A question about the usage of "said"

[Sengoku]

I have a question about the usage of 'said'. I'd like to know if there's a wrong way or right way because I feel that I might be doing it the wrong way, even though it feels right to me (It's so wrong but feels so right!).

Now, this is how I use 'said.':

"I fell of my bike," said Peter.

But, what I find more and more is that many writers would put the sentence like this:

"I fell of my bike," Peter said.

"Said Peter" feels more right to me than 'Peter Said', so I was wondering which is right or wrong, or if both are correct and the use of 'said' is all about style. Thanks much.

 

[sr71plt]

Whichever you find flows smoother in the specific sentence. They are both correct.

I will sometimes use the "Peter said" version in period pieces to help establish a period of the past.

 

[bronzeage]

I have a question about the usage of 'said'. I'd like to know if there's a wrong way or right way because I feel that I might be doing it the wrong way, even though it feels right to me (It's so wrong but feels so right!).

Now, this is how I use 'said.':

"I fell of my bike," said Peter.

But, what I find more and more is that many writers would put the sentence like this:

"I fell of my bike," Peter said.

"Said Peter" feels more right to me than 'Peter Said', so I was wondering which is right or wrong, or if both are correct and the use of 'said' is all about style. Thanks much.

Both are correct.

It's one of the few times in English when word order does not matter.

 

[IsabellaKing]

I don't think I have ever used said Peter.

To me it sounds as if it should be in a children's book.

 

[_Lynn_]

I find "said Peter" disrupts the flow and sounds snobbish. But that's my personal thoughts.

As the others mentioned, both are correct.

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

There's not a lot of difference. I think "said Peter" focuses on the fact that its Peter did the saying; "Peter said", at the end of the sentence, makes more a point about what's being said. It's not a strong difference, but I find this works for me:

"But... what about my rights as a woman?" said Amy.
"Amy? No one gives a damn about your rights as a woman," Peter said.

Peter's making a strong statement, so the verb goes last to add punch. At least, that's how my ear hears it.

 

[Sengoku]

Thanks so much everyone for the much-needed info.

 

[palisa]

I don't think I have ever used said Peter.

To me it sounds as if it should be in a children's book.

While I agree that there's no grammatical difference, I also agree with you that the verb-first construction SOMETIMES sounds like something from a children's book or a verse of "Barnacle Bill the Sailor."

But subject-verb really sounds ugly, IMO, when there's a phrase in apposition with the noun identifying the speaker. Then you almost have to use the "said x" construction. Putting the "said" at the end of the sentence leaves it dangling there twisting in the wind.

"There's nobody except me at home," Samuel, the ginger-haired boy, said.

"There's nobody except me at home," said Samuel, the ginger-haired boy.

That objection disappears, I think, if "said" (or a similar word) doesn't end the sentence.

"There's nobody except me at home," Samuel, the ginger-haired boy, said to the mail carrier.

--------------
Added later: Samuel is waiting for the remake of "Home Alone," Isabella!

Maybe the best way to sum this up is that subject-verb is the natural word order in English and so should usually be preferred in dialogue attribution as well.

 

[IsabellaKing]

While I agree that there's no grammatical difference, I also agree with you that the verb-first construction SOMETIMES sounds like something from a children's book or a verse of "Barnacle Bill the Sailor."

But subject-verb really sounds ugly, IMO, when there's a phrase in apposition with the noun identifying the speaker. Then you almost have to use the "said x" construction. Putting the "said" at the end of the sentence leaves it dangling there twisting in the wind.

"There's nobody except me at home," Samuel, the ginger-haired boy, said.

"There's nobody except me at home," said Samuel, the ginger-haired boy.

That objection disappears, I think, if "said" (or a similar word) doesn't end the sentence.

"There's nobody except me at home," Samuel, the ginger-haired boy, said to the mail carrier.

'I don't think Samuel should've been left home alone,' I said.

 

[mynameisben]

Someone mentioned this is one of those rare instances in English where word order doesn't matter, as "said Peter" and "Peter said" are both grammatically correct. While I agree with the linguistic science of that observation, I have to disagree with the art. "..., said Peter" sounds a little off to me. It does remind me of a children's book. In other contexts, paradoxically enough, "said Peter" can sound a bit snobbish too. Grammar has nothing to do with it, of course. My opinion on this matter -- as seems to be the case with many others -- is largely borne from prejudices I've acquired from the literature I have chosen to read throughout my lifetime. "I have read Barnacle Bill the Sailor," said I.

