# Attributions and Dialogue Flow



## InkwellMachine (Mar 10, 2014)

I'd like to keep this thread direct and simple:

*1* - Am I wrong or is it extremely uncomfortable to imagine the narrator of an audiobook trying to read dialogue that has no attributions or beats? It's like a constant, incessant outpouring of conversation. It doesn't flow right. Bearing this perspective in mind, how many times in a row do you think it's okay to just use quotation marks without a beat or an attribution to pace things?

*2* - If we have a character named Mark, why does it seem to be the standard to say "Mark said" when writing attributions as opposed to "said Mark"? They're both correct. I understand that you wouldn't say "threw Mark the ball," but if the purpose of the attribution is to invisibly indicate who the text between the most recent quotes belongs to, doesn't it make more aesthetic sense to tuck the unimportant "said" between the dialogue and the attribution? (a comparison, for your consideration: _"Doesn't matter," said Mark, tossing the ball back into the basket._ [vs.] _"Doesn't matter," Mark said, tossing the ball back into the basket._)

*3* - Finally, I understand the practical uses for beats in dialogue. It's a clever way to combine an attribution into an action to keep up the flow of the dialogue. But what if you've got too many lines of dialogue and too few actions to pace them? Do you think it's okay to include arbitrary actions to avoid making your dialogue tedious to read? I've been curious about this one.

Thanks.


----------



## Bishop (Mar 10, 2014)

1) Once. My unattributed dialogue looks like this:

Joseph laughed, "You really think that's going to work?"

"I don't know," Sarah said, "Is it?"

"No, it's not."

Sarah sighed. "Fine... at least you understand," she said.

2) See above. I use "Sarah said," just because when it says "said Sarah" I often hear Yoda narrating it. I understand it's as correct, it just seems dated.

3) In place of action between dialogue, I sometimes use facial expressions where applicable. But there's really nothing wrong with a lot of dialogue. It can say a lot more about your characters than the narration can many times.

Bishop


----------



## Riptide (Mar 10, 2014)

I don't really get the problem here. I've done both so many times I just pick which ever one feels right when I'm writing


----------



## spartan928 (Mar 10, 2014)

1. I feel this is a stylistic choice, but I tend to break things after half a dozen exchanges or so. But again, I don't follow any hard lines, it's kind of a feel thing.

2. I almost always use "said Mark" if it's just a dialogue tag. If there is some action or something more to it I tend towards "Mark said", For example;

 "Doesn't matter", Mark said as he hurled the ball toward the basket. 

I don't know how correct that is, just how it comes out for me often.

3. I tend to think of it this way; do people stand, sit or whatever and the only thing that happens is they look at each other and volley lines of speech? That never happens in real life. Conversation is always alive in ways apart from the words spoken, and I think it's important to sprinkle that stuff in there to bring the conversation to life. Thoughts of characters, pauses, non-verbal communication that adds to the dialogue, or even atmospheric things that can break up the dialogue to give the story some balance and rhythm or paint a broader picture in the mind of the reader are important so I make an effort to include that without going overboard.


----------



## j.w.olson (Mar 10, 2014)

1. Two or three times, at most, unless there are special circumstances.

2. "Said Mark" and "Mark said" both sound right to me. What I've been taught, though, is to imagine it as "he said" and "said he" if you want help realizing how archaic one of them sounds.

3. Yes, keep dialogue grounded in reality.


----------



## spartan928 (Mar 10, 2014)

j.w.olson said:


> 1.
> 
> 2. "Said Mark" and "Mark said" both sound right to me. What I've been taught, though, is to imagine it as "he said" and "said he" if you want help realizing how archaic one of them sounds.



That's interesting, I favor "he said" or "she said" when using that exact tag but with a specific name or title I almost always write it "said Mark" or "said Sally".


----------



## j.w.olson (Mar 10, 2014)

spartan928 said:


> That's interesting, I favor "he said" or "she said" when using that exact tag but with a specific name or title I almost always write it "said Mark" or "said Sally".



