Contractions in narrative

[SimonDoom]

This may seem like a pretty technical question. I use contractions often in my fiction. I do so in two cases in particular -- in place of "had" and in place of "not."

For example:

She didn't answer right away.

We'd always gone backpacking as a family.

I often use "wasn't" in place of "was not."

I think contractions lubricate the flow of the prose and often make things read better. It gives the writing a more casual feel, but enough very good writers write this way that I feel it's OK. I don't always use contractions. Sometimes I'll write "was not" instead of "wasn't."

My question: Are there any guidelines for when you use contractions and when you do not/don't? For me it's just a matter of feel. I use them to make things flow faster, but sometimes I do not use them to mix things up. What do others think?

 

[MelissaBaby]

In a first person narration, I'd use or not use the contraction based on the voice of the narrating character.

In third person, I use what fits the tone best. If the action of the story is light or casual, I'll probably use the contraction, if it's something more serious, I would more likely not.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

In a first person narration, I'd use or not use the contraction based on the voice of the narrating character.

In third person, I use what fits the tone best. If the action of the story is light or casual, I'll probably use the contraction, if it's something more serious, I would more likely not.

I agree - first person, imagine it as one giant piece of dialogue in their voice, so standard contractions like hasn't, mustn't, don't are par for the course.

Third person - use more sparingly but a story isn't formal writing so they would be natural (see what I did there?)

 

[Comshaw]

The Data-Lore quandary...to use or not to use that is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outraged readers, Or to take up virtual arms... Oh sorry, got carried away there...we now return you to the OP's post...



Comshaw

 

[KeithD]

Contractions are fine whenever they help the flow and are consistent with the character.

 

[NotWise]

I use contractions to give narrative a more informal feel, and I use them fairly commonly. The case in which I won't use them is when I want to emphasize the "had" or the "not."

 

[TadOverdon]

I use or don't use them intuitively; I've never worked out a rule for it. Generally, I think I'm more likely to separate the words when the voice is somewhat formally distant, as third-person omniscient sometimes is, rather than representing the point of view of a character. I'll also use the full words for emphasis, even in dialogue for mildly humorous effect - I like the Runyonesque quality of it.

 

[JanusGoneAwry]

I use them in dialog and as others have already mentioned in first person but tend to steer clear of them other than that. However, I don't mind them when I read them in stories written by others regardless of where they're used so I guess I'm a bit contrary.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

Your story, your choice. You write a good stick, Simon.

 

[jaF0]

The Data-Lore quandary...

Data's inability to eludicate contractions is the first thing I though of here and how unnatural it always sounded.

I try to watch them though and sound them out. We covered this in a previous thread though, like most topics have been.

It is not: It isn't sounds much better than it's not.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Data's inability to eludicate contractions is the first thing I though of here and how unnatural it always sounded.

I try to watch them though and sound them out. We covered this in a previous thread though, like most topics have been.

It is not: It isn't sounds much better than it's not.

Yeah, when we were kids we used to have a little rhyme; “You probably think it’s funny when your nose gets runny, but it’s not.”

 

[Comshaw]

I use contractions to give narrative a more informal feel, and I use them fairly commonly. The case in which I won't use them is when I want to emphasize the "had" or the "not."

To be serious, it all depends on whom the character is in the story. I too use it for a more informal feel. If I want a character to appear stiff and stuffy, the lack of contractions (at least to me) seems to convey that.

Comshaw

 

[ElectricBlue]

To be serious, it all depends on whom the character is in the story. I too use it for a more informal feel. If I want a character to appear stiff and stuffy, the lack of contractions (at least to me) seems to convey that.

This tends to be my approach, to bring across character nuance in dialogue. I'm not aware of any prescriptive rules for fiction, and if there were I'd probably break them. It's something I always look at in edit, and generally find myself going with the contraction. I tend to write the formal first, then relax it, I don't quite know why. Crappy auto-predict, probably.

 

[KeithD]

Chicago Manual of Style 16, 5.103: "Most types of writing benefit from the use of contractions. If used thoughtfully contractions in prose sound natural and relaxed and make reading more enjoyable."

