International spellings and reported speech

[Bramblethorn]

My rule of thumb is to write in a variety of English that's appropriate to the narrator (or for third-person stuff, the primary setting/protagonist/etc). So with an Australian narrator I'll use Australian expressions and write "colour"; for a story set in New England I'll spell it "color". For me, details like that help with immersion - it's easier for me to feel the location and the culture if those little details match.

But my current story has an Australian narrator talking to an American woman. The main body of the story is in Australian English (aside from US place names e.g. Santa Carla Conference Center) but I'm not sure how best to handle reported speech from the American.

My instinct is to use US spelling for quoted speech from an American speaker. I'm trying to write her dialogue with a US voice and I think it'd be jarring to have the spelling conflict with that. So, Australian protag says "colour" and her US ladyfriend says "color".

But I wonder if readers will also find it jarring to have me switch between the two. Thoughts, suggestions?

 

[sr71plt]

Using different spellings in the same story would be jarring, I think. For starters on your stated practice, the spellings should, I think, be geared to our audience, not the origin of your narrator/character (which gets you into the bind you are in). If you really want to have the flavor of a UK or Australian setting and want the target audience to feel they are there, I guess it's fine to use those spellings. But it's just going to stop the flow for the reader when you mix spelling when you don't need to.

Whether you character's word is spelled color or flavor or colour or flavour, it's pronounced the the same whether your character is American or British. If there's a distinct difference in how an American and Brit would pronounce a particular word, I guess that's when you might consider variant spellings.

What really should be considered with different nationality characters is the national differences in actually different words used to mean the same thing. A Brit might speak of sending a jumper to the cleaners where an American would speak of sending a sweater.

 

[lovecraft68]

My opinion is blah blah blah because I know what all readers think when they read blah blah blah.

Fixed your post

 

[lovecraft68]

My rule of thumb is to write in a variety of English that's appropriate to the narrator (or for third-person stuff, the primary setting/protagonist/etc). So with an Australian narrator I'll use Australian expressions and write "colour"; for a story set in New England I'll spell it "color". For me, details like that help with immersion - it's easier for me to feel the location and the culture if those little details match.

But my current story has an Australian narrator talking to an American woman. The main body of the story is in Australian English (aside from US place names e.g. Santa Carla Conference Center) but I'm not sure how best to handle reported speech from the American.

My instinct is to use US spelling for quoted speech from an American speaker. I'm trying to write her dialogue with a US voice and I think it'd be jarring to have the spelling conflict with that. So, Australian protag says "colour" and her US ladyfriend says "color".

But I wonder if readers will also find it jarring to have me switch between the two. Thoughts, suggestions?

You mentioned New England and the first thing I thought of was Lovecraft's the "colour" out of space.

 

[sr71plt]

Fixed your post

Yeah, I knew you were too dumb to understand writing issues that go beyond titillating incest pedophiles.

 

[sr71plt]

You mentioned New England and the first thing I thought of was Lovecraft's the "colour" out of space.

I'm not surprised that you don't realize there's a world beyond Rhode Island.

 

[Bramblethorn]

You mentioned New England and the first thing I thought of was Lovecraft's the "colour" out of space.

Huh. I've read that story several times and had never noticed he was using UK spelling...which makes me wonder if this is something I pay more attention to in my own writing than in reading others'.

All the funnier since my New England story where I carefully used "color" has a Lovecraft reference in the title.

 

[lovecraft68]

Huh. I've read that story several times and had never noticed he was using UK spelling...which makes me wonder if this is something I pay more attention to in my own writing than in reading others'.

All the funnier since my New England story where I carefully used "color" has a Lovecraft reference in the title.

I've been asked countless times here why I haven't written a HPL style story.

I think its simply because I really enjoy his work and mythos and trying my hand at it would take the fun out of it...if that makes any sense.

