Semi colons in speech/ direct thoughts

[HareBrain]

In my own examples, I might change no. 2 to full-stop (am I the only person who's never going to call them periods?) and nos. 3 and 4 to dashes.

But I would fight almost to the death to keep no. 1 a semi-colon. Somehow, for me, it causes a kind of "tripping" between the first and second parts of the sentence, a kind of fortuitous stumbling or "falling forwards", if that makes any sense, and no other punctuation mark would have the exact same effect.

(I realise I have probably made myself seem to possess all the qualities of degenerate fin-de-siecle aesthete-ish limp-wristed transvestism attributed to semi-colons in FH's wiki quotes.)

 

[allmywires]

But I would fight almost to the death to keep no. 1 a semi-colon. Somehow, for me, it causes a kind of "tripping" between the first and second parts of the sentence, a kind of fortuitous stumbling or "falling forwards", if that makes any sense, and no other punctuation mark would have the exact same effect.

That was the one I struggled to find an acceptable-sounding alternative with so I think I understand you. Doesn't make it right though!!

 

[Jo Zebedee]

"

Ok, so I am sad, but I know King prides himself on his range of writing tools, and I went and dug out King's Under the Dome, which is relatively recent. On page one he had a semi colon ( just for Mouse , ) on page two he has a double semi colon, and this pattern continues for the first five pages. Then i stopped, knowing i will read it again now.

 

[Fishbowl Helmet]

Ok, so I am sad, but I know King prides himself on his range of writing tools, and I went and dug out King's Under the Dome, which is relatively recent. On page one he had a semi colon ( just for Mouse , ) on page two he has a double semi colon, and this pattern continues for the first five pages. Then i stopped, knowing i will read it again now.

Yeah, like I said, I thought it was funny. I don't think they work in dialogue, but I'm nowhere near as militant as the bit I quoted.

 

[Warren_Paul]

Sorry, to give an example, one of the reasons I use so many is that Hex has battered the term I thought out of me, but in third it isn't as easy to link internal thoughts to action as in her breathy first style. Therefore I join actions to the linked internal thought with semis. A period or comma can't do that.

It's a personal preference thing, and I disagree that you can't do the same with a period. But my opinion would be that you don't need to join an action to a thought as one sentence. The thought being in its own sentence following the action after a period has the same effect as far as I'm concerned. But that's the way we read sentences having an influence on how we write them.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

It's absolutely a US thing. I think we view them as slightly antiquated and stuffy.

I disagree. I use semicolons all the time. (I am, however, immensely antiquated, and possibly stuffy, too.) Taking some books by other American fantasy writers down from my shelves and checking, I find that most of them do use semicolons (although not as many of them as I do).

I also use long dashes. Lots of long dashes. I would never use one as an alternative to a semicolon; dashes mean something else entirely.

 

[AMB]

‘I understand; it’s sacred. But there’s nowhere private here for you to go.’

‘She hates magic; she’s told me so, more than once.’

‘The Mother is life; she can’t be dead.’

‘I can’t leave Tashi for that long; this morning was bad enough.’

So HB's examples are on this page too.

I can't see 2 as a full stop; It feels to stilted. Nor can I see it as a comma because I'd read the "she's told me so" as being bracketed, and that wouldn't make sense. If not a semicolon, it would have to be a long dash for me. 3 and 4 could possibly get away with commas, though I prefer them as they are, and I agree 1 can't be anything else.

Can you tell which camp I fall into on this one?

 

[Fishbowl Helmet]

Sorry, to give an example, one of the reasons I use so many is that Hex has battered the term I thought out of me, but in third it isn't as easy to link internal thoughts to action as in her breathy first style. Therefore I join actions to the linked internal thought with semis. A period or comma can't do that.

That seems unbelievably awkward. You know you can use italics to denote thoughts, right? That's actually used in print. So you're saying your rather do something like:

I'm too old for this ****; John shot his partner in the face.

Where the first is meant as an internal thought, or viewpoint character narrative? Rather than:

I'm too old for this ****. John shot his partner in the face.

Or:

I'm too old for this ****, he thought. John shot his partner in the face.

Not a great two sentences, granted.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Yes, I am aware I can use italics, and sometimes do, but they don't do the same thing. And yes, to answer your question, I would go with the first. The full stop in your number 2 seperates the action from the thought, which is what I - deliberately - want to aoid. Having said that, this isn't a great example as the i am too old is not the actual reason for the shot. It would be more like:

I am dead if I don't; John shot his partner in the face.

And i would avoid the last like the plague as it lifts me from his thoughts.

So far not one single beta - and I have had lots!- has told me it reads awkwardly. But then again, each is thought out and worked so that the sentence structure supports the semi colon.

 

[Ursa major]

I must have missed one of your real examples, Springs, i.e. one of the instances where your betas have remained silent. I'll have to work with what you have mentioned:

I am dead if I don't; John shot his partner in the face.

I find it very awkward, and yet I have no qualms about using semicolons in dialogue and thoughts.

The awkwardness I feel comes because the two sentences have very little in common, except that the first gives the reason for the action in the second. Another factor is that the first sentence is in the first person whereas the second is in the third person. (Not that making them both first or third actually helps me here.) This just emphasises that the two sentences are fundamentally different: that there is, for want of a better explanation, a subtle shift in point of view, one with which a mere semicolon** (or comma) cannot cope

But what is wrong with:

I am dead if I don't. John shot his partner in the face.

Having this as a short, two-sentence paragraph, with the first sentence identified as a thought, provides all the connection between the two that's required. The fact that the first is obviously the reason/excuse for the action of the second fully cements the bond.