Fair enough, but that's coming from someone with a Yoda quote as a signature.  
In all seriousness, I used to be the same way. I've changed, though, over time.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Mar 10, 2014)

InkwellMachine said:


> *1* how many times in a row do you think it's okay to just use quotation marks without a beat or an attribution to pace things?


Probably around 4-5 lines of dialogue, usually. The main issues are a) how long can you expect the reader to tell who's speaking without having to go back and remember, and b) you start to lose atmosphere; feels like reading a script if there's too much.



> *2* - If we have a character named Mark, why does it seem to be the standard to say "Mark said" when writing attributions as opposed to "said Mark"?


Subject-verb is the more common sentence construction in English, is all. Inversion is allowed in some situations but it feels a bit more formal.



> 3 - what if you've got too many lines of dialogue and too few actions to pace them? Do you think it's okay to include arbitrary actions to avoid making your dialogue tedious to read?


_Arbitrary_ actions? No. Actions that tell us something about the character (thoughts, feelings, background) that the dialogue can't? Yes.


----------



## Kyle R (Mar 10, 2014)

I agree with Lasm. You shouldn't include "arbitrary" actions just for the sake of including a beat.

Better to include the actually movement as it occurs. And likely, there's movement of some sort, otherwise you just have what is called a "talking heads" trope, which is when there's dialogue but nothing else happening.






(Bill Watterson poking fun at the "talking heads" trend)

The best way, for me, to avoid this problem is to make sure every scene has a physical goal and/or purpose. 

Either your characters are trying to get onto a moving train, or Susan is trying to fold the laundry while Carl keeps yanking the clothes back out of the hamper. 

There should be some sort of physical _activity_ your characters are involved with to keep things moving.

This also gave birth to a technique that's called, among other aliases, the _Pope in the Pool_ technique. It refers to a scene from a movie when a character (in this case, the Pope) was being told information that was vital to the story. In order to avoid it being a "talking heads" scene, the screenwriters decided to have the Pope in a swimming pool, doing laps.

This activity gave the necessary movement and physical beats needed to avoid pure back-and-forth dialogue, which, if handled incorrectly, can simply be boring.

So, my advice: make sure there's a physical purpose to each scene and use that action to keep the dialogue bouncing around with proper beats.

:encouragement:


----------



## spartan928 (Mar 10, 2014)

j.w.olson said:


> Fair enough, but that's coming from someone with a Yoda quote as a signature.
> In all seriousness, I used to be the same way. I've changed, though, over time.



Ha ha, you got me there. That's why I keep coming here, learn something new all the time.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Mar 10, 2014)

From my perspective the 'said he' method is incorrect.  Now the fact that it has been used a lot over the years obviously has more clout than any grammatical rule but.....I never use it.  

Here's why.
The English language (as I teach my students) is nothing like Mathematics.  The order of the factors DOES alter the final product.  As such English is a language based on positions.  

First position in a sentence is usually held by a noun which is the Subject of the phrase.
The second position is the verb.
The third position is often the object.  
The role of the subject is to carry out the action of the verb.
The verb is the action.
The object receives the action of the verb.

Said he is just WRONG in my book.
It's like Tarzan Talk.
Me tell She.  (which should be I told her)  

Although I am yet to attempt a Detective novel, my influence in this area is Robert B. Parker.  I read 50 or so of his novels over the course of a winter.  After the first three or four I realized that EVERY DIALOGE TAG WAS HE SAID.  HAWK SAID.  SUSAN SAID. I SAID.  SHE SAID.  No bloody variations for 50 novels.  Not even a he said as he placed his pistol on the ground.  NADA.  

Economy.  There are other better ways to do it so why mess around and get yourself into trouble.  
The Dialogue attritute is like politics.  Get too funky with it and you can pretty much guarantee that half the people are going to be against you.  

David Gordon Burke

PS.  Here's a file I have deep on my hard drive.  Other possibilities for 'SAY'  
I use about 10 of them regularly.  Say still gets the massive majority.  Tell, ask and reply or answer comes in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th.  The rest of them migh get some play occasionally.  If it's a confession I will use confess.  If they are yelling I might say yell or scream.  Otherwise it's SAY as in He said.  

