Concerning spelling

[Britva415]

Mark Twain could write 15 distinct dialects purely phonetically, though I bet most modern readers don't distinguish half of them

I bet most of his contemporaries couldn't.

 

[anthrodisiac]

I think you have to consider what you're trying to do with it if you're using these types of phonetic translations. I wrote a trilogy where I massively overused it, just because it was post-apocalyptic and I was like "ah, but they all speak poorly!" Except it can get exhausting to both write and read if it's every damn where and every damn character talks like that.

However, I do enjoy these things quite a lot, because they can really add a layer of depth and authenticity and fun than simply saying "she said with a Southern accent." If I see "she had a southern accent" but none of the dialogue actually reflects the speaking style, that feels like the author is too concerned with readability, fretting about overuse, or, honestly, just lazy.

How someone speaks says a lot about them without having to explicitly lay it out. A lot of my stories take place in Southern California, so the dialogue tends to reflect that. The way they speak is indicative of that, people who've lived there for a while, or who are enmeshed in certain cultures will speak one way, and you get to see people who spend a lot of time together converge in how they speak. Likewise, it also separates out those who are NOT from that area, who grew up speaking differently. The phonetic translation of dialogue serves a purpose there, to show group status. But it can also be used to show education level, age, intonations, emotion, all sorts of things that allow you to show and imply rather than bludgeon the reader and explicate.

If you're just doing it for the hell of it without a specific goal in mind, I'd say avoid that. But if you're doing so with intention, you have your reasons for doing so, and you apply it consistently and judiciously, you can do it very well and create wonderful effects that turn bland prose-sounding dialogue into something vibrant and alive.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

I bet most of his contemporaries couldn't.

True - until radio, unless you travelled a fair bit, you'd have little idea that folks a hundred miles away spoke funny, even if you could place the exact social stratum anyone local came from. Or if you were in a city that people travelled to, I guess.

 

[Britva415]

True - until radio, unless you travelled a fair bit, you'd have little idea that folks a hundred miles away spoke funny, even if you could place the exact social stratum anyone local came from. Or if you were in a city that people travelled to, I guess.

I was thinking more about how, even if you knew what all 15 accents sounded like, telling them apart when rendered in "phonetic" text would be a tall order. Accurately identifying each of them, even taller.

If all you had to go on were the "phonetic" quoted speech, you couldn't easily tell a Jamaican from a Pakistani, even though they don't sound alike to the ear at all. Text is just inadequate to do the job of rendering the sound.

This is why the narrative has to do the job of identifying them.

 

[Voboy]

Example: instead of doctor, she would say doctuh, which in much of the south is normal pronunciation. Same with dropping the’ings’. As in ,” just don’t know what’s happenin’ to me!” You get it. What’s your take?

If you did this, I would instantaneously click out of your story.

Fair or unfair, it's what I would do.

 

[MiaSalnias]

Wondering what you would think. I’m writing a story where a couple role plays and the wife adopts a southern drawl. I state this in the text so the reader is aware. Is this adequate or should I spell each word out the way it should sound were she actually speaking? Example: instead of doctor, she would say doctuh, which in much of the south is normal pronunciation. Same with dropping the’ings’. As in ,” just don’t know what’s happenin’ to me!” You get it. What’s your take?

I think the real danger is to use an alternate spelling and miss the accent you're going for. Dropping the 'g' in an 'ing' is probably OK for many accents. But southerners do not say "doctuh", at least not to my ear. That final syllable should be more subtle than that. I would rather go with traditional spelling and let the reader infer the accent than to swing-and-miss on a bad alternate spelling.

Remember, you don't need to be perfectly phonetic on every word to get your accent across. Gently reinforcing the accent every so often can be enough. Your reader can fill in a lot of the subtleties.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

I was thinking more about how, even if you knew what all 15 accents sounded like, telling them apart when rendered in "phonetic" text would be a tall order. Accurately identifying each of them, even taller.

If all you had to go on were the "phonetic" quoted speech, you couldn't easily tell a Jamaican from a Pakistani, even though they don't sound alike to the ear at all. Text is just inadequate to do the job of rendering the sound.

This is why the narrative has to do the job of identifying them.

If you make them use the same dialect - prestigious Standard English of whatever country - then yes, it would be difficult to convey an accent without any stress markers or IPA symbols. But if they're speaking with even a bit of relevant dialect, it becomes very easy to convey the accent in text.

The novel White Teeth by Zadie Smith comes to mind - first-gen immigrants to London and their second-gen children all have very clear and distinct voices portrayed beautifully. It's a great book as long as the characters do their stuff in Willesden, north-west London. There's a totally nonsensical subplot about GM lab mice that makes no sense at all...

 

[THBGato]

I wrote a trilogy where I massively overused it, just because it was post-apocalyptic and I was like "ah, but they all speak poorly!" Except it can get exhausting to both write and read if it's every damn where and every damn character talks like that.

Have you read "Riddley Walker"? Or "The Book of Dave"?

 

[anthrodisiac]

Have you read "Riddley Walker"? Or "The Book of Dave"?

I haven't. Just checked out an except from The Book of Dave, and... yee, deffo n't gunna pih ih up o' nuffin' n.e. time soon

But I did read Dolores Claiborne by Stephen King, and it's one of the only books I ever DNF. Everything, even the prose was written with highly phonetic spellings, also rambling and tangential. It was basically an interview with a woman with ever so mild supernatural events surrounding a murder, first-person POV, and the choice to write it more or less phonetically was just too rough for my tastes at the time. And I wasn't that interested in the plot, which probably didn't help none; might've stuck it out if I'd actually cared, but I didn't.

 

[Stay_Curious_G]

I agree with your finishing sentiment in that less is probably more. Perhaps many outside of Scotland might struggle with Mr Welsh’s dialogue which is a shame because his writing of Edinburgh’s druggy underclass in Trainspotting is first rate. However it can be a bit like being ‘in on the joke’ great if you are in the know much less so if not. So I concur with others to avoid this level of dialect at the risk of losing readers. Hey if you think it’s important to your story go for it, my caveat being make it genuine as a pastiche of a dialect voice is worse. I am thinking Mary Poppins Chimney Sweep Cockney bad