** - Perhaps a colon might work -

I am dead if I don't: John shot his partner in the face.

- but the full stop (period) does the job far better.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

It's not a good example. This was the example I used last night (and the very fact that it was the only example I could find in half an hour says that I don't do it all that often):

It turned back to Sean and he forced himself to meet its eyes; just because they were aliens didn’t mean they were sinister.

Now, yes, I could go

It turned back to Sean and he forced himself to meet its eyes. Just because they were aliens didn't mean they were sinister.

And it works perfectly well, and is what most people might do.

I prefer the semi, though, because it makes the connection to the alien's eyes - these aliens look like dogs but their eyes are intelligent and wolf like, so shows their alienness - and the thought. It's only a little thing, but it's something I do, and stylistically it works for me, so why not? I think the meaning is clear, either way, and I don't think it's unbelievably awkward. (And, crucially, have been given no feedback to say it was. I do get feedback that I use too many semis, but not in these joined clauses.)

 

[Bowler1]

‘I understand; it’s sacred. But there’s nowhere private here for you to go.’ - Cool.

‘She hates magic; she’s told me so, more than once.’ - to - 'She hates magic... she's told me so, more than once.' - Slows the reader a little more and I think makes it sound like the character is sort of whispering the first three words; so emotional impact.

‘The Mother is life; she can’t be dead.’ - Me, I can't see another way of doing this as the statements feel linked.

‘I can’t leave Tashi for that long; this morning was bad enough.’ - Sorry HB, "and"?

If I was reading all these lines none of them would pull me up or push me out of the writing. Thank you for sharing, HB. My voting 1 & 3 but maybe not 2 & 4.

Ah, the joy of the semi and voting - I clearly need to get out more.

 

[Ursa major]

It turned back to Sean and he forced himself to meet its eyes; just because they were aliens didn’t mean they were sinister.

This is somewhat different. There isn't the subtle change in PoV that I mentioned in my (edited) previous post - and there's no change in tense - so it's far less jarring. Note, though, that this does not include direct thought (which would be in the present tense), merely narration which happens to capture the thought**.


Here are two examples using direct thought, the second one highlighting this with italics:

It turned back to Sean and he forced himself to meet its eyes. Just because they're aliens doesn’t mean they're sinister.

and

It turned back to Sean and he forced himself to meet its eyes. Just because they're aliens doesn’t mean they're sinister.

** - As when one includes questions in the narrative:

Sean shot him there and then. And why not? Only one of them was ever going to get out of this place.

 

[Warren_Paul]

It turned back to Sean and he forced himself to meet its eyes. Just because they were aliens didn't mean they were sinister.

You don't even need to italicize that, and I think it works perfectly fine as:

It turned back to Sean and he forced himself to meet its eyes. Just because they were aliens didn't mean they were sinister.

It's close 3rd narrative, not direct thoughts.

 

[Hex]

Meh. I'm going through a dashes phase and almost none of my characters are sophisticated enough to use semi colons anyway.

I wouldn't use a semi colon like HB's first example but only because it made me twitch. I like the semis in the others.

In a previous incarnation I used semi colons in every sentence.

 

[chrispenycate]

In general conversation in English, I use semicolon concepts in about a quarter of my sentences (I know, I spent some time recording conversations and analysing them).

If this makes me sound academic and boring, that's possibly because I am.

The semicolon is a symbol of a particular form of thought organisation; to use it effectively you need to plan your speech in advance, which not everyone does (or wishes to do).

So using semicolons in dialogue says something about the person who is talking. I can, if necessary, produce live dialogue in iambic pentameter. To do so I will need to talk roughly 15% slower, to prepare the words; I have never attempted this in rhyme, but I imagine a live rap singer could manage. But unless your protagonist is a plainclothes rapper he's more likely to do a minimalist 'run, Spot, run' speech pattern than deliver a prepared diatribe.

 

[nightdreamer]

I have no problem with them, providing the character is one who would use them in the first place. But I also agree with some of the comments that a dash or ellipsis might work better in many instances. There's no "right" way.

Vonnegut was a bit loopy, anyway.

 

[TheDustyZebra]

I don't see why the character would need to know what a semicolon is, in order to use it. It's not as if he's actually stating it out loud as a word. Punctuation is there to add order to words, to make them make proper sense to the reader. If the character doesn't know what a semicolon is, he probably doesn't know what an ellipsis or a long dash is, either, but he probably "uses" them in speech.

That said, I use them myself, and have no problem with them. I also use the ellipsis and the long dash a lot, and occasionally the colon. It just depends on the sentence, and it doesn't matter to me if it's dialogue or not.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I don't see why the character would need to know what a semicolon is, in order to use it. It's not as if he's actually stating it out loud as a word. Punctuation is there to add order to words, to make them make proper sense to the reader. If the character doesn't know what a semicolon is, he probably doesn't know what an ellipsis or a long dash is, either, but he probably "uses" them in speech.

That said, I use them myself, and have no problem with them. I also use the ellipsis and the long dash a lot, and occasionally the colon. It just depends on the sentence, and it doesn't matter to me if it's dialogue or not.

Tdz, tyou, you managed to say what I meant exactly...

 

[Scott R. Forshaw]

I haven't read through anyone else's comments, so please forgive me if I'm being repetitive.

I've read a few books, recently, by Simon R. Green, and this was one of the things I noticed. He used semi-colons during both speech and thought, and my initial reaction was, really? Can you do that?

I'd often thought about it, and wondered whether it was correct or not, so I'd always avoided using it for that very reason: because I was uncertain. Simon, however - an author of just short of fifty published books - must be right, mustn't he?