Question regarding proper quoting of dialogue

[driphoney]

What are the rules regarding paragraphing of dialogue? Should dialogue always start the paragraph, as is usually seen in novels, or can dialogue be buried inside the paragraph? If it can't, then why is it acceptable to do it with continued dialogue?

A.
Tina licked her lips, then look up at Larry.

"Sorry. I really didn't mean to chew it off," her eyes fell to the floor again before she continued, "I just got carried away."

or

B.
Tina licked her lips, then looked up at Larry and replied, "Sorry. I really didn't mean to chew it off ..."

I just saw a remark that said "B" is basically wrong. Since I've actually been told to do that when the action led the comment, or was more appropriate, I'm confused.

Thanks.

 

[Tio_Narratore]

What are the rules regarding paragraphing of dialogue? Should dialogue always start the paragraph, as is usually seen in novels, or can dialogue be buried inside the paragraph? If it can't, then why is it acceptable to do it with continued dialogue?

A.
Tina licked her lips, then look up at Larry.

"Sorry. I really didn't mean to chew it off," her eyes fell to the floor again before she continued, "I just got carried away."

or

B.
Tina licked her lips, then looked up at Larry and replied, "Sorry. I really didn't mean to chew it off ..."

I just saw a remark that said "B" is basically wrong. Since I've actually been told to do that when the action led the comment, or was more appropriate, I'm confused.

Thanks.

I've been comfortable with either, depending on what fit the flow of the story. The notion of starting the paragraph with the dialogue is based on the shift from narrator to speaker, but, if the narrator is actually narrating the speech, then it seems to me the paragraph should contain the speech.

 

[sr71plt]

"B" is fine. It's not buried too far in the paragraph.

It's more important that you don't put dialogue by more than one character in the same paragraph.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

Yes, I'm on SR's side here. When editing I break out multiple character's dialogue into separate paragraphs. If nothing else it just flows better for the readers. I'm really good at reading a story and identifying the "stumbling" points, but I can't tell grammatically why. Just instinct for me and I haven't been too far off on account of it.

Shakes, SR. Hope you had a great Thanksgiving.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

DP, just send it my way, haven't had any takers to my post <wink>.

 

[sr71plt]

Shakes, SR. Hope you had a great Thanksgiving.

I did. Feasted on top of a mountain with family and went down in the valley the next day to winery crawl, ending up in front of a fireplace in a colonial country inn for dinner.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

Sounds great, good on you! Enjoy, SR!

Shakes!

 

[driphoney]

"B" is fine. It's not buried too far in the paragraph.

It's more important that you don't put dialogue by more than one character in the same paragraph.

If I could have come up with an example, I would have had one with a longer paragraph lead-in.

Is that okay? To have several sentences in front of a line of dialogue?

Here is a paragraph from a British book I've just started (not riveting out of context):

Burstenshaw came in to George's office twenty minutes late and sat familiarly on the conrner of his desk. George was glad that Fenner, the other company lawyer who shared the room, was out jogging. Glemmie, the secretary, was typing swiftly in the adjacent room. One day, thought George, it would be expected that he should go to Burtenshaw. Burtenshaw was smoking. He knocked the ash into the ashtray on the low middle table and then scattered it with his sleeve as he put the cigarette back to his mouth. He was portly and tanned, fair thinning hair and spiky blue yes. There was a smirk adhering to the corner of his mouth, there usually was. Burtenshaw nodded towards the tapping of the typewriter. 'Glad to hear there's some activity up here. ' he observed. 'Can't imagine how you stand all this silence.' -- The Adventures of Goodnight and Loving by Leslie Thomas, published by Penguin Books

 

[driphoney]

DP, just send it my way, haven't had any takers to my post <wink>.

Well, this tangent is the product of a post I read over in the AH.

Just as soon as I can turn 3 pages into 25 or so, I'll send it on.

I'm stuck. Dead, dead, dead. The characters have stopped speaking to me.