 

[blin18]

My rule of thumb is to write in a variety of English that's appropriate to the narrator (or for third-person stuff, the primary setting/protagonist/etc). So with an Australian narrator I'll use Australian expressions and write "colour"; for a story set in New England I'll spell it "color". For me, details like that help with immersion - it's easier for me to feel the location and the culture if those little details match.

But my current story has an Australian narrator talking to an American woman. The main body of the story is in Australian English (aside from US place names e.g. Santa Carla Conference Center) but I'm not sure how best to handle reported speech from the American.

My instinct is to use US spelling for quoted speech from an American speaker. I'm trying to write her dialogue with a US voice and I think it'd be jarring to have the spelling conflict with that. So, Australian protag says "colour" and her US ladyfriend says "color".

But I wonder if readers will also find it jarring to have me switch between the two. Thoughts, suggestions?

I write mostly first person Australian narrative with Australian spelling and word selection, but its not such an easy choice in third person limited.

I think the story should use consistent spelling throughout. In third person limited, basing it on the narrator's nationality seems sensible, but I think its a rule I might break if the entire story was set in the US with other US characters including dialogue. Using switching POV would make it an even tougher choice.

I find readers pretty tolerant of my spelling, especially for the well known words like colour (less so for sceptic). If you have any concerns about alienating readers, just raise your fist, shout MURICA, and switch your spell checker to US English. Guaranteed no complaints.

 

[LadyVer]

I vote on consistency.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Using different spellings in the same story would be jarring, I think. For starters on your stated practice, the spellings should, I think, be geared to our audience, not the origin of your narrator/character (which gets you into the bind you are in).

I could be wrong, but I don't think my audience has a strong preference for one particular spelling style. While I know other authors here do get flak for non-US spellings, I suspect those readers will already have found other things to dislike about my stories. I can't remember ever getting negative feedback about non-US spellings; what region-oriented feedback I get tends to be more along the lines of "nice to see another Aussie" or "I liked the Australian setting".

If you really want to have the flavor of a UK or Australian setting and want the target audience to feel they are there, I guess it's fine to use those spellings. But it's just going to stop the flow for the reader when you mix spelling when you don't need to.

Yeah, that's what I was wondering.

Whether you character's word is spelled color or flavor or colour or flavour, it's pronounced the the same whether your character is American or British. If there's a distinct difference in how an American and Brit would pronounce a particular word, I guess that's when you might consider variant spellings.

It's not huge, but there are certainly noticeable differences between Australian and US pronunciations for those words. US tends to pronounce the final 'r'; Australian quite often omits it ("kulla"). I'd sooner cut my fingers off than try to write phonetic accents, but the difference in background is part of the story and I'd like readers to be conscious that these two people don't have the same dialect.

But if inconsistent spelling is going to be jarring for the readers, maybe I need to stick to speech patterns as a way of doing that.

What really should be considered with different nationality characters is the national differences in actually different words used to mean the same thing. A Brit might speak of sending a jumper to the cleaners where an American would speak of sending a sweater.

Oh yes. Or indeed the same word used to mean different things. My partner raised some eyebrows when she told American friends "it was a hot day so I took my jumper off [in public]".

 

[Bramblethorn]

I've been asked countless times here why I haven't written a HPL style story.

I think its simply because I really enjoy his work and mythos and trying my hand at it would take the fun out of it...if that makes any sense.

Yeah, it does. I enjoy the mythos but I'm not sure I could write straight Lovecraftian; that one I linked is more about exploring a tangent that spun off from Lovecraft and Robert Chambers (King in Yellow).

 

[slyc_willie]

Using different spellings in the same story would be jarring, I think. For starters on your stated practice, the spellings should, I think, be geared to our audience, not the origin of your narrator/character (which gets you into the bind you are in). If you really want to have the flavor of a UK or Australian setting and want the target audience to feel they are there, I guess it's fine to use those spellings. But it's just going to stop the flow for the reader when you mix spelling when you don't need to.

Whether you character's word is spelled color or flavor or colour or flavour, it's pronounced the the same whether your character is American or British. If there's a distinct difference in how an American and Brit would pronounce a particular word, I guess that's when you might consider variant spellings.

