# Dialogue



## Schrody (Apr 8, 2015)

For years - actually, all my writing life I wrote dialogues like this:


- Hey. - she said with a smile.


Now I want to try something new, to redefine my writing and don't know how it should be


"Hey." She said with a smile.

or

"Hey.", she said with a smile. 


Which technique you like best and why?


----------



## Sam (Apr 8, 2015)

It should be: 

"Hey," she said, with a smile.


----------



## Deleted member 56686 (Apr 8, 2015)

"Hey," she said, with a smile. 

You wouldn't need a period with this sentence. I think the comma would go inside the quote. You would need a period only if the quote was ending the sentence.


----------



## Terry D (Apr 8, 2015)

Dialogue tags -- the 'he said' 'she asked' 'Bob replied' sort of attribution -- are part of the sentence which includes the quote so a comma is used at the end of the speech. There are exceptions, however. When the speech is an exclamation, or a question the (!) or (?) go inside the quotes, but the first word of the tag remains uncapitalized.

"She did what?" he asked.

"Look out, Bob!" she shouted.


----------



## LeeC (Apr 8, 2015)

This is what makes things so damn frustrating. As opposed to what Terry correctly stated, the European(?) approach (if I understand it correctly) is that any punctuation within the quote marks belongs only with what is quoted and not with the sentence the quote is part of. I think the latter makes more sense. It also bugs me when I write something like, "'She did what?' he asked." and the SP&G checker always tells me to capitalize "he."


----------



## Jeko (Apr 8, 2015)

'Hey,' she said with a smile.

or

"Hey," she said with a smile.



> As opposed to what Terry correctly stated, the European(?) approach (if I understand it correctly) is that any punctuation within the quote marks belongs only with what is quoted and not with the sentence the quote is part of.



I think the 'European approach' is exactly what Terry stated.

Also, this thread probably belongs in SpaG.


----------



## Schrody (Apr 8, 2015)

Sam said:


> It should be:
> 
> "Hey," she said, with a smile.



Are you sure a comma goes after "she said"? It just feels unnatural. Maybe because English is not my native language?



mrmustard615 said:


> "Hey," she said, with a smile.
> 
> You wouldn't need a period with this sentence. I think the comma would go inside the quote. You would need a period only if the quote was ending the sentence.



Um, it is end of the sentence. 



Terry D said:


> Dialogue tags -- the 'he said' 'she asked' 'Bob replied' sort of attribution -- are part of the sentence which includes the quote so a comma is used at the end of the speech. There are exceptions, however. When the speech is an exclamation, or a question the (!) or (?) go inside the quotes, but the first word of the tag remains uncapitalized.
> 
> "She did what?" he asked.
> 
> "Look out, Bob!" she shouted.



Thanks, Terry. So it would be "I'm going to the store.", she said... ?

Thank you M and Sam


----------



## Schrody (Apr 8, 2015)

LeeC said:


> This is what makes things so damn frustrating. As opposed to what Terry correctly stated, the European(?) approach (if I understand it correctly) is that any punctuation within the quote marks belongs only with what is quoted and not with the sentence the quote is part of. I think the latter makes more sense. It also bugs me when I write something like, "'She did what?' he asked." and the SP&G checker always tells me to capitalize "he."



Oh, good. So I'm not the only one :mrgreen:



Cadence said:


> 'Hey,' she said with a smile.
> 
> or
> 
> ...



You can move it to SpaG if you think it belongs there :mrgreen: (like you need my permission)


----------



## Sam (Apr 8, 2015)

All dialogue is written the same, whether it be American or European, and that is as follows: 

"What are we doing after the match?" Jack asked. 

"We're heading to the pub for a few, then off to the cinema," John replied. 

Speech/quotation marks are *always* outside punctuation. ALWAYS. 

The only time quotation marks go inside punctuation is when you are quoting what someone else has said, and only for UK and European English.

Mark Twain once said that "it is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt". 

This does not apply to U.S. English, nor does it apply to dialogue.


----------



## Terry D (Apr 8, 2015)

Schrody said:


> Thanks, Terry. So it would be "I'm going to the store*.*"*,* she said... ?



