quotes for internal thoughts

[robertreams]

Okay, here we go: I was always taught that one says - "Oh my god, it's a snake!" she thought. is a quote

Here is the "rule" I go by: If it would take quotation marks when spoken aloud, then I use quotation marks for thoughts.

but - she thought he had a big dick - is not a quote. I looked it up. The OWL had nothing I could find, several sites had "opinions" but nothing definite What is the consensus? Or if someone has the proper reference materials, what is the definitive answer ?

Also one site said "modern authors" put internal thoughts of their characters in italics.

In other words, in fiction, when does one use quotation marks for the thoughts of characters?

 

[PennLady]

sr71 seems to know this stuff best, but what I've observed in fiction -- published, printed fiction -- is the following. Currently, one does not use italics or quotes to denote thoughts. One just writes a sentence like this:

That's not what I want, she thought.

Up until a certain time, and I'm not sure when that time is, italics were used:

That's not what I want, she thought.

It seems the guidelines have changed, although I still come across books using italics. Except for stories at Literotica and similar sites, I don't think I have ever seen double quotes, or single ones, used to indicate thoughts. I never learned that as you say you did.

Now, let me say this is not my rule, and I *prefer* using italics to indicate thoughts. However, if it came to being published and the publisher said no italics, then fine -- no italics.

 

[sr71plt]

For the last ten years (since its 2003 15th edition--it's now in the 16th edition), the Chicago Manual of Style has given two possibilities for rendering unspoken discourse (thoughts) in the U.S. style: just like spoken dialogue, with double quotes, or just without the double quotes:

"What a merry mess we're in," Kremehilde thought.

What a merry mess we're in, Kremehilde thought.

Either choice, as long as you're consistent.

(I try to use the second to still keep it separate from spoken dialogue.)

Before that, CMS style included use of italics also:

What a merry mess we're in, Kremehilde thought.

Since the dropping of this option (the one I thought was best) is fairly recent, you'll see a lot of books using CMS style that used the italics--because they were edited/printed before 2003.

But you also will see books by U.S. publishers published since 2003 that are still using the italics. That's because these printers haven't incorporated the CMS style point on this point.

For Literotica, you could do whichever of the three seems clearest to you. You just should be consistent with the choice you made.

If you are writing British style, you're on your own. the CMS is for U.S. style. (But then Literotica is a U.S.-based Web site and it uses U.S. style itself.)

Why did the CMS drop what was probably the clearest choice? Probably because there's a long-term move to drop bold and as much italics as possible from publications. I don't know why.

 

[robertreams]

Thanks to all of you. That's what i thought.