He said / She said

[timelord1963]

I have way to many He said / She said paragraphs. I feel as though I am using them every other paragraph.'

Is there a better way to phrase a paragraph and but down those' he said' phrases by 50%
I feel the reader should be smart enough to tell who is talking.

I would also need to have it acceptable to Lit.

TL63

 

[oggbashan]

I have way to many He said / She said paragraphs. I feel as though I am using them every other paragraph.'

Is there a better way to phrase a paragraph and but down those' he said' phrases by 50%
I feel the reader should be smart enough to tell who is talking.

I would also need to have it acceptable to Lit.

TL63

1. Why not have plenty of 'he said/she said'? If it is only two people talking you can omit some of them.

2. Readers' eyes tend to skip bare 'he said/she said'. They could seem excessive to you but not to a reader. If you modify the tags, such as 'she said loudly/with a smile/as an aside' they will be MORE obvious and obtrusive.

3. Readers aren't that smart when trying to follow bare text. They NEED clear clues about who is speaking. It may seem simple to you but all the reader has is your words. You need to be sure that the reader can identify the speaker.

 

[Bramblethorn]

You can cut down on tags a bit, and strengthen the story at the same time, by using actions etc. to signal the speaker.

"So, how did your trip go?" He was trying much too hard to sound casual.

"Oh, pretty boring. Just the usual, you know." She didn't meet his eyes.

 

[Nezhul]

1) You can add actions inctead of "he said/she said". This way the phrase is still linked with the character but you escape those statements.
2) Also instead of said you can use other expressions like "laughed", "mumbled", "shrugged", "told", "asked"...
3) you can skip the endings entirely leaving only direct speech, just don't do several phrases in a row, and don't start the dialogue with such a line. Also be careful when there's more than two people talking.

Examples:
"What?!" Jack stopped in his tracks.
"No, it's nothing," she shrugged, looking awkwardly
"Come on, I know there's something!"
"No," she shook her head, "Forget it."
"I'm gonna be curious for the rest of the day now..." Jack pouted looking at her.
"Well..." Jane fumbled with her dress nervously, "In fact I really gotta talk to you."
"Yes?"
She was blushing so hard that it looked like her clothes may catch on fire any moment.
"Well, remember when we went to the cinema the other night?" She said slowly, starting from afar.
"Yes, what of it?"


and so on.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

"Carol, be reasonable."

She looked at Jim, and frowned. "Why? I don't do pink. I never have. You know I hate it."

"But this has been a dream of mine for years. And it's more a sort of rose, isn't it?"

"You're colorblind. It’s fuckinig pink. Look, I get it, it's beyond daring, people will talk... but really? I'm not in high school any more, you know?"

Jim looked at her, sadly, with big puppy eyes. "Just... please?"

"Fine" she snapped bitterly. "A big shiny pink sun, green sky and purple ocean. Anything else you want on the fucking living room wall for all my art major friends to see?"

"Uh... it needs a pair of black pyramids. And the left one has to be jut a little bit bigger."

"I so did not go to fucking art school for this."


Realistically Jim's name would be given by previous context and it would be he. But the point is as long as context makes it clear who's speaking, you don't have to tag every statement. You can drop in clues in long sequences of dialog with the occasional description, as above with the puppy eyes.

 

[MrBennet]

1) You can add actions inctead of "he said/she said". This way the phrase is still linked with the character but you escape those statements.
2) Also instead of said you can use other expressions like "laughed", "mumbled", "shrugged", "told", "asked"...
3) you can skip the endings entirely leaving only direct speech, just don't do several phrases in a row, and don't start the dialogue with such a line. Also be careful when there's more than two people talking.

Examples:
"What?!" Jack stopped in his tracks.
"No, it's nothing," she shrugged, looking awkwardly
"Come on, I know there's something!"
"No," she shook her head, "Forget it."
"I'm gonna be curious for the rest of the day now..." Jack pouted looking at her.
"Well..." Jane fumbled with her dress nervously, "In fact I really gotta talk to you."
"Yes?"
She was blushing so hard that it looked like her clothes may catch on fire any moment.
"Well, remember when we went to the cinema the other night?" She said slowly, starting from afar.
"Yes, what of it?"


and so on.

and so on? I don't suppose you'd care to continue - I was quite taken with how that was going

 

[tomlitilia]

"No," she shook her head, "Forget it."

Is this really right? It comes off a bit weird to me. And I don't mean the comma instead of full stop before the capitalized F -- I think that was just a mistake. But shouldn't the verb that describe the speech say something about the way she says it? I.e. she can laugh it, shriek it etc. But can she really shake it? Not trying to be a smart ass, just curios if I'm the only one who think it sounds weird. I would write this as

She shook her head. "No, forget it."

