Is this grammar correct?

[HeyAll]

Reffering to what comes after the quotations:


“Well, you obviously saw something that you weren’t supposed to,” Barbara said.


Or does it have to be...


“Well, you obviously saw something that you weren’t supposed to,” said Barbara.



Much thanks in advance.

 

[sr71plt]

Reffering to what comes after the quotations:


“Well, you obviously saw something that you weren’t supposed to,” Barbara said.


Or does it have to be...


“Well, you obviously saw something that you weren’t supposed to,” said Barbara.



Much thanks in advance.

Either is technically correct. The first is the usual, and sounds smoother to me.

 

[HeyAll]

Much appreciation.

 

[MasterProse]

Reffering to what comes after the quotations:


“Well, you obviously saw something that you weren’t supposed to,” Barbara said.


Or does it have to be...


“Well, you obviously saw something that you weren’t supposed to,” said Barbara.



Much thanks in advance.

It's fine, but if it is an ongoing dialogue within your story... You might want to try 'Barbara replied.'

Glad I'm not the only one that gets caught up on the little details when writing.

Good luck.

 

[HeyAll]

good catch, thanks!

 

[elfin_odalisque]

It's fine, but if it is an ongoing dialogue within your story... You might want to try 'Barbara replied.'

Glad I'm not the only one that gets caught up on the little details when writing.

Good luck.

No. I go with sr but disagree with MasterProse.

Story tags are a neccessary evil and should be minimized or, best, avoided.

'replied', 'groaned', gasped' etc. should be avoided. If you need a tag - and often you don't when it's clear who's speaking - 'said' is simple and unobtrusive.

'Barbara replied' is tautologous if in a conversation.

 

[sr71plt]

I don't reject variations on "said" as long as they faithfully represent the tone/action of the quoted line and as long as they aren't used so frequently that they begin to intrude into the read. The "good" thing with "said" is that it does the job and is so common that the reader will breeze right through it without intrusion into the read.

Here, I was simply responding within the context of what was asked--the comparison of the two examples given.

 

[PennLady]

My editor/publisher despises dialogue tags like that, especially in a scene with only two people. I get around it by occasionally using "said," which is a handy little word, and by describing the person's actions.

Like:
“Well, you obviously saw something that you weren’t supposed to.” Barbara threw her hands up and sighed in frustration.

And sometimes I just leave it out all together, for a few lines, and have the characters just trade statements. But not too long, b/c I don't want to lose track of who's talking.

 

[rwsteward]

Reading "The complete works of Sherlock Holmes"

Okay, it was free on iTunes.

The dialogue tags are kind of funny to read in this time frame.

"Holmes," said I.

"She's dead. Murdered!" said he.

mike

 

[sr71plt]

Reading "The complete works of Sherlock Holmes"

Okay, it was free on iTunes.

The dialogue tags are kind of funny to read in this time frame.

"Holmes," said I.

"She's dead. Murdered!" said he.

mike

That use is an affectation--to give the impression of historical period. It's common practice for Victorian-period fiction.

 

[SamScribble]

It’s a matter of taste, isn’t it. To my mind, ‘said Barbara’ sounds somewhat old fashioned.

Interestingly, one of my editors gets upset by any deviation from she said, he said; while another inclines to the view that if you can avoid any dialogue tags, you should.

My personal preference is for the she said/he said model.

I also think that it’s important to recognise the role of a dialogue tag in helping the pace a conversation – even when there is absolutely no doubt as to who is speaking.

For example …

‘You’re a bitch.’

‘I can see why you might think that,’ she said. ‘But perhaps you need to define bitch.’

‘Said she’ in that situation, just wouldn’t have the same flow.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

I would bang on that if you can, don't use tags. Dialogue should run free and only be steered if there's a chance of confusion.

Always question whether 'Abby said as she turned her back and walked out' is as effective as, ''Abby turned her back and walked out' .

 

[estragon]

Dialogue between two people is best without tags, like watching a play or a movie. Tags are needed only when an express shift in emphasis needs to be made clear. "Said she" is old-fashioned, best saved for historical fiction.

 

[sr71plt]

Dialogue between two people is best without tags, like watching a play or a movie. Tags are needed only when an express shift in emphasis needs to be made clear. "Said she" is old-fashioned, best saved for historical fiction.

After five or six rounds of dialogue, I'll put in a tag so that the reader doesn't lose track of who is saying what.

 

[Firebrain]

Tags only when needed. I prefer to use actions as tags rather than "said" etc if I can, but if you get into a conversation with more than two people then you're going to need some imagination.

But things like "replied" and "answered" are different to said/mumbled/whispered because we know they're replying. It's implied and it's obvious. It's like "asked" on the end of speech with a question mark -- that mark already told us about the asking.

I think writers need to be aware that they'll develop their own voice and there isn't a uniform approach. You just have to find a balance that doesn't disrupt from the dialogue itself, and that'll depend on how you write to start with.