 

[Trionyx]

Sometimes reading it out loud will give one the ‘feel’ for the better option. I agree with most everyone here that first person narratives sound better with contractions. And when writing dialogue, using words such as ‘gonna’ and ‘shoulda’ is appropriate if the characters would speak that way.

 

[Comshaw]

Sometimes reading it out loud will give one the ‘feel’ for the better option. I agree with most everyone here that first person narratives sound better with contractions. And when writing dialogue, using words such as ‘gonna’ and ‘shoulda’ is appropriate if the characters would speak that way.

Absolutely. As spoken dialogue goes a long way in setting the flavor of a story. Sure it isn't correct written English, but to covey the feel, the flavor, the character of a character it's sometimes the right thing to do. I couldn't tell a story about my father without peppering it with a pastel of "ain't" and a whole lot of profanity. Well I guess I could but it would take pages of writing to get across what a few well-chosen colloquial phases or words could.


Comshaw

 

[SamScribble]

I think the simple guide to what to use, where, and when, is: what is the narrator's 'voice'? Decide that, and you have decided everything else.

 

[Rustyoznail]

It also depends on the setting. A formal discussion in a courtroom is different to talking in a bar.

But, your story - your choice.

 

[PennameWombat]

It also depends on the setting. A formal discussion in a courtroom is different to talking in a bar.

But, your story - your choice.

This. My dialogue is all over the place, based on the characters and situation but also a bit on the narrator. If it's being filtered through the narrator's perception, that might modify things a bit. But 'gonna,' 'shoulda,' and so on aren't out of bounds.

As to narrative, it depends on whose voice. I do a fair amount of third-person multiple PoV, so each section can have (I hope) differences. I have certain characters who are either alien or simply 'formal' and the narrative is more formal, it's what they learned/are. Others, the contractions will be there.

 

[lovecraft68]

I have some weird glitch with contractions as in I don't use them when I'm writing my initial drafts. I keep going with I do not, she could not...like my characters are all speaking formerly, and I change most of them during editing.

What's strange about it is I use them all the time when I speak so I'm not sure what gets lost between my mind and the keyboard

 

[KeithD]

I think the simple guide to what to use, where, and when, is: what is the narrator's 'voice'? Decide that, and you have decided everything else.

Basically, I think, many of us were taught in high school English that contractions were to be avoided, and some have kept that in the backs of their minds. I quoted from the CMS to establish that what you learned in high school was meant to provide grounding and mostly applied to formal essays. Commercial fiction has no bias against the use of contractions, especially in fiction. There's no reason to try to come up with reasons for using them. They're fine in fiction. It all depends on what aids the flow and makes the prose sing.

 

[XerXesXu]

I’ve thought about this in the past.

Narration.

I always write stories in third person omniscient, but I want my narration to be relatively neutral ie: minimal authorial voice. If I use contractions in narration I feel I’m being too intimate, more intrusive than I want to be. It’s just a feeling, but contractions trigger that feeling, that I, the narrator, am in the story.

Dialogue.

In dialogue, I use it in-so-far as it seems natural, with one exception. Where non-native English speakers speak between themselves in their native language (but written in English) I use contractions as a cue that they’re speaking their native language. When they speak in English, I don’t contract, using the slightly stilted language as a cue that they aren’t native speakers.

I’ve yet to dip my toes to find out if this works.

 

[AlphaLyon]

When I actively avoid them:
- descriptions
- general prose

Only times I use them:
- dialogue
- first person narration
- if the rhythm of the sentence flows better, such as when there is faster paced action/activity.

That being said, I get a little hard when I find an opportunity to use double contractions:
- woudn't've
- couldn't've
- he'd've
- y'all'd've (I just came...)

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I usually use them, contractions that is, but do pepper a story with the longer versions just so it is not full of them.

 

[ScrappyPaperDoodler]

In dialogue, it depends on the character. Still, I sometimes feel it’s odd when a character refrains from using contractions. It may be the case with someone who’s hyper-educated or very 'proper', but I think using none can come across as artificial.

In narration, I don’t pay it enough mind to notice. That said, on a second draft I usually look at the contractions or lack thereof when gauging the pace of the story.