 

[Bramblethorn]

"What?!" Jack stopped in his tracks.
"No, it's nothing," she shrugged, looking awkwardly
"Come on, I know there's something!"
"No," she shook her head, "Forget it."
"I'm gonna be curious for the rest of the day now..." Jack pouted looking at her.
"Well..." Jane fumbled with her dress nervously, "In fact I really gotta talk to you."
"Yes?"
She was blushing so hard that it looked like her clothes may catch on fire any moment.
"Well, remember when we went to the cinema the other night?" She said slowly, starting from afar.
"Yes, what of it?"

This is a great example, but there are some punctuation glitches. If it's not a speech tag (basically, synonym or near-synonym for "said", "wrote", "texted" etc. - some action that creates words) then it doesn't get punctuated like a speech tag.

For instance, "shrugged" is not a speech tag so "She shrugged" is a completely new sentence:

"No, it's nothing." She shrugged, looking awkward.

On the other hand, "...she said slowly" is a speech tag, and since it's attached to the preceding words it's not the beginning of a sentence. So that line should be:

"Well, remember when we went to the cinema the other night?" she said slowly, starting from afar.

(Many writers slip up on this, and probably 95% of readers don't notice/don't care, but if you want to satisfy the fussy 5%...)

 

[Nezhul]

First time I hear that. Way I was taught (and later on googled it to check, when I checked my style) - when ANYTHING comes after the quotes - then you MUST put a comma before the quote, not the dot. And the next character is never capitalized.
And it was stressed that it has to be always done like that, if the text after quotes comes in the same paragraph.

Also before quotes you, as well, ALWAYS put the comma, and never the dot.

The way you re-do it

"No, it's nothing." She shrugged, looking awkward.

is wrong. You could make it like this:
"No, it's nothing."
She shrugged, looking awkward.

splitting into two separate lines, but that is another thing entirely.
And yea, technically you can separate those to different sentences by a dot, but writing them in one line would be a mistake. In my example shrugging - is a part of how she talks. Not a different, standalone action. You could replace it by:
"No, it's nothing," she said as she shrugged, looking awkward.
But you can leave those extra words out and still have your perfectly fine sentence.

At least that's how I know it, how I read it in books and how I studied it in school, so yeah. I don't buy into what you say here.

After surfing the net for 20 min now, I simply can't find the rule you are referring to. Maybe I'm wrong, If so - give me a link. I can only find rules that explicidly state that if there's text - any text - after quotes, then you put a comma. And if there's text before quotes - you put a comma too.
Nothing at all about different types of text that could be mixed in with direct speech.

 

[timelord1963]

quote

would it help if I had the person doing some action in the middle or end of a quote instead of the begining? Perhaps, throwing in some direct speech once in a while?

I am no Rhodes scholar in English, I just want to make my work better, taking baby steps.

I figure I am a 'C' writer at best, I have been learning lots of things over the course of many stories. I am slowly improving, but it is a long slog.

TL63

 

[Bramblethorn]

First time I hear that. Way I was taught (and later on googled it to check, when I checked my style) - when ANYTHING comes after the quotes - then you MUST put a comma before the quote, not the dot.

Can you provide a link to that reference? That doesn't seem right to me.

And the next character is never capitalized.
And it was stressed that it has to be always done like that, if the text after quotes comes in the same paragraph.

Also before quotes you, as well, ALWAYS put the comma, and never the dot.

This depends on whether the quote is part of the same sentence as the preceding/following text.

I said, "Let's have breakfast at Tiffany's." I picked up the phone and made a booking.

Here, 'I said, "Let's have breakfast at Tiffany's." ' is all one sentence. The spoken part is attached to the "I said". So we don't have a sentence break after "said"; instead we use a comma.

But 'I picked up the phone...' is a brand new sentence, so we need to terminate the previous one.

If English was a more logical language, it would be '...at Tiffany's.". ' - one period inside the quotes to terminate the spoken sentence, and then one period outside the quotes to terminate the sentence that begins 'I said...' but English isn't, so we just have the one period.

Alternately:

I picked up the phone. "Let's have breakfast at Tiffany's," I said.

Here, we have a sentence ending with 'phone' so we terminate it there, but the 'I said' sentence includes the quote, so we finish the quote with a comma and not a period.

But if the quote contains a terminator other than a period, we keep that instead of the comma:

I picked up the phone. "Shall we have breakfast at Tiffany's?" I said.

The way you re-do it
is wrong. You could make it like this:
"No, it's nothing."
She shrugged, looking awkward.

splitting into two separate lines, but that is another thing entirely.

You certainly can do that, but it's not compulsory to have a line break in between sentences.

And yea, technically you can separate those to different sentences by a dot, but writing them in one line would be a mistake. In my example shrugging - is a part of how she talks. Not a different, standalone action. You could replace it by:
"No, it's nothing," she said as she shrugged, looking awkward.
But you can leave those extra words out and still have your perfectly fine sentence.