I have to agree. Better to stick with one spelling convention than to switch back and forth. I think a clever reader would pick up on the differences, but a lot of others would point out supposed "misspellings." Aesthetically, I think sticking to one style makes more sense than using a separate style.

What really should be considered with different nationality characters is the national differences in actually different words used to mean the same thing. A Brit might speak of sending a jumper to the cleaners where an American would speak of sending a sweater.

This bears a little emphasis. If I see Brit or Australian spellings in a story, but then see references made from a US point of view, I find that jarring as well.

"He drove a two-tone sedan, the entire body of which was white except for the hood and trunk. The contrasting colours were striking, emphasising Marcus' dual nature."

The sentence seems written from an American point of view, but with Brit spelling. That would make me stumble as I read it, because there's the British spelling of a couple words, but US references to parts of a car that Brits wouldn't say.

"He drove a two-tone saloon car, the entire body of which was white except for the bonnet and boot. The contrasting colours were striking, emphasising Marcus' dual nature."

While I am not British, this would make more sense to me than the previous version.

 

[Hypoxia]

I vote on consistency.

Quite. Local or vernacular words like CRIKEY! would pass, but COLOUR and COLOR in the same text won't. As for HPL's title COLOUR OUT OF SPACE, remember that he was an unrepentent Anglophile... and that the spelling probably looked a bit exotic to his pulp-magazine audiences.

 

[sr71plt]

I'm working on an e-book now with a similar issue. Sabb and I are combining on another Shabbu book, where there are two characters, one Australian, one American, working toward each other with alternating first-person chapters. Sabb, an Australian, is working the Australian character, and I am working the American one. We'll use appropriate language and spellings of each in the separate-character chapters (with each chapter being internally consistent). What will be interesting is if the concluding chapter goes to third person and which style will be used then. In past instances, it's gone to an American-voice narrator and used American style.

 

[Bramblethorn]

OK, looks like everybody here (plus my beta reader) votes for "consistent spelling".

New complication: protagonist is staying at the Santa Carla Conference Center. As a proper noun I understand it sticks with its US spelling, but if she ever discusses it as a common noun it'd be in her spelling. So, "I arrived at a conference centre" but "I arrived at the Santa Carla Conference Center".

...I think I might just work around using common-noun phrasings there.

 

[sr71plt]

"I arrived at a conference centre" but "I arrived at the Santa Carla Conference Center".

Right. For starters you have to take a business' name as the business has registered it. Some even are trademarked (e.g., Wal-Mart, which interestingly enough, has started bastardizing its own name to Walmart in its own ads. Its right, I guess, but not the way it's trademarked. Maybe it's recently retrademarked the name, though.).

 

[Handley_Page]

OK, looks like everybody here (plus my beta reader) votes for "consistent spelling".

New complication: protagonist is staying at the Santa Carla Conference Center. As a proper noun I understand it sticks with its US spelling, but if she ever discusses it as a common noun it'd be in her spelling. So, "I arrived at a conference centre" but "I arrived at the Santa Carla Conference Center".

...I think I might just work around using common-noun phrasings there.

There was a discussion about this problem a month or three ago.
The general consensus was to put the odd word or two (perhaps specialist ones) in the original American this time) and carry on with the tale as normal. That way, the reader can get the flavour of a different language in the tale.

For instance, English & French:
"Here you go girl. . ." as he handed yher a drink.
"Merci," she replied.

Personally, I'd just say "the Conference Centre".
It's a Convention Centre, according to Wiki.
And it's at Santa Clara.

 

[slyc_willie]

There was a discussion about this problem a month or three ago.
The general consensus was to put the odd word or two (perhaps specialist ones) in the original American this time) and carry on with the tale as normal. That way, the reader can get the flavour of a different language in the tale.

For instance, English & French:
"Here you go girl. . ." as he handed yher a drink.
"Merci," she replied.

