Adverbs (!)

[Teresa Edgerton]

I would prefer this:

"Stop!" I said. "There's a dragon on the line."

Possibly not the best example you could give, because too many exclamation points can be far more distracting than too many adverbs.


I agree with this:

I think the way something is said should be told in context to the action of the narrative.

But the same can be advanced as a reason to avoid overdramatic punctuation.

 

[D_Davis]

Possibly not the best example you could give, because too many exclamation points can be far more distracting than too many adverbs.


I agree with this:



But the same can be advanced as a reason to avoid overdramatic punctuation.

Just keeping it as close to the original as possible, but yes, I agree. One use of a ! and a suddenly per chapter, max!

 

[Anne Lyle]

Possibly not the best example you could give, because too many exclamation points can be far more distracting than too many adverbs.

Exclamation marks shouldn't be used to indicate shouting, but they are legitimate when using the imperative mood.

"Stop! There's a dragon on the line."

The whole thing might be shouted, but only the command merits an exclamation mark. Generally you don't have dialogue with people yelling instructions at one another, so !!! pileups shouldn't be a problem.

At least, that's what I was taught in school (back in the Middle Ages, when Latin was compulsory).

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

They're legitimate in many situations. I use them myself. (Exclamation points, colons, semicolons, ellipses, dashes, adverbs, passive verbs. I will defend any form of punctuation and any part of speech to the death. Well, OK, probably not that far. But in a civil debate I will always argue against their extinction.) But I have seen pile-ups.

 

[Malloriel]

Probably because it's far easier to forbid something outright than to teach when it works well and when it doesn't. You don't need to eliminate adverbs. You should question how useful each one is.

Always aim to use the best word in the best sentence. If that best word is an adverb, use it.

As with so many elements within our chosen genres, questioning what we put into the prose is one of those constantly recurring themes with which we must deal. Whether it be a conlang, exposition about the world you've spent so much time building, exotic names, or, as in this case, the very words we use to express all of these ideas, moderation and justification walk hand in hand to determine how a scene ultimately is built.

I think when it comes right down to it, you have to look at a majority of what you've put in to a section and justify the existence, either of the information or the method of expression. With something as heavy as a conlang, for example, the best advice I've seen is to start with a reasonable number of words to be included (being none), and fight tooth and nail to justify ANY number beyond that initial figure. Alternately, when addressing something like the presence of adverbs (or any other decorative, expressive addition to your basic sentence structure), you're looking at the process of determining the very best way to communicate with the reader. Knowing not just what the scene looks like, feels like, smells like, but what you want the reader to get out of it will help simple up the decision as to which approaches might be most appropriate for that communication.

All of this is the concern of the writer in the editing process, though. First drafts don't have to adhere to the same lines of thought. If you want the character to shout something breathlessly, let him shout it breathlessly. If nothing else, it reminds YOU what feeling the action should convey. Going back over it, you can then take the time to determine if "breathlessly" is the very best way to express the idea, or if a restructuring of the sentence could create a more complete picture in the reader's mind.

 

[seaside]

Out of curiosity, what's a conlang?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Short for "constructed language." A language that's been invented rather than one that's evolved naturally over the millennia.

Fantasy and science fiction writers sometimes invent them to use in their books. Tolkien, on the other hand, started inventing his Elven languages, Sindarin and Quenya, first and then wrote stories to go with them.

 

[Anne Lyle]

All of this is the concern of the writer in the editing process, though. First drafts don't have to adhere to the same lines of thought. If you want the character to shout something breathlessly, let him shout it breathlessly. If nothing else, it reminds YOU what feeling the action should convey. Going back over it, you can then take the time to determine if "breathlessly" is the very best way to express the idea, or if a restructuring of the sentence could create a more complete picture in the reader's mind.

Exactly. I don't worry about adverbs and clumsy phrasing in the first draft, because I'm more concerned about getting the story out of my head and onto the paper/screen. The last thing I need is to come back to a scene weeks or months later and start wondering "did I intend this line of dialogue to be angry or sarcastic"?

 

[Malloriel]

The last thing I need is to come back to a scene weeks or months later and start wondering "did I intend this line of dialogue to be angry or sarcastic"?

Agreed entirely. I take detailed notes of funny conversations for the same reason. My best friend can write down a few key words and remember the rest of the conversation later, but I prefer having all the details in place. The same is true of my writing. When I put it down I may be thinking "he's feeling anxious", but if I don't express that in the prose, then coming back to that section months later with only a "he said" after a statement and few other clues in the surrounding text, I might be left scratching my head, wondering why the section doesn't read properly.

 

[TacticalLoco]

I confess I had to chuckle ironically at your opening line. I mean that in a very good way.
Everyday when I find time to logon Chrons, I see things in a new way.

Before coming to this site, I never guessed how much author dissected their own work. Makes sence though now that I think about it.

HareBrain's statement seems the wisest to me. Meanwhile, I certainly will not be overly worried about anything other how the lines scan.

Of course, that's because I'm not smart enough or trained enough to do anything else.

Oh BTW, and smelled is something done a by a nose, where as smelt is a small fish.

 

[Hex]

I think you can say (in the UK) "I smelt the smelt" or even "the smelt smelt" although obviously you wouldn't, because that would be silly (and confusing).