is a literal translation of sign words and is perfectly grammatical intelligent in sign language, but not so much in English. If you end up just writing beautiful English sentences they may sound wrong to someone who actually knows sign-language - although that's an issue that can hit with any translated language)

 

[ElectricBlue]

This is probably the sort of thing you want to check with what the signing community actually thinks is best practice, although I had a quick look and the best I could find was this.

Agree, that's the respectful thing to do. From that article, there appears to be no "standard", but the deaf community's desire that it be handled the same way as spoken words is the thing to follow - the observation about a thought versus a signed exchange was a good point to make. On that basis, Example 2 would appear to be best - given that many authors use italics to designate thoughts, not speech.

 

[AchtungNight]

I have a character named Asher in my stories who speaks in sign language and I use option 2 from the opening post for him. No one has ever raised issue about it. In practice, though, I don’t feature the character that much. If I need to make him appear more often, an interpreter will probably be necessary. I will probably make that character his lover if the issue ever comes up. Kind of a nice romantic dynamic, I think.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

As TRC's (very useful) article says, every author has to decide for themself.

I personally like your use of italics. It makes it clear how the words are being communicated.

Moreover, ASL is indeed another language, not just a translation of English into visual symbols. Grammar and wordings do change. My point with this is that if one was writing a tale with somebody speaking French, one would not do the literal translation (eg the classic La plume de ma tante) but would use the more-easily-understood My aunt's pen.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

I'd go mostly for option 2, but describe some of the signs rather than just "she signed".

So:
"I don't like it," Jill shook her head, emphasising the sign.
"No?"
"I don't want it." Her flat palm pushed it out of her sign space, decisively.

If you're trying to explain exactly what a sign means, then glosses are usually done in capitals, with hyphens joining English words that are all part of that sign, commas for ones that are sequential.

His sign wasn't great, but he had no problem parsing her response: DON'T-LIKE, MAKE-GO DON'T-WANT. She really didn't like it!

 

[AlexBailey]

Personally I like example 1 if it's the case that one person is signing and one is speaking.

This is probably the sort of thing you want to check with what the signing community actually thinks is best practice, although I had a quick look and the best I could find was this. Which pretty much suggests either of your examples is okay and there's no agreed standard. There see to be whole other issues with the fact that sign language isn't just 'English with your arms' so you have also to make decisions about how you are representing the grammar of what people say. (e.g. "I go store" is a literal translation of sign words and is perfectly grammatical intelligent in sign language, but not so much in English. If you end up just writing beautiful English sentences they may sound wrong to someone who actually knows sign-language - although that's an issue that can hit with any translated language)

That is a great article in the link! Thanks for posting it.

Having been on the periphery of the deaf community I have seen how personally many of them are affected by the insensitivity of outsiders.

After reading that article I think I would use regular quotes and italics for the signed words. In most cases I would use English grammar with occasional direct translations of ASL when appropriate for short quotes.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

I If I need to make him appear more often, an interpreter will probably be necessary. I will probably make that character his lover if the issue ever comes up. Kind of a nice romantic dynamic, I think.

Sure can be. Though I recall a nightmare conference I worked at where there was one terp, two Deaf guys, and the terp got together with guy1 (it was a voluntary thing so not against an ethical code, they may have already been together). And they were so busy checking out the bedroom accommodation to ensure it was satisfactory, that they kept missing seminars.

Guy2 was lovely about it (hadn't expected any interpretation), so a friend of mine offered to give it a go, being fluent in BSL but never interpreted. I recall a couple moments where the whole seminar had to stop and the terping guy just went "look, I don't know what it bloody means either, I'm just telling you what they said, OK? Understanding it is your problem!" Hilarious for those of us who understood (which I think everyone did, as mime got more vigorous).

Of course you can also get controlling relationships (even by accident) where one partner does all the communication with the outside world...

 

[PeytonMirabelle]

Thanks everyone for the feedback, and @TheRedChamber for sharing that article.

Sounds like there is no universal answer here, so I'll go back to my friends and discuss some more. I guess the best idea is to pick a style and remain consistent.

 

[AchtungNight]

Thanks everyone for the feedback, and @TheRedChamber for sharing that article.

Sounds like there is no universal answer here, so I'll go back to my friends and discuss some more. I guess the best idea is to pick a style and remain consistent.

Consistency is important, on ethical alignment if nothing else.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

Having read the linked article, I agree with her - the options 1,2,3 where sign is treated as a language work; the bold or capitals are distinctly othering. Unless you're Terry Pratchett writing Death (or a new character, Deaf, who takes over when Death is on holiday? Confusion ensues. @Duleigh ?) I really wouldn't go there - it might be OK in a book that was actually teaching sign, but not an ordinary story.

And the deaf-as-gimmick, oh ye gods yes! As cringey as the guy who used to tell me regularly, "I find hearing aids reeeeally sexy..."

 

[HectorBidon]

You might be interested in reading Isla's Summer by Nellymcboatface. It's a lovely story in which the first-person FMC is deaf. This excerpt gives an example of how signing is dealt with in this story:

The stranger lifted his hands off his hips and slowly signed, "Hello, me G. A. R. Y."
. . .
I sign in response, "Hi G. A. R. Y... Me I. S. L. A."

After spelling my name in full, I repeat it showing him my sign name. I use the third finger of my right hand across my heart on my chest for the `I', followed by the sign for an island.

Gary nodded. Although he already knew my name, he copied my signing. Although deep in thought with his eyes furrowed, he signed, "Island... Why?"

"I. S. L. A... Island in Spanish. My sign name. I, Island."

 

[AchtungNight]

You might be interested in reading Isla's Summer by Nellymcboatface. It's a lovely story in which the first-person FMC is deaf.

I approve of this. It's very important to remember why a character uses sign language.

My character Asher is mute but not deaf. Due to being a trained Special Forces Officer, gypsy acrobat, and spy, he knows how to read lips and sign in multiple languages. He once could speak a wide variety of languages before a terrorist torturer severed his tongue and still has the ability to hear and understand many languages. A person who can't hear will be signing for very different reasons and thus be a very different character. It's an important distinction.

For prominent appearances of Asher in my ficverse, check out Debrief, Running Down a Dream, and Counseling Chapters 3 and 4. I have to confess I haven't given him any detailed sex scenes yet. He's more of a gimmick character and I'm unsure how to portray him in lovemaking for multiple reasons. I have only imagined him, never known anyone like him. I hope I have not offended anyone with portraying him. Of course, any writer practicing character diversity has to deal with such things.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Example 2 looks fine to me. It's translated dialogue, punctuate it the same way as other translated dialogue.

Recently I read a book where most of the characters speak both English and Cantonese (always presented in English translation). Most of the time, it's not indicated which language they happen to be speaking to one another, because it's not important to the story. Only on the rare occasions where language is relevant (e.g. speaking in Cantonese to exclude somebody who doesn't understand it) and not obvious from context is it specified, and then it uses the same style as Example 2.

If there are a lot of places in the story where it's important to know whether dialogue is signed or vocalised, and where it's not immediately obvious from context, then there might be reason to consider a separate convention. But otherwise, making a point of signalling that difference when it's not necessary can get readers wondering about why it's so important to you that sign be marked out from other languages. It can be interpreted as implying that it's somehow not a proper language in the way that those other languages are, which unfortunately is an attitude that signers have experienced a lot.