Other words for said in alphabetic order
•Accepted, Accused, Acknowledged, Admitted, Advertised, Affirm, Agonized, Agreed, Alleged, Announced, Answered, Appealed, Apply for, Arranged, Articulated, Asked, Asserted, Asseverate, Assumed, Assured, Attract, Aver, Avow,
•Barked, Bawl, Bawled, Beamed, Beckoned, Begged, Bellowed, Beseeched, Blubbered, Blurted, Bossed, Breathed, Broadcast,
•Cajole, Called, Carped, Cautioned, Censured, Chimed in, Choked, Chortled, Chuckled, Circulate, Claim, Comforted, Conceded, Concurred, Condemned, Confer, Confessed, Confided, Confirm, Consoled, Contend, Continued, Crave, Cried out, Criticized, Croaked, Crooned, Crowed,
•Declared, Defend, Demanded, Denote, Dictated, Disclosed, Disposed, Disseminate, Distribute, Divulged, Drawled,
•Emitted, Empathized, Encourage, Encouraged, Entreated, Exact, Exclaimed, Explained, Exposed,
•Faltered, Finished, Fumed,
•Gawped, Get out, Giggled, Given, Glowered, Grieved, Grinned, Groan, Groaned, Growled, Grumbled,
•Handed on, Held, Hesitated, Hinted, Hissed, Hollered, Howled,
•Impart, Implied, Implored, Importune, Inclined, Indicate, Informed, Inquired, Insisted, Interjected, Invited,
•Jabbered, Joked, Justified,
•Keened,
•Lamented, Laughed, Leered, Lilted,
•Maintained, Make known, Make public, Marked, Mewled, Mimicked, Moaned, Mocked, Mourned, Murmured, Mused
•Necessitated, Needed, Noted,
•Observed, Offered, Ordered,
•Passed on, Pleaded, Postulated, Preached, Premised, Presented, Presupposed, Proclaimed, Prodded, Professed, Proffered, Promised, Promulgated, Proposed, Protested, Provoked, Publicized, Published, Puled, Put forth, Put out,
•Quaked, Queried, Quipped, Quivered, Quizzed, Quoted,
•Raged, Ranted, Reckoned that, Rejoiced, Rejoined, Released, Remarked, Remonstrated, Repeated, Replied, Reprimanded, Requested, Required, Requisition, Retorted, Revealed, Roared,
•Said, Sang, Scoffed, Scolded, Seethed, Sent on, Settled, Shared, Shed tears, Shouted, Shrieked, Shrugged, Shuddered, Snarled, Snivelled, Sobbed, Solicited, Sought, Specified, Spluttered, Spread, Stammered, Stated, Stuttered, Stressed, Suggested, Supposed, Swore,
•Taunted, Teased, Testified, Thundered, Ticked off, Told, Told off, Tore a strip off, Touted, Trailed off, Transferred, Transmitted, Trembled, Trumpeted,
•Understood, Undertook, Upbraided, Uttered,
•Verified, Vociferated, Voiced, Vouched for, Vouchsafe,
•Wailed, Wanted, Warned, Weep, Went on. Wept, Wheedle, Whimpered, Whined, Whispered,
•Yawped, Yelled, Yelped,Yowled


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Mar 10, 2014)

The grammatical rule is that "said he" is correct. This is called a quotative inversion of subject and verb. English word order is not totally fixed as you seem to think.



			
				DGB said:
			
		

> Me tell She. (which should be I told her)



This isn't a case of subject-verb inversion (or one where that would be admissible) but of your switching subject pronoun for object pronoun and vice versa.


----------



## InkwellMachine (Mar 10, 2014)

> First position in a sentence is usually held by a noun which is the Subject of the phrase.
> The second position is the verb.
> The third position is often the object.
> The role of the subject is to carry out the action of the verb.
> ...


But if the dialogue comes before the attribution, there's already an involuntary reordering. 