No. It would be: "I'm going to the store," she said. The only full stops used inside of quotation marks when tags are used are exclamation points and question marks.


----------



## Schrody (Apr 8, 2015)

Great! Thanks, Sam!


----------



## Schrody (Apr 8, 2015)

Terry D said:


> No. It would be: "I'm going to the store," she said. The only full stops used inside of quotation marks when tags are used are exclamation points and question marks.



Got it. Thanks


----------



## Deleted member 56686 (Apr 8, 2015)

What Terry said. 

In the way that you wrote your sentence, the quote doesn't end the sentence, it is only part of it, thus, the comma.


----------



## Jeko (Apr 8, 2015)

> It just feels unnatural. Maybe because English is not my native language?



You get used to it, as your readers will be. Give them punctuation they're not used to and they'll go out of the scene.


----------



## LeeC (Apr 8, 2015)

Well Cadence and Sam, I'm sure you're both more learned than I, especially since as a youth I abhorred English in favor of Shoshone. Also since my school years were so long ago, likely rules have coalesced more.

What I do remember from my school years is along the lines of this statement I ran across:

In the United Kingdom, Canada, and islands under the influence of British education, punctuation around quotation marks is more apt to follow logic. In American style, then, you would write: 

"Economic systems," according to Professor White, "are an inevitable byproduct of civilization, and are, as John Doe said, 'with us whether we want them or not.'"​
On the other hand, in the British style you would write: 

‘Economic systems’, according to Professor White, ‘are an inevitable byproduct of civilization, and are, as John Doe said, “with us whether we want them or not”’.​
Looking further, I found this quick chart of the differences. 

Style issue: To enclose a quotation, use…
...American Style: Double quotation marks
...British Style: Single quotation marks

Style issue: To enclose a quotation within a quotation, use…    
...American Style: Single quotation marks
...British Style: Double quotation marks

Style issue: Place periods and commas…
...American Style: Inside quotation marks
...British Style: Outside quotation marks

Style issue: Place other punctuation (colons, semi-colons, question marks, etc.)…
...American Style: Outside quotation marks*
...British Style: Outside quotation marks*

*Place other punctuation inside quotation marks when that punctuation is part of what is being quoted, such as a quoted question.


----------



## Sam (Apr 8, 2015)

That's not dialogue, Lee. 

That's a citation. Citations in UK English are different from U.S.. 

Dialogue in novels is identical worldwide. To wit, all punctuation goes inside quotation marks in dialogue.

Whether to use single (') or double (") for speech marks differs from person to person. Some say English is one, American is two; and some swear it's vice versa. I go with personal preference.


----------



## J.J. Maxx (Apr 8, 2015)

I wouldn't add a comma to the tag.

"Hey," she said with a smile.

That's it.


----------



## Riis Marshall (Apr 15, 2015)

Hello Schrody

Or maybe even:

She smiled: 'Hey!'

(Some may question the use of the colon but I can pull a load of books by different writers down from my shelf - old and new - and see the colon used here.)

All the best with your writing.

Warmest regards
Riis


----------



## escorial (Apr 15, 2015)

these threads blow my mind..i read with interest and leave more confused...


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Apr 15, 2015)

escorial said:


> these threads blow my mind..i read with interest and leave more confused...



That is exactly why I don't pay a whole lot of attentiopn to "rules."

I write the way I write. I'll probably have to change some things later, (once I get a good Beta read) but until then, I am just going to put the words on the paper and go from there.


----------



## Carousel (Apr 16, 2015)

Yeah, do your best and ignore the rest. Whoever heard of a reader say “I didn’t like the book, I spotted three misplaced commas”


----------



## Sam (Apr 16, 2015)

No one said that a misplaced comma is going to alienate your readers, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't at least put an effort into learning fundamentals. 

A great story riddled with errors is not going to be as powerful as a great story with none. Errors sever the suspension of reality, because the reader is forced to go back and try to make sense of what s/he has just read. 

Having a good grasp of fundamentals makes the process much more memorable and enjoyable for the reader.


----------



## Carousel (Apr 16, 2015)

Sam said:


> A great story riddled with errors is not going to be as powerful as a great story with none. Errors sever the suspension of reality, because the reader is forced to go back and try to make sense of what s/he has just read.
> 
> Having a good grasp of fundamentals makes the process much more memorable and enjoyable for the reader.



