Forum: Author Hangout

Why do you have a dialogue tag? To let the reader know who's speaking. So which is the most important word -- John or said?

That's why I was asking. I don't know why she kept doing it (only two times in the first chapter, but I know she did more in the others too). As I said, I suspect it's because, with minor characters, it doesn't really matter who's speaking, just that someone said the statement (ex: "Get Down!" shouted the bank guard.").

Now that so much time has passed, and I'm rethinking her advice, I really don't want to open a can of worms by asking. As for whether "said he" is any more visible than "he said", I simply don't know. I've never understood how they determined it. I've never seen any scientific studies documenting whether people notice "said" or not, it's just a canard repeated by publishing execs. I doubt that those who believe "said" is invisible ever stopped to consider this newest twist, simply assuming that "said" is always invisible.

ex: "Get Down!" shouted the bank guard."

In that example, "shouted" is definitely not invisible. I would probably have done it her way in that case.

The litmus test -- what is more important comes first. In this case, "shouted" is more important. The verb "shouted" it more than a dialogue tag. It's a rather strong verb.

In that example, "shouted" is definitely not invisible. I would probably have done it her way in that case.

That was a made-up example, here are some the editor used (i.e. added to my story):

"Good. You're here," said a dark-haired woman as Em walked into the Commissioner's office suite.

"I don't know about the where or the what, but the who would be me," said a voice behind him.

And an exception to my guess about only using it for minor characters, this example features the main character:

"Okay, so far the evidence supports our position," said Em.

As I said, I can't see either rhythm nor reason to her use of this phrasing, so I don't understand why she uses it.

@rustyken

I see the issue a little differently as to whether 'said' comes before the speaker or after. To me if the sentence leads with the speaker then 'said' is placed just before the words spoken. If it is after the spoken words then I think 'said' should come before the speaker.

Sorry, Rusty Ken, but I'm having trouble picturing what you're suggesting. Could you supply some examples?

Edit: Sorry, the middle example was my own creation. I used it to emphasis the "who, what and where", leaving who was speaking as a surprise for the following sentence.

As for the two examples there is a difference to that simple example above. Both have longer descriptors "said a dark haired woman" and "said a voice behind him"

Both sound good but if the verb were behind the adjective and noun/name then it could be overwhelmed by them.

Thanks, Sejintenej, that's the explanation I was looking for all along. That never even occurred to me. It's also likely to affect how I write going forward.

Update: Went back and checked. Sorry, Sejintenej, but that's not the case. She seems to use in indiscriminately, with or without additional text. She also uses it more in certain chapters and rarely in others. So I still can't figure out what was driving its usage.

To me "said [name or pronoun]" sounds archaic and "[name or pronoun] said" sounds natural.

Again, I have no clue why she chose that form (which was why I posted the question, trying to wrap my mind around it), but she didn't do it often. Generally, there would be a couple in each chapter, with dozens (close to a hundred, I'm guessing) "Said" usages.

I guess it's a style thing. I prefer "he said" to "said he" just as I prefer it after the dialogue than in the front (not always, btw).

By the way, this editor does way more attribution than I normally do. Even with only two people talking, she'll list each speaker by name each time, rather than allowing the discussion to unfold in it's own time.

I don't agree with that. I try to avoid dialogue attributions as much as possible. I like the reader to concentrate on what's being said -- to hear only the dialogue. If the two-way dialogue goes on for a while, I do throw in a "John said" just to remind the reader who's speaking (or do it with action).

I don't agree with that. I try to avoid dialogue attributions as much as possible. I like the reader to concentrate on what's being said -- to hear only the dialogue. If the two-way dialogue goes on for a while, I do throw in a "John said" just to remind the reader who's speaking (or do it with action).

That's what I've always done. Just as I try not to constantly repeat the same name, over and over again, substituting their role ("her lover", or "his wife"), in order to mix it up occasionally. She claims to work with a lot of well-respected authors (I checked her credits), so I'm assuming these are accepted practices, but it seems counter-intuitive and doesn't follow what most sources say to do.

Still, she does it in such a way as it doesn't slow down the reading or stand out, so I went along with what she chose.

Still, she does it in such a way as it doesn't slow down the reading or stand out

That's the key.