Fragment

[2ndchance]

So, a question which - I hope - will create some debate.

Dialogue and fragmented sentences.
For example:

‘Is that right.’

‘Yeah right.’

‘Might do.’

‘Might.’

Two east-end (London) guys could have a long conversation using a lot of fragmented questions and answers.

Okay now and then? All the time? Too much will be too much.

Just curious

 

[Cathbad]

I believe that dialogue should be done like people speak, and to hell with correct grammar! When writing in first person, all the text should be written in exactly the same manner in which the POV Character speaks.

People speak in sentence fragments. One rarely goes up to a buddy and says, "How are you doing today, my fine friend?" We say things like, "Hey." "Whassup?" "Yo!".

Dialogue that follows all the rules of grammar tends to become unbelievable. People just don't speak to each other that way.

 

[R.T James]

There was a debate on this even during the old days. I found a piece awhile back a writer wrote to prove to an over zealous editor that he was in fact an imbecile.

The writer was getting enraged by the editor making everything grammatically correct even in the dialogue.

So he wrote a piece in third person involving a narrator and three characters. A couple and a homeless beggar.

Everything was in queens English. You could not understand a damn thing. You could not tell the difference between who was speaking.

Write what you need too to convey the story. Fragments are part of vernacular, and story telling has its routes in vernacular. If anybody disagrees with me look at oral history and come back to me.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Basically we need to keep up with who says what, stay immersed, and it be interesting.

Clear speech tags, some 'beats' (actions) to keep us immersed, and a point to having the conversation....

 

[Stephen Palmer]

You need a speech identifier at least once every four lines, otherwise the brain can't keep up with who's saying what.

 

[2ndchance]

Stephen, that's a very good point, and one easily missed as the author. You get sucked into the conversation, which is in your head, and you know who is saying what. Reading back, or getting someone else to read back, will pick up these points - lost points.

 

[2ndchance]

RT, great point. If everything was in Queens, every book would read like a manual. So, to fix your car you need to...

ABC _ XYZ. sometimes, the Z comes before the Q or you even miss the...

We'd all lose our hard fought for voice.

 

[Kylara]

Less of a problem in dialogue than in prose, as long as it's in keeping with the character and the PoV. It only becomes problematic if meaning is lost in the dialogue.

 

[R.T James]

This is going to sound utterly absurd, but here's a joke my ex and I used to do to determine if dialogue was distinguishable between characters.

I call it the bob test. Change anything used to tell it's a different character to Bob. See if you can tell alone by dialogue if the characters are different.

Okay why such an absurd idea? Because people talk differently and have different speech patterns . This is a fact.

How many times have we said in our live times, "Yeah that sure sounds like something (insert name) would say."

People tend to get hung up or use certain words constantly like a broken record. You might have one character always swearing or using a light swear.

"Yeah well it means well but thing's gone to hell," Bob said to Bob lighting up a fag.

Bob grabbed his temple and groaned. "Look, I get that but just because she acts that way-"

"It's a load'a bollocks yeah hear? She's-"

"Playing me like a fiddle..."--Bob sighed pushing back his hair--"Yeah, yeah, Yes I get it. I know your opinion of the foul witch Bob.You don't have to tell me, again!"

"See I'm just worried about yeah mate. She got yeah by right by the bollocks. Just right there. You see right there mate. I think yeah screwed."


I hope my hastily and crappily written example proves a point. Two people never sound the same unless the culture mandates it.

Just walk around go to a store and buy a beef stick, a slushie, something and listen to people ramble on and on about things. You'll see how fragmented and the same sentences of people are.

A friend once told me, "You write how you talk, it's crazy." And I took that as such a compliment. (Well except I do have a stutter so if I repeat the same word fifteen times in row while making a post please let me know immediately.)

Look for flow and organic. Look for the natural. You can put a lot of emphasis with a few words. Action beats help.

"Yeah." Bob frowned.

"Yeah?" Bob said reaching into his pocket.

"Yeah!?" Bob snarled as he broke the beer bottle against table.

"Ye-yeah?" Bob gulped as she traced his collar with her hand.


I am not the best with grammar. Though I feel it's more a issue of using the proper punctuation than grammar. Many people disagree with me. FOR ALL MUST BE THE SAME AND WRITTEN IN FLAWLESS QUEENS ENGLISH WITH NO DETAILS AND EVERYTHING MUST BE KNOWN. Sorry had a flashback to another writere forum that did waaaay more harm than good.

 

[The Storyteller]

I think pretty much everyone is saying it, but yes, fragments in speech should be acceptable because it's realistic. I think you could push it too far, as the dialogue should still be a. interested, b. not confusing, and c. have a point/further the plot. If we had a page of fragmented speech in which it was hard to follow who was talking, or nothing much really happened, or that felt dull/repetitive, then that would be doing more harm than good. But that goes for non-fragmented speech as well. So long as the dialogue still accomplishes the things we are all looking to accomplish in our writing, the use of fragments should be a non-issue.

As you said, it's important for each person to talk according to their character. For some, that means they will never use a fragment, while for another, it may be fragments and poor grammar all the time.

 

[2ndchance]

The StoryT,

One of the first things I learnt was to take the reader somewhere. Or it's just drivel, driven or otherwise - cut it...

Some do indeed never allow their guard down - old school education - and will always avoid fragmented sentences. Unlike moi'

RTJ,

Love the bob bob idea. Such a great way to see and think about it.

Dare I mention colloquialism's... Part of your literary voice or not? Too much is too much?

Then we have speech patterns such as Cockney - Geordie - Scouse and so on.

'O-right darlin', howz ya doin'.'

Set the tone and go back ta propa english or keep the tone, 'I only told ya' ta' blow the bluddie daws off.'

I also believe that characterful dialogue can show the reader a little about the individual.

Hmmm

 

[R.T James]

I say your in an agreement with me.

I've seen colloqiusms used nicely. I've always purposely written to be absolutely horrible and hard to grasp. I believe personally it depends on the story.

Does it fit? Does it hinder? Does it add to the experience in some way ask people to read it and see what they think. Worse case you change it. Unless they hunt you down and try to kill you. Then you know your writing was really bad.

 

[2ndchance]

Well JT,

I do like a Coll' before they are all gone, appropriately. And, going by the feedback from my first novel, I obviously use them in a good way. I also think you can use certain - incorrectly spelled words - to link two halves of a story.
By example, Rebecca's mum uses the word anyways, and so does Meredith in 1853. To know the significance of that, said reader would have to read R hehe... I tried Coll's and 'stitches' such as anyways to see how the reader would respond. The problem - a small one - is now working - tirelessly - on Rebecca Box Four, how many more rules can I break ;-)

I also like winks of the eye, to certain people in your life - that have helped your story line, unwittingly or not. Is he talking about me?

Gotta be good or they'll come looking for ya wiv a poison tongue.