When Contractions Attack.

jaF0

Moderator
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Posts
39,168
Posted in the Blurt, but then I thought I'd bring it over here too.


Consider:

It isn't early.

It's not early.


They say the same thing, but the second sounds like 'snot'. I know there are other examples. When you type in a contraction, do you sound it out or try to find another way if it sounds offputting?
 
On no....the you think its funny, but its snot joke! :D

I've noticed in my writing I seem to write everything out

Do not should not would not

Sometimes its okay, but I keep doing it and it makes the dialogue seem stilted or like they're back in another era, way too formal

But when I speak I always use contractions...and have been accused of creating new ones:eek:
 
Posted in the Blurt, but then I thought I'd bring it over here too.


Consider:

It isn't early.

It's not early.


They say the same thing, but the second sounds like 'snot'. I know there are other examples. When you type in a contraction, do you sound it out or try to find another way if it sounds offputting?

It does sound like "snot".

It's also what most people seem to say. So, I guess it depends on how much you value realism vs. style which you would use.
 
I've noticed in my writing I seem to write everything out

Do not should not would not

Sometimes its okay, but I keep doing it and it makes the dialogue seem stilted or like they're back in another era, way too formal

I am reminded of Lt. Cmdr. Data.
 
For narration I rarely use contractions. In dialog, I use those that I think the character would be using unless the conversation is in a formal setting.

"Abbs, what is it?" McGee

"It's snot."

"It's not what?" McGee.

"It's snot!"
 
I don't think about that for my writing here. But if I'm writing a speech or talking points, I always read it aloud to hear the rhythm, awkward snot moments like your example, and sentence length vs. lung capacity.
 
We’ve not. When your loom jams. (Weave knot)

My dog’s pot, or my dog’s spot. What if she’s named Spot? My dog Spot.

Doesn’t its see through tops look nice? Dozen tits. See through tops. Look nice.

Ok, stopping now. Not even going to the blurt thread. Never been. They’re to see in person.
 
Last edited:
Like Zeb, I use contractions differently in narration than in dialog, but I don't have a "rule" about it. It's just the difference between my narrator voice and my character voices. In general, I change contractions to the written-our words when I want emphasis. There are two that I change every time I see it with one exception:

"She'd" and "He'd" - I just hate how they sound and look and everything about it. (Yes, my feelings towards these word are strangely intense!) However, there is one situation where I'll always use them: "She'd had" There's no way I'm going to write "she had had." I try to avoid a tense situation where it would be an issue to start with, but there really are some places where that's the proper tense and construction. My loathing for "had had" is simply greater than my dislike of "she'd" and "he'd."

We’ve not. When your loom jams. (Weave knot)

My dog’s pot, or my dog’s spot. What if she’s named Spot? My dog Spot.

Doesn’t its see through tops look nice? Dozen tits. See through tops. Look nice.

Ok, stopping now. Not even going to the blurt thread. Never been. They’re to see in person.

Love seeing it when you have fun like that. You spelled out "BOOBS" a lot on your calculator as a kid, didn't you? ;)
 
Like Zeb, I use contractions differently in narration than in dialog, but I don't have a "rule" about it. It's just the difference between my narrator voice and my character voices. In general, I change contractions to the written-our words when I want emphasis. There are two that I change every time I see it with one exception:

"She'd" and "He'd" - I just hate how they sound and look and everything about it. (Yes, my feelings towards these word are strangely intense!) However, there is one situation where I'll always use them: "She'd had" There's no way I'm going to write "she had had." I try to avoid a tense situation where it would be an issue to start with, but there really are some places where that's the proper tense and construction. My loathing for "had had" is simply greater than my dislike of "she'd" and "he'd."



Love seeing it when you have fun like that. You spelled out "BOOBS" a lot on your calculator as a kid, didn't you? ;)

Oh, puh-leeeeease. It was “BOOBIES”. That’s 5318008, thank you very much. A full 5,260,000 more than just “BOOBS”.

“BOOBS”. The nerve of some people!!!

:)
 
Oh, puh-leeeeease. It was “BOOBIES”. That’s 5318008, thank you very much. A full 5,260,000 more than just “BOOBS”.

“BOOBS”. The nerve of some people!!!