I never said don’t bother in putting any effort in, I said do your best but I know my best isn’t anywhere near perfect and I suspect many other published writers aren’t either. Spike Milligan confessed that he was pretty awful at punctuation, though the lack of expertise in the field didn’t stop him from making a fair living from his writing.  

Stephenie Meyer was roundly criticised (amongst other faults) for her bad grammar etc in the Twilight series, which makes you wonder who proof read the manuscripts before publication; though the many problems with her writing seemingly didn’t prevent her books becoming among the best sellers.

Do publishers make judgments solely on the grounds of grammar and punctuation as to whether to accept for a work publication? I don’t know, but the facts suggest they don’t.


----------



## Sam (Apr 16, 2015)

Carousel said:
			
		

> Do publishers make judgments solely on the grounds of grammar and  punctuation as to whether to accept for a work publication? I don’t  know, but the facts suggest they don’t.



Not solely, no, but if they have one hundred great stories with shoddy writing, and one hundred great stories with competent writing, which hundred do you think they'll choose? 

Having good fundamentals tells a publisher that the person cares about their craft; has pride in their work; does not believe that someone else will come along and tidy up their crap.


----------



## Terry D (Apr 16, 2015)

Sam said:


> Not solely, no, but if they have one hundred great stories with shoddy writing, and one hundred great stories with competent writing, which hundred do you think they'll choose?
> 
> Having good fundamentals tells a publisher that the person cares about their craft; has pride in their work; does not believe that someone else will come along and tidy up their crap.



It's about being professional. While some writers like to think of themselves as artists and approach the craft with that mindset, publishers and editors are business people first and foremost. Your level of professionalism--including the way you present your manuscript--will go a long way toward giving you an advantage when facing the 'slush-pile'. I was at a writer's conference recently where an agent told us, each agent in her office receives 450 to 500 manuscripts each month. That's 5,400 to 6,000 each year per agent. Of those 6,000 manuscripts each agent will take on 10 to 15 new clients per year, a rate of just two tenths of a percent (.2%). That's just agents. Publishers are even more flooded.

The occasional example of generally poor writing which makes big money, like Twilight, or Fifty Shades, is a lightning strike, a lottery win (actually, statistically, you have a better chance of winning a lottery). To improve your odds you need to present the best, the cleanest, manuscript you are able to produce.


----------



## Jeko (Apr 16, 2015)

> I said do your best but I know my best isn’t anywhere near perfect and I suspect many other published writers aren’t either.



Achievement in any craft comes not from perfection but from the pursuit of perfection; aim to have perfect SPaG and you'll have better SPaG than if you didn't.


----------



## Carousel (Apr 16, 2015)

Terry D said:


> The occasional example of generally poor writing which makes big money, like Twilight, or Fifty Shades, is a lightning strike, a lottery win (actually, statistically, you have a better chance of winning a lottery). To improve your odds you need to present the best, the cleanest, manuscript you are able to produce.



I think that observation covers all who submit there first book to the publishing firms, whether it is badly written or not  

We are not discussing bad writing here, that embraces a multitude of issues which, even if it was written with perfect punctuation and grammar wouldn’t excuse a poorly written piece.
 I repeat I give punctuation my best shot but I don’t have anything like the expertise of a professional proof reader and neither do most amateur or professional writers either. The publishing firms are not stupid, they are not going to turn down, what in their minds, is a potential blockbuster on the grounds that the punctuation and grammar is a bit on the dodgy side. Because every novel they accept will go through the same process of editing and proofreading. 

A quote from a publishing firm.


Nobody can proofread their own writing effectively. Our brains see what we expect to see and fill in the gaps because we know what we mean to say, and everyone makes grammatical errors. Outside editors and proofreaders are an essential quality control step.


----------



## Sam (Apr 16, 2015)

No one is talking about proofreading. And, no, people can proofread their own work to an effective degree. I've done it. I also know of several successful authors who do it for a living.  

What we're talking about is making your manuscript as clean as possible. No matter how good you think the story is, why would any publisher take a great story littered with errors over a great story with almost none? Why would they give themselves more work? 