Personally, I'd just say "the Conference Centre".
It's a Convention Centre, according to Wiki.
And it's at Santa Clara.

It's not quite as simple as that. It's not a "convention (or conference) centre" that happens to be in "Santa Clara." It is, officially, "The Santa Clara Conference Center." That is its formal name, and should be referred to as such regardless of the domestic spelling practices of whoever is writing about it. It's a matter of cultural respect.

If I were to write a spy story in which my American character interacted with someone from "the Ministry of Defence," I wouldn't change the spelling to "defense" because that is not the spelling given in the official title.

Deference given where it is due.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Personally, I'd just say "the Conference Centre".
It's a Convention Centre, according to Wiki.
And it's at Santa Clara.

No, I'm not using the Santa Clara Convention Center (which is a "-er", being American). "Santa Carla Conference Center" is a fictional place; as a general rule I try to stay away from real businesses/people/etc.

Some readers here may remember where the name comes from, although I've transplanted it a fair way south.

 

[ElectricBlue]

if your narrator is Australian

I reckon you should write as you would in Oz, because your narrator is going to think and talk like an Aussie. Use the US spellings for place names, obviously.

But to change your spelling "to gear it for our audience"? WTF? Count the countries, sunshine, you'll find there is more than one.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

Using different spellings in the same story would be jarring, I think. For starters on your stated practice, the spellings should, I think, be geared to our audience, not the origin of your narrator/character (which gets you into the bind you are in). If you really want to have the flavor of a UK or Australian setting and want the target audience to feel they are there, I guess it's fine to use those spellings. But it's just going to stop the flow for the reader when you mix spelling when you don't need to.

Whether you character's word is spelled color or flavor or colour or flavour, it's pronounced the the same whether your character is American or British. If there's a distinct difference in how an American and Brit would pronounce a particular word, I guess that's when you might consider variant spellings.

What really should be considered with different nationality characters is the national differences in actually different words used to mean the same thing. A Brit might speak of sending a jumper to the cleaners where an Americocaan would speak of sending a sweater.

Crap, from what I know, sweater is commonplace UK vocab now

 

[Hypoxia]

... as a general rule I try to stay away from real businesses/people/etc.

Real people are probably okay to include if the content isn't slanderous. I wouldn't say that the assistant dean with a hook hand was a good fuck unless it was true. Public figures are an exception; they're fair game for almost anything. Yes, you can mention Sarah Palin pulling a donkey trick in Tijuana as long as you don't describe it too closely.

Similarly with real businesses, except those caught in public controversy. Are Chick-Fil-Fucking-A management really possessed by polymorphously perverse devils? Shit yeah! Don't be afraid to say so!

Same with real places, including public and private convention centres and such facilities, naturist sites, presidential palaces, fuck motels, etc. I name names when I think I can get away with it and if they don't reveal too much about where I or my sources have been.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Real people are probably okay to include if the content isn't slanderous. I wouldn't say that the assistant dean with a hook hand was a good fuck unless it was true. Public figures are an exception; they're fair game for almost anything. Yes, you can mention Sarah Palin pulling a donkey trick in Tijuana as long as you don't describe it too closely.

Similarly with real businesses, except those caught in public controversy. Are Chick-Fil-Fucking-A management really possessed by polymorphously perverse devils? Shit yeah! Don't be afraid to say so!

Same with real places, including public and private convention centres and such facilities, naturist sites, presidential palaces, fuck motels, etc. I name names when I think I can get away with it and if they don't reveal too much about where I or my sources have been.

This one's less about being sued for trashing somebody's brand, and more about giving me space to make up the details as needed without having readers tell me "but that hotel doesn't HAVE an eleventh floor! And their booking system doesn't work that way!"

 

[Bramblethorn]

Crap, from what I know, sweater is commonplace UK vocab now

I wouldn't expect any UK/Australian reader to be confused by "sweater" - we get so much US TV it's hard not to be moderately familiar with US English - but there's more potential for confusion in the other direction.