:)

Sure, it's all about the word count. You guys always have to take out the ruler. :rolleyes:

EDIT: Character count. It's all about the character count. 'Cause 1 = 1. Duh!
 
Last edited:
Someone take away his keyboard until after class!

The interesting thing, at least with fancier calculators, they render text and numeric characters with smoothed fonts, not the digital 8 shaped grid with its seven segments.

So at some point, even the joys of spelling BOOBIES on your calculator will become another thing that future kids won’t know what you’re talking about, and will be replaced by just downloading porn directly (and actually seeing boobies) on your calculator screen!

Man, kids today are soooo lucky! :D
 
Last edited:
I use contractions all the time in narrative, and I see its use in published fiction of all kinds all the time, so I don't see anything wrong with it.

In general, although this isn't a hard and fast rule, if I have three words like

She had not

He is not

I'll combine the verb and "not" with a contraction rather than the pronoun and verb.

So

She hadn't
He isn't

versus

She'd not
He's not

But I don't always do it that way, and I combine pronouns and verbs freely when there's no "not".

She's going to the store.
He's a bad boy.

The Chicago Manual of Style seems to be fine with using contractions.
 
When it comes to dialogue, I just straight up act out lines in an approximation of the character's voice. If it sounds wrong when I'm trying to channel the character, I try it a different way until the word flow sounds right with how that character speaks.
 
Sure, it's all about the word count. You guys always have to take out the ruler. :rolleyes:

EDIT: Character count. It's all about the character count. 'Cause 1 = 1. Duh!

i.e. - there’s the difference between BOOBS and BOOBIES... ;-)
 
Last edited:
Sure, it's all about the word count. You guys always have to take out the ruler. :rolleyes:

EDIT: Character count. It's all about the character count. 'Cause 1 = 1. Duh!
Freudian slip there, Nyx?

Go on, you can say it: you want the full ruler, not just the paltry inch!

For your sake, though, never use the expression, "Go the whole nine yards." Unless, of course, you do it incrementally ;).
 
Freudian slip there, Nyx?

Go on, you can say it: you want the full ruler, not just the paltry inch!

For your sake, though, never use the expression, "Go the whole nine yards." Unless, of course, you do it incrementally ;).

Call me unambitious, but there simply aren't enough increments for nine yards.
 
There MUST be more examples.

If not, I could go off on the double word thing. When I decide to do it, it might annoy some people.

Ooops. Drat.
 
There MUST be more examples.

If not, I could go off on the double word thing. When I decide to do it, it might annoy some people.

Ooops. Drat.

Another double word thing I use sometimes, but sometimes feel uncomfortable about, is "that that."

I told the waiter that that was my favorite drink.

I believe that this is correct grammatically. But it sounds a bit awkward. I think one also can eliminate one of the "thats" if one wants (as I did in this sentence, before "one"), but then it becomes a kind of elliptical clause, because there's a missing implied "that."
 
Another double word thing I use sometimes, but sometimes feel uncomfortable about, is "that that."

I told the waiter that that was my favorite drink.

I believe that this is correct grammatically. But it sounds a bit awkward. I think one also can eliminate one of the "thats" if one wants (as I did in this sentence, before "one"), but then it becomes a kind of elliptical clause, because there's a missing implied "that."
Are you implying that that implicit statement is explicit, or that that explicit statement is implicit; both, or neither?

"Stop it, EB," said Suzie. "You're only messing with his head."

"What?" EB replied. "He's the grammarian. Or is that just an honorarium?"

"Bloody hell," said Simon. "You'll have me in a sanitarium."

"Already there, mate, already there."

Carry on :).
 
Another double word thing I use sometimes, but sometimes feel uncomfortable about, is "that that."

I told the waiter that that was my favorite drink.

I believe that this is correct grammatically. But it sounds a bit awkward. I think one also can eliminate one of the "thats" if one wants (as I did in this sentence, before "one"), but then it becomes a kind of elliptical clause, because there's a missing implied "that."

I believe that "that that" is something that can be easily avoided. In fact, I've always been convinced that that "that that" problem can just be side-stepped The question that I see is whether the author who feels that that "that that" usage is preferable was attacked by an ellipse as a child. That, as I see it, is the question that that scenario poses.
 
@jafo & ench-girl... (hey, SHE brought it up!). ;-)

There there... EDIT: oh crap. Should have said, they’re they’re.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top