Greetings to my friends and, especially all the authors who have shared their stories here at The Big Closet.
One of my G+ friends shared this link which I thought would be of interest since many of our stories feature internal dialogue where the character has thoughts that aren't shared with other characters and may differ substantially from what they actually say in the story.
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/formattin...
It shared some good thoughts and I may try to check the site again for other tips.
The main methods discussed are italics, quotation marks, and internal dialogue without formatting.
Mignon Fogerty doesn't distinguish between single and double quotation marks, though.
The method I remember learning in the 60's was to use single quotes for thoughts and double quotes for things actually said, so that's probably what I will do in my writing, at least if I'm telling it in first person.
The main story I'm currently working on (I've completed one part but want to flesh out the next two before I start sharing it) is written in third person but with a fair amount of dialogue.
There are a few good links in the article as well.
BTW, I noticed in the September Mixed Tape a recommendation for Eats, Shoots and Leaves. I have that book and it's a fun read with some good tips. Many of us could benefit from being more aware of how punctuation changes the meaning of our writing.
As an example, I noticed last summer a major discussion about whether a mark in the original Declaration of Independence (for the U.S. colonies) was a period or a comma and how that would affect the meaning of that historical document.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/3/what-did-jeff...
All the best to all of you!
Gillian Cairns
Comments
What a Bizarre Argument...
What part of "to secure these rights..." don't they understand? The phrase clearly refers back to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", the rights ("endowed by their creator") that the document just enumerated, no matter what punctuation (if any) comes before the dash that separates it from the previous sentence. (And it IS separate; the dash is in all copies of the document of which I'm aware, including the one attached to their site.)
I can be as talmudic as the next guy, but I don't see anything of substance to argue about here.
Eric
18th century punctuation
Good to hear from you, Eric.
They parsed the language a bit more formally back then, which may be why some people today think freedom of religion has nothing to do with freedom of speech or that the right to keep and bear arms has nothing to do with the militia.
But, I was just using that as an example.
The point of the book, which I think is useful for modern writers, is that where you use punctuation can change the meaning of the words or phrases you write.
Have a good week!
Gillian Cairns
Quotation marks
My understanding is that British and American practice differs on the use of quotation marks. The British, or so I'm led to believe, use single quotation marks for the main quote, and double marks for a quote within a quote. American practice is the reverse. We have authors from both traditions here, so you will see both methods on BC.
I tend to dislike either form of quotation mark for internal thoughts, since, to me, they mark spoken words. Italics work for me, as does the use of an asterisk to set off internal thoughts, as long as the author is consistent.
I agree
Consistency is more important than the specific method used.
I've read a lot of British authors while perusing the TG literature, so I've become more aware of our linguistic differences.
Gillian Cairns