She shrugs as she talks, but shrugging isn't how she makes the words, so it's not a speech tag.

After surfing the net for 20 min now, I simply can't find the rule you are referring to. Maybe I'm wrong, If so - give me a link. I can only find rules that explicidly state that if there's text - any text - after quotes, then you put a comma. And if there's text before quotes - you put a comma too.
Nothing at all about different types of text that could be mixed in with direct speech.

I have to go to a funeral now, but if nobody's posted a reference by the time I'm back I'll see if I can rustle one up.

 

[KindofHere]

..............

 

[weftandwarp]

I have way to many He said / She said paragraphs. I feel as though I am using them every other paragraph.'

Is there a better way to phrase a paragraph and but down those' he said' phrases by 50%
I feel the reader should be smart enough to tell who is talking.

I would also need to have it acceptable to Lit.

TL63

Dialogue is very popular. It is said to be easier to read and adds to the charactorisation. I often find its excessive use bogs the story down and makes it terribly slow. I prefer dialogue to be relevant to the story. The key is the word "story". If the story isn't moving because of the excessive use of dialogue I'd much rather delete it. I prefer to use short paragraphs.

If you're worried about he said /she said scenarios it indicates to me it could be looked at with a view to deleting it.

As with all things there are exceptions where dialogue does move the story along. I suspect this is unusual - authors who can do it well are rare and I like to read their work.

 

[Areala-chan]

I absolutely love writing dialogue, because it speeds the story along and forces the reader to participate in the imagination process. Poor dialogue can grind a story to a halt, but if you do it right I think it flows so well the reader can't help but get swept up in the flow and see the scene unfold in his or her mind.

Example from one of my stories:

I'm barely in the door when Mom unloads her opening salvo: "I saw you took the van, is everything OK with your sister? Did she push herself too hard in therapy yesterday? I told her not to overdo it, but she never listens to me. Maybe you can talk to her?"

"Hello to you too," I reply in the space when she stops to breathe. "In order: Lynn is great; she wanted the wheelchair just in case; and she doesn't need anyone lecturing her about her health. Also, my day was fine, thank you for asking. How's grandma?"

"Oh, she's driving me up the wall, but that's nothing new. I'm sorry, I can't seem to get much of anything right today. How are you, Colleen?"

"I'm okay. Just thought I'd take a nap before I pick Lynn up." I head down the hall.

"Sweetie, I can get her," Mom calls to me as I leave the room. "Why don't you rest?"

"It's all good," I say over my shoulder. "Just make sure I'm up in an hour. You'll have your hands full with dinner anyway. She'll be ready to eat a horse when she gets home."

"She gets that from your father, I'll have you know!"

"See you in an hour, Mom."

I think the key isn't to just throw lines back and forth, but to have your characters engage in other actions while they're talking. In real life we're rarely sitting or standing still, doing nothing but flapping our gums. Recognizing this and applying it to our characters makes them more real in the eyes of a reader, I think.

 

[_Lynn_]

Even though this thread is from 2010, it has several helpful posts about dialogue.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I have to go to a funeral now, but if nobody's posted a reference by the time I'm back I'll see if I can rustle one up.

I reckon I'm with Bramblethorn on this. I've never seen a rule that all speech ends with a comma. To do so would give you all sorts of strange grammatical constructs.

I'd stick my neck and say that it may be taught that way in Russia, but it certainly isn't taught that way in Australia, for example. But I can't find my Oz Style Guide to confirm.

Pilot will know, for the US of A.

 

[Nezhul]

Edit: Could be that Russia's way is different than the US way, or UK or anywhere else.

We don't use quoted direct speech in our books at all. We use apostrophes. We kinda do have rules for quoted direct speech, but they are skimmed over briefly because no one uses them.

So I learned my rules for quotes specifically for English.

Way I see it, if the text you write with the quotes is part of the speech, you put a comma in. Like if
"Yes," she nodded, "Definitely."
can be replaced with
"Yes," she said, nodding, "Definitely."
then you put commas. Nodding is something she does as she talks. It's the body language that is used to articulate the phrase and is inseparable from it.

Now let's look at it with periods.
"Yes." She nodded. "Definitely."
The meaning of this phrase action-wise is TOTALLY different. It reads:
"Yes," she said. Then she nodded. Then she added, "Definitely."

I think there's a clear distinction in the feel, the meaning of this line.

I see one rule about this whole comma thing.
If there's a text after the quotes that is pointing to the person who does the talking, you put a comma in (unless it's question or exclamation marks) and start this text without capitalization.
In my examples, "she nodded" "she shrugged" - clearly point to the person speaking. It is a pointer line.

I can find nothing about the verb needing to be variations of "said".