 

[sr71plt]

If I could have come up with an example, I would have had one with a longer paragraph lead-in.

Is that okay? To have several sentences in front of a line of dialogue?

Here is a paragraph from a British book I've just started (not riveting out of context):

Burstenshaw came in to George's office twenty minutes late and sat familiarly on the conrner of his desk. George was glad that Fenner, the other company lawyer who shared the room, was out jogging. Glemmie, the secretary, was typing swiftly in the adjacent room. One day, thought George, it would be expected that he should go to Burtenshaw. Burtenshaw was smoking. He knocked the ash into the ashtray on the low middle table and then scattered it with his sleeve as he put the cigarette back to his mouth. He was portly and tanned, fair thinning hair and spiky blue yes. There was a smirk adhering to the corner of his mouth, there usually was. Burtenshaw nodded towards the tapping of the typewriter. 'Glad to hear there's some activity up here. ' he observed. 'Can't imagine how you stand all this silence.' -- The Adventures of Goodnight and Loving by Leslie Thomas, published by Penguin Books

Yes, that's OK. Less OK if there were several bits of dialogue (even by the same character) salted around in the paragraph.

 

[driphoney]

Yes, that's OK. Less OK if there were several bits of dialogue (even by the same character) salted around in the paragraph.

That's what I thought. It really is about readability. However, I have to admit that if I were writing that paragraph(if only!), I would have separated the sentence out. For some reason, I hate deeply buried dialogue in a paragraph, but I didn't think it was wrong.

Thanks.

 

[_Lynn_]

That's what I thought. It really is about readability. However, I have to admit that if I were writing that paragraph(if only!), I would have separated the sentence out. For some reason, I hate deeply buried dialogue in a paragraph, but I didn't think it was wrong.

Thanks.

I'm with you. In that paragraph, the dialogue feels lost to me.

 

[CopperSkink]

Another vote for B from me. Dialog belongs with the content. It's (generally) not required to have to start a paragraph just for the sake of quotes.

The paragraph made me choke, but only because the subject changed so many times:

"Burstenshaw came. George was glad. Glemmie was typing. George thought. Burtenshaw was smoking. He knocked then scattered as he put. He was. There was a smirk adhering to the corner of his mouth, there usually was. Burtenshaw nodded. He observed."

Sooo many clauses in there. While it's acceptible to have multiple people doing things in one paragraph, you don't have to break it up as long as only one person talks (generally). But with three people doing stuff, then switching to pronouns, you can trip over who's doing what. When I first looked, I thought it was George doing everything until I slimmed everything down and saw "he" was in fact Burt.

But no, no reason to start a new paragraph just for someone to talk.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

Another vote for B from me. ...

I agree.

... Sooo many clauses in there. ...

Er ... they are all sentences actually. Multiple clauses are things like:
Having stopped the car, and having opened the door, and having stepped out, John realised it was cold outside.

... But no, no reason to start a new paragraph just for someone to talk.

Just when someone else talks.

 

[driphoney]

Another vote for B from me. Dialog belongs with the content. It's (generally) not required to have to start a paragraph just for the sake of quotes.

The paragraph made me choke, but only because the subject changed so many times:

"Burstenshaw came. George was glad. Glemmie was typing. George thought. Burtenshaw was smoking. He knocked then scattered as he put. He was. There was a smirk adhering to the corner of his mouth, there usually was. Burtenshaw nodded. He observed."

Sooo many clauses in there. While it's acceptible to have multiple people doing things in one paragraph, you don't have to break it up as long as only one person talks (generally). But with three people doing stuff, then switching to pronouns, you can trip over who's doing what. When I first looked, I thought it was George doing everything until I slimmed everything down and saw "he" was in fact Burt.

But no, no reason to start a new paragraph just for someone to talk.

Some of your issues with readability might have to do with reading it without surrounding context.