Writers obsess over dialog tags, and for good reason. The goal is to draw readers into a story with compelling dialog and keep them immersed by doing everything within their power to make the often-obligatory "said" as inconspicuous as possible. Some authors omit the word "said" entirely, relying on context alone to guide readers through who is saying what. A clever wordsmith can make tag omission work, but often at the subtle expense of altering the natural flow of spoken expression to include a necessary clue to clarify which character is speaking. BUt this technique breaks down pretty badly whenever three or more characters are having a discussion. Other writers reject the tag-less approach and write speech exactly as they hear it in their mind's eye, a style which necessitates the use of "said Peter" or "Peter said." But which order to use?

It's all about minimizing distractions to your reader. Readers HATE to be distracted by things that do not matter. This is why authors are loathe to use dialog tags. Readers want the story. They want to get lost in it. They do not want to be reminded they are merely reading text on a page rather than actually living your story. So, if you are going to use dialog tags, make them as inconspicuous as possible. Adopt one style or the other and stick to it. Don't write, "said Peter" in the odd-numbered sentences and "Peter said" in the even-numbered ones, lest your readers avoid your works like the plague. The fact that word ordering doesn't matter is what makes it matter. Be as consistent as the pounding surf, and your readers, like homeowners on the beach, will never even hear the pounding monotony of "Peter said." To that end, it is also unwise to draw undue attention to your dialog tags by attempting to spice things up once in a while with something like "..., Peter pontificated," unless, maybe, you are writing a story about the Pope.

Don't let yourself be rule-bound either, unless you want to write like software. If you know "said Peter" may sound a bit snobbish, use that knowledge to your advantage if you want to have a character say something that betrays a hint of snobbery. Or if one of your characters has a capricious nature, once in a while you may want to write: "'Blah blah, blabity blah,' said Mary." The choice of word ordering may subconsciously evoke the feel of Barnacle Bill or some other children's story. But again, I must caution that you must use this type of variety very sparingly. For it's effectiveness, like the overused exclamation mark, is rapidly diminished by overuse.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

... "..., said Peter" sounds a little off to me. It does remind me of a children's book. In other contexts, paradoxically enough, "said Peter" can sound a bit snobbish too.
...

Don't let yourself be rule-bound either, unless you want to write like software. If you know "said Peter" may sound a bit snobbish, use that knowledge to your advantage ...

The operative phrase here is where I have emphasised in the quote. Different people put different interpretations on written words and an author cannot be sure that all the readers will feel the same about interpretation.

On a related topic, I feel that "..., replied Peter" is far more acceptable than "..., Peter replied". Does anyone else agree?

 

[sr71plt]

On a related topic, I feel that "..., replied Peter" is far more acceptable than "..., Peter replied". Does anyone else agree?

No, for the same reason you yourself gave for different preferences for "Peter said/said Peter."

Both are correct--therefore equally acceptable. I'd just go with whichever one sounded more natural to the flow of that specific sentence. It quite likely will be one more than the other for individual authors/readers.

 

[CarlusMagnus]

I'd just go with whichever one sounded more natural to the flow of that specific sentence.

To which I would add "…in that particular context."

The rhythm established by the surrounding sentences can play a rôle, too.

 

[R_Percival_Shackleford]

its a purely artistic choice i think; whichever one works best depends on the context and the flow of the surrounding text.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

No, for the same reason you yourself gave for different preferences for "Peter said/said Peter."

Both are correct--therefore equally acceptable. I'd just go with whichever one sounded more natural to the flow of that specific sentence. It quite likely will be one more than the other for individual authors/readers.

Gee sr, I agree with you twice in the same day. I'd better take a cold shower and a lie-down.

Going back to basics, dialogue tags are the dog crap that clings to story writers shoes - best avoided if at all possible. Even the thought of using, 'X replied' seems unnecessary.

Whilst I fully accept that word order is ambivalent, I vote for the 'Peter said' - if essential to differentiate speakers.