In the model you set up (subject, verb, object upon which the subject acts using the verb), dialogue should read: _Mark said "Hello baby,"_ but what you really seem to mean is that dialogue should read: _"Hello baby," Mark said_, which is actually ordered: object upon which the subject acts using the verb, subject, verb. 

Following this model, the phrasing for any other sentence would be rather awkward. You'd effectively be writing "the ball Mark threw," as opposed to "Mark threw the ball." 

This is still a problem when writing "said Mark" though, because that's structured: object, verb, subject. Using that structure, the example sentence I used would read "The ball threw Mark."

So it really comes down to aesthetics, because if you're putting the dialogue before the attribution, you're already structuring your sentence weird. Since attributions are supposed to be invisible, I submit that "said Mark" would be less disruptive than "Mark said," because that's a complete inversion of the typical sentence structure, where "Mark said" is a scramble with the subject in the middle instead of the verb. This does not apply to situations that do not use names. 

"Said he" will always be more jarring than "He said." But if you're using "he" instead of a name, you might not really need the attribution to begin with. That has more use in terms of beats, and I'm only really talking about attributions here.


----------



## Morkonan (Mar 11, 2014)

InkwellMachine said:


> I'd like to keep this thread direct and simple:
> 
> *1* - Am I wrong or is it extremely uncomfortable to imagine the narrator of an audiobook trying to read dialogue that has no attributions or beats? It's like a constant, incessant outpouring of conversation. It doesn't flow right. Bearing this perspective in mind, how many times in a row do you think it's okay to just use quotation marks without a beat or an attribution to pace things?



I used to listen to books on CD when traveling. I listened to quite a few. I never heard the narrators have any problems with dialogue, attributions or no, and it didn't seem incessant. It just "is." As far as when to use attributions, use them when necessary to guide the Reader, for one. You don't want the Reader getting confused about who is saying what to whom. After that, it's Style. Some authors don't use many attributions at all, some use a great deal. But, in the end, it's really either there in order to keep the Reader on track or added for effect. - "," Julius screamed." "," intoned Brutus."

*



			2
		
Click to expand...

*


> - If we have a character named Mark, why does it seem to be the standard to say "Mark said" when writing attributions as opposed to "said Mark"? They're both correct. I understand that you wouldn't say "threw Mark the ball," but if the purpose of the attribution is to invisibly indicate who the text between the most recent quotes belongs to, doesn't it make more aesthetic sense to tuck the unimportant "said" between the dialogue and the attribution? (a comparison, for your consideration: _"Doesn't matter," said Mark, tossing the ball back into the basket._ [vs.] _"Doesn't matter," Mark said, tossing the ball back into the basket._)



I haven't really noticed that. But, it could also serve as a nice change-up, spicing up the reading a bit. But, I wouldn't mix it in regularly with other attributions. The sentences you exampled are good choices for that sort of change, if you've been favoring one attribution style over another in other dialogue pieces.

*



			3
		
Click to expand...

*


> - Finally, I understand the practical uses for beats in dialogue. It's a clever way to combine an attribution into an action to keep up the flow of the dialogue. But what if you've got too many lines of dialogue and too few actions to pace them? Do you think it's okay to include arbitrary actions to avoid making your dialogue tedious to read? I've been curious about this one.Thanks.



In my opinion, only if it helps to improve the scene and, if so, then no character actions would be arbitrary. Would a reluctant boss, who is forced to fire their long-time secretary, just drone on and on about everything under the sun before firing her? Or, would there be moments when his hesitation was visibly evident or even needed to be? Would he quietly sit after some soliloquy and push some papers around his desk, staring at nothing until he worked up the courage to say the rest of the words? Maybe he would get up and pace, trying to escape from the dilemma while caged in his office? Probably so. In that case, you're making use of the break to describe a fuller picture of the exchange and adding a glimpse into the veiled thoughts of the character.