 

[ElectricBlue]

Now let's look at it with periods.
"Yes." She nodded. "Definitely."
The meaning of this phrase action-wise is TOTALLY different. It reads:
"Yes," she said. Then she nodded. Then she added, "Definitely."

I think there's a clear distinction in the feel, the meaning of this line.

Totally agree, there is a different meaning; which was my observation above.

The only thing I'd write differently is this:

Then she added, "definitely."

Because it's a part of the same sentence, it doesn't need the upper case 'D'.

 

[Green_Knight]

...

3. Readers aren't that smart when trying to follow bare text. They NEED clear clues about who is speaking. It may seem simple to you but all the reader has is your words. You need to be sure that the reader can identify the speaker.

I lose track after about four unattributed quotes and have to go back to the last he/she said and track forward from there: him... her... him... her... So the occasional he said/she said helps to reset the clock or you need to be more inventive:

'Did you know he's had his balls cut off?'

It took Sarah a few moments to get over the shock before she could reply. 'Well that's saved me the bother...'

 

[Green_Knight]

I picked up the phone. "Let's have breakfast at Tiffany's," I said.

Here, we have a sentence ending with 'phone' so we terminate it there, but the 'I said' sentence includes the quote, so we finish the quote with a comma and not a period.

But if the quote contains a terminator other than a period, we keep that instead of the comma:

Or, just to confuse things, in English rather than American it would be:

I picked up the phone. 'Let's have breakfast at Tiffany's', I said.

 

[Nezhul]

Then she added, "definitely."

Because it's a part of the same sentence, it doesn't need the upper case 'D'.

You can say it both ways (examples without breaking it by supporting text).
"Yes, definitely." - this way there will be no upper case.
"Yes. Definitely." - this way there will be.
Again, both cases have a slightly different meaning and emotional undertones. The second variant is heavier, it empathizes the complete assurance better.

The upper case is determined solely by weather it is a start of a new sentence in the speech, or a continuation of the previous one.

 

[_Lynn_]

In my examples, "she nodded" "she shrugged" - clearly point to the person speaking. It is a pointer line.

Neither of those are dialogue tags, though.

 

[Nezhul]

So after all, where is the rule about so-called "dialogue tags"? When I search for direct quoted speech punctuation rules, I can't find ANYTHING about what you are talking about here.

You are all talking about it like it's written in the textbooks. I, for the life of me, can't find this rule, or even any rules about dialogue tags. I can see the attribution lines called "dialogue tags", but I can't find any rule about what can or can not be used as a dialogue tag.

Ok, I can find references to an ongoing holywar, which boils down to one camp stating that only words "said" and "asked" are acceptable, while other camp argues that any verb can, because we do not just "say" things, but yell them, tell them, whisper and mumble them, etc.
And the argument here is not the rules of English Language. It is literally this:
"Any word excepting the words "said" and "asked" is distracting for the reader and does not let the reader to concentrate on the story." - Which is a big load of bull, if you ask me.

Is that where you are coming from?
Because not one person seems to be able to find an actual official rule of English language that outlines how attribution phrases can and can not be constructed, or what words can be used.
There's none. No such rule like that I can find.

Which makes me strongly believe that the whole argument is a matter of personal opinion regarding style. Like the whole "only-use-the-word-said" thing.

 

[_Lynn_]

So after all, where is the rule about so-called "dialogue tags"? When I search for direct quoted speech punctuation rules, I can't find ANYTHING about what you are talking about here.

You are all talking about it like it's written in the textbooks. I, for the life of me, can't find this rule, or even any rules about dialogue tags. I can see the attribution lines called "dialogue tags", but I can't find any rule about what can or can not be used as a dialogue tag.

Ok, I can find references to an ongoing holywar, which boils down to one camp stating that only words "said" and "asked" are acceptable, while other camp argues that any verb can, because we do not just "say" things, but yell them, tell them, whisper and mumble them, etc.
And the argument here is not the rules of English Language. It is literally this:
"Any word excepting the words "said" and "asked" is distracting for the reader and does not let the reader to concentrate on the story." - Which is a big load of bull, if you ask me.

Is that where you are coming from?
Because not one person seems to be able to find an actual official rule of English language that outlines how attribution phrases can and can not be constructed, or what words can be used.
There's none. No such rule like that I can find.

Which makes me strongly believe that the whole argument is a matter of personal opinion regarding style. Like the whole "only-use-the-word-said" thing.

Here's an article on tags. If you scroll to the bottom, the article states: You can’t giggle spoken words. You can’t laugh them or sigh them or smile them, either.

You can't nod spoken words or shrug them, either.

 

[Nezhul]

Article is not a rule of language. It is subject to author's personal preferences and beliefs.
I am pretty sure that English HAS to have an official set of grammar and punctuation rules. Some dictionary or another official document or codex? I know Russian has one and it is updated regularly. Can you at least point me to that, if not the rule itself?