Also, I'm no grammarian by a long shot, but I'm with Snoopy. I always thought clauses were a subject and a predicate (verb phrase?) A sentence is a clause. "The house is big." "Is big" is modifying "house". But a complex sentence can hold multiple clauses.

I happen to be the Queen of Clauses, and love to pour out commas with abandon. Ask anyone who's had to fix any of my many loopy sentences.

One thing that struck me in re-reading the Leslie Thomas paragraph was that he has imbedded internal thought which the publisher chose not to italicize. The book is old. I wonder if italicizing 'head-think' is a new publishing phenomena? I didn't mistype, in this case, it was left out.

 

[sr71plt]

One thing that struck me in re-reading the Leslie Thomas paragraph was that he has imbedded internal thought which the publisher chose not to italicize. The book is old. I wonder if italicizing 'head-think' is a new publishing phenomena? I didn't mistype, in this case, it was left out.

It's not new, no. The current Chicago Manual of Style doesn't list italics as an option for internal thoughts. The last CMS did.

 

[CopperSkink]

Maybe the old printing methods didn't have italics? I don't see Head-Thinks as being necessarily italicized because italics can mean a number of things; I use it for whispering and quoting long paragraphs to name a few.

Sentences are not clauses in themselves; rather, they contain clause, sometimes more than one.
"I parked my car, he ran into me, I sued him for murder, and he told me to bill him from Hell." "I parked," "he ran," "I sued," and "he told" are all complete noun-verb clauses, all taking part in a larger sentence.

Is anybody else learning more from editing and the forums than from high school?

 

[sr71plt]

Old printing methods did have italics and italics was once a preferred way to show internal thought. But no one way has ever been uniformly used. Currently, the preferred are roman and putting the thoughts in double quotes just like spoken dialogue. Italics are still popular enough that many publishers still use them,though.

 

[driphoney]

Old printing methods did have italics and italics was once a preferred way to show internal thought. But no one way has ever been uniformly used. Currently, the preferred are roman and putting the thoughts in double quotes just like spoken dialogue. Italics are still popular enough that many publishers still use them,though.

It must be one of those, "This year we lay the baby on it's back. Last year it was the side, and the year before, the belly. Get it straight you stupid parents!"

Italics was used in that very paragraph I quoted, so Penquin was fully capable of doing it. I looked at the publishing date: 1987. Old for a paperback, but not ancient.

Also, it was a British produced book, with single quotes, etc.

I like italics, myself, and I'll be so happy when publishers finally start calling me to ask how I want it done.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[sr71plt]

I like italics, myself, and I'll be so happy when publishers finally start calling me to ask how I want it done.

Thanks for the feedback.

I think most publishers would leave it italics if you preferred it that way. It wasn't one of the CMS's more popular changes in the latest edition.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

Just ordered the CMS for $30, not sure if that's a deal, the hardcopy edition, will arrive in about a year (well, free shipping, you know how that goes)

So is it generally easy to understand or will some prep be helpful?

 

[driphoney]

I think most publishers would leave it italics if you preferred it that way. It wasn't one of the CMS's more popular changes in the latest edition.

Oh, I was being incredibly sarcastic. I meant when I'm Queen of the Earth and everyone gives a damn what I think.

But it's nice to hear that publishers do sometimes listen to writers.

 

[sr71plt]

But it's nice to hear that publishers do sometimes listen to writers.

Oh, publishers give authors a lot of lattitude--especially in fiction.

The issue here is that authors don't often take lattitude in creative ways that would be left; they take lattitude in basic English that would needlessly confuse the reader. And to a publisher, the reader (the buyer) is more important than the author (much to the authors' chagrin).

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

Just ordered the CMS for $30, not sure if that's a deal, the hardcopy edition, will arrive in about a year ...

One problem is that CMS cannot make its mind up. Every new edition it changes some of the advice, so be prepared to be shot down in flames next year when you are using an out of date set of "rules".