Presentation is important.


----------



## Terry D (Apr 16, 2015)

Carousel said:


> I think that observation covers all who submit there first book to the publishing firms, whether it is badly written or not
> 
> We are not discussing bad writing here, that embraces a multitude of issues which, even if it was written with perfect punctuation and grammar wouldn’t excuse a poorly written piece.
> I repeat I give punctuation my best shot but I don’t have anything like the expertise of a professional proof reader and neither do most amateur or professional writers either. The publishing firms are not stupid, they are not going to turn down, what in their minds, is a potential blockbuster on the grounds that the punctuation and grammar is a bit on the dodgy side. Because every novel they accept will go through the same process of editing and proofreading.
> ...



If you do the best job of self-editing that you can, good. You are right, no one is perfect. I don't think I've ever read a published book that was 100% error-free even after going through 'the process'. I simply made my comment because I've seen a number of inexperienced writers on these boards say they would let the editors and proof readers worry about punctuation, spelling, grammar, etc. They seem to think that stuff isn't their job. It is. If that doesn't apply to you, that's fine.


----------



## Jeko (Apr 16, 2015)

> The publishing firms are not stupid, they are not going to turn down, what in their minds, is a potential blockbuster on the grounds that the punctuation and grammar is a bit on the dodgy side.



To put this in the context of the thread; if you spend the entire novel writing dialogue incorrectly, it's not going to send off the right signals. Engagement with a narrative and characters is often a matter of confidence in the author - that confidence is forged for agents through the meeting of standards and expectations. If your first page has a glaring SPaG error or two, therefore, that confidence is going to be damaged. So yes, dodgy SPaG can lead to the turning-down of a 'potential blockbuster' if they can't see the potential through the artist's potentiality for mishandling their presentation.


----------



## Carousel (Apr 16, 2015)

Sam said:


> No one is talking about proofreading. And, no, people can proofread their own work to an effective degree. I've done it. I also know of several successful authors who do it for a living.
> 
> What we're talking about is making your manuscript as clean as possible. No matter how good you think the story is, why would any publisher take a great story littered with errors over a great story with almost none? Why would they give themselves more work?
> 
> Presentation is important.



Successful authors who do proofreading for a living? That begs the question on exactly how successful these authors are. But let that pass.

If, as you say that you have done proofreading surely you will know that the skill is centred on correcting punctuation and grammar which is the purpose of the thread.

_Why would they give themselves more work?_ Simple, because it’s not more work.
Every manuscript goes through the same process of proofreading and editing before going to press. No publishing house would dream of sending a raw manuscript to press without subjecting it to scrutiny and a new author’s manuscript will probably be more rigorously scrutinised.
 Although how Stephenie Meyer's epic got through the process remains a complete mystery.

 I was a moderator on a forum after Meyer’s masterpiece hit the fan. It seemed that for months after every other piece for critique was devoted to bloody vampires, mostly by teens and twenty something’s, each convinced that they had hit the jackpot. Who was I to argue, hadn't Stephenie shown them the way?


----------



## EmmaSohan (Apr 16, 2015)

Sam said:


> Not solely, no, but if they have one hundred great stories with shoddy writing, and one hundred great stories with competent writing, which hundred do you think they'll choose?
> 
> Having good fundamentals tells a publisher that the person cares about their craft; has pride in their work; does not believe that someone else will come along and tidy up their crap.



As far as I can tell, "Allen was a young man, and an old one." is not grammatically correct. ppsage said it shouldn't have the comma, and I agree. Is this what you mean when you say having good fundamentals -- know that sentence is not grammatically correct? It's from Clancy, with the name changed. Same for "That's one small step for (a) man, one giant step for mankind." Right?

Then you have putting the apostrophe on the right side of the s when it isn't tricky. If you get that wrong, you are going to look amateurish. Right?

So I don't know what you mean by the fundamentals.


----------



## aj47 (Apr 17, 2015)

Schrody said:


> For years - actually, all my writing life I wrote dialogues like this:
> 
> 
> - Hey. - she said with a smile.
> ...



"Hey!' she said, smiling. "What's my next line?"


----------