There's a writer that rarely uses attributions and breaks in one of his works. As a result, conversations come in bursts. It can be confusing as to who is saying what. But, it's not unmanageable and it's somewhat appropriate for the story, given its subject. But, when there is an occasion to have what amounts to "regular" dialogue, usually during a crisis, it stands out very well.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Mar 11, 2014)

David Gordon Burke said:


> From my perspective the 'said he' method is incorrect.
> 
> Said he is just WRONG in my book.



The 'essential' point of my post was that 'I don't use it, I don't like it and as I said... IN MY BOOK it's all wrong.  A discourse on why it is grammatically correct isn't going to change my position on it.  Thanks however.

I think the paradox of the Writer's forum is that we have a ton of people, some well read, some not so much, some well educated, many in the process, others self taught and within that diverse world there are a few trends and a lot of contradictions.  

The vast majority here (from my perspective) seem to want to write the blockbuster bestselling novel.  (I base that opinion on the prevalent genres - seems like a lot of horror, sci-fi and fantasy - very little literary fiction) Hence a commercial take on the art of writing. 
So which one is going to fall into the 'commercial' realm? He said or said he.
How do you want your new Sci-fi intergalactic epic to read?  
Are you going to take your cues from the writing style prevalent on the shelves of your local bookstore today or are you going to develop your style based on everything that was ever relevant since the first printed, published works?

What if you are writing a western novel or a period piece?  In both cases you would be writing a Modern Western Novel or a Modern Period Piece.  (That is unless you have a time machine in which case.....give me a call)  

So while the dialogue itself might be 'period' and full of tasty bits of timely idiomatic frases or vocabulary, the structure of the book itself, the attributions and set-up would need to (or should be if you have a mind to sucess) written with TODAY's reader in mind.  

So to back up my opinions (yeah, I know, what a novel thought) I jump onto google and search Dialogue Attributions.  What I find are hundreds of pages that are clearly against using anything other than SAID and especially against adding extra info into the attribute via adverbs.  I surf and surf and surf but I find nothing about reversing the order of attribute and subject.  I don't even see one single example of it on the 9 or 10 pages I investigate.

That alone should tell you all you need to know.  

David Gordon Burke
PS.  Who are you reading that does reverse the attribute and the subject.  I'd be interested to see if I can keep down my lunch while reading it.


----------



## Kevin (Mar 11, 2014)

"In my book" - did you mean in your metaphorical set of parameters for life, your 'life's rulebook', or, your actual book(the one you're writing or have written)?  If it is the latter, I take it that you might possibly consider the tag order verb-pronoun/name in another written work.


----------



## InkwellMachine (Mar 11, 2014)

Your point about writing for the market is very valid. Worth considering that people should stick to what they understand.

But if you'll give the last part of my previous post a twice-over, you'll see that I'm referring very specifically to attributions that use a Character's name. Perhaps I should have been more specific in that the name must follow exactly after the word "said" for me to phrase things that way. But I do think I made it fairly clear that I'm not writing "period dialogue" here and this is the one place my attributions might differ from any other writer's.

As for "reversing the order of attribute and subject" (object and subject) I was only responding to the model you presented in your post. Very clearly, a sentence structured "'hello bay,' Mark said" (object, subject, verb) is what you're advocating while simulntaneously saying that the proper structure of a sentence is subject, verb, object. I was only saying that I swap the positions of the verb and the object in this case to avoid getting the object in the middle (where it wouldn't be if structured "correctly").

No venom intended here.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Mar 11, 2014)

Kevin said:


> "In my book" - did you mean in your metaphorical set of parameters for life, your 'life's rulebook', or, your actual book(the one you're writing or have written)? If it is the latter, I take it that you might possibly consider the tag order verb-pronoun/name in another written work.



The first option - a parameter for writing and reading.  
As far as accepting the tag order verb-pronound etc. etc. in another written work....it depends on the style, era and genre as to whether it works or not.  It could be that when the particular attribute order that we are discussing is combined with other grammatical elements, together they create a particular style reminicent of an era and the combination works.  

Outside of that genre or era and as an individual element, the verb before subject attribute is IMHO like an elephant in the room.

David Gordon Burke


----------

