Semi colons in speech/ direct thoughts

[Fishbowl Helmet]

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.

The difference being that ellipsis are used for pauses in speech. Em dashes for interruptions. So they're actually heard to some degree in someone's speech. If the character pauses, as writers we translate that to an ellipsis, whether the character could point one out or not. So too with the em dash, because they're voiced to some degree.

I see the argument against as a variant of the above. A character who wouldn't speak posh shouldn't have his dialogue written as posh. You wouldn't have a traffic warden speak like an Oxbridge professor, nor would you have a veteran politician speak like a deck hand on a fishing boat.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

But the dialogue doesn't change?

So

"Eh, you - get off that boat. Now!"

Vs

"Eh, you; get off that boat. Now!"

I would say them out loud exactly the same.

So, why would my boatman use one form over the other?

 

[Warren_Paul]

But the question arises, is a semi-colon actually all that posh? I don't really think it is.

It's been given that level of fanciness to it because very few people in the world know how to use them correctly, and so, think that you must have a degree in English to understand how they work. I don't, and I'm pretty sure most of the people that use them in writing don't either.

I agree though that there is a difference between a semi-colon and a dash. Of course there is, otherwise there wouldn't be a need for both of them to exist. I can picture people using semi-colons in conversations, even if they don't even realise that on paper their dialogue would be punctuated with a semi-colon. The semi-colon was invented to translate an act of our subconscious mind, is the way I see it. Almost everybody uses them, in the right situation, they just don't realise it.


@Springs shame on you and that terrible example. I wouldn't use a dash, or a semi-colon in that dialogue. It's definitely just a comma, imo.


Now, HB's example on the other hand: "She hates magic; she’s told me so, more than once." You could get away with a dash without it sounding any different. "She hates magic -- she’s told me so, more than once." Because either way, the explanation that is joined to the statement comes across as an afterthought, which is more likely to create the pause in my mind than the punctuation itself -- the punctuation just lets me know for sure that it is an afterthought.

The boatman's statement to get off the boat isn't an afterthought.

 

[Hex]

The semicolon there makes me shudder, springs, sorry. But I'm a recovering addict and struggling to use them as little as possible, so it's probably that.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

"Eh, you; get off that boat. Now!"

Since "Eh, you" isn't an independent clause, the semicolon shouldn't be there. The only way you could write it without the rest of that sentence would be if it were an exclamation, in which case it would be: "Eh, you! Get off that boat. Now!" Otherwise, you're stuck with one sentence and a comma: "Eh, you, get off that boat. Now!"

I say this as one who adores the semicolon, so you know I don't speak out of prejudice against it.

However, it has occurred to me, as I listen to this discussion about whether semicolons belong in dialogue* or not, that this is one of those areas where we, as writers, allow ourselves to get obsessively, needlessly worried. I am sure that ordinary readers don't notice the difference, and I am betting that editors don't care.

*or thoughts

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Tis ok, i know a hole when I see one, TE and Hex. i think, if they occur naturally, as they would in non dialogue ( and you're quite right, naturally I woud use a !) then they're valid. I shall go put my shovel in the garage.

 

[Ursa major]

If we're going down the road that says that the punctuation of a character's dialogue should reflect their knowledge of punctuation, we're opening the door to a whole lot of deliberately badly punctuated speech.

Besides, it's a somewhat silly aim, except in those cases where it's important to the book/story (e.g. narrators who are young or have, say, mental health issues). While we (sometimes) try to get the narrative as close to the PoV character as possible (particularly in first person), and so try to remove evidence of ourselves as writers from the space between the narration and the reader, we have to recognise that a book/story is always an artificial form, not unmediated reality. Indeed, we might end up making something harder to decipher - say by limiting ourselves to only two sorts of pause (full stops and commas) - and so inadvertently bringing ourselves back into that space between the reader and the story.


Possibly.

 

[Fishbowl Helmet]

However, it has occurred to me, as I listen to this discussion about whether semicolons belong in dialogue* or not, that this is one of those areas where we, as writers, allow ourselves to get obsessively, needlessly worried.

Wholeheartedly agree.

I am sure that ordinary readers don't notice the difference, and I am betting that editors don't care.

Couldn't disagree more. The semicolon is easily the most misunderstood, and misused, punctuation mark in English. I'd argue that most reader don't know what the hell it is, much less what it denotes, or its proper use.

As an editor, I'd say that the story surrounding it had better be good enough to forgive any and all non-standard or confusing uses of spelling, grammar, and punctuation. That said, I'd try my hardest to convince the writer to focus on the story itself and seamlessly communicating with the reader. Anything that gets in the reader's way has to go. Period.

As springs said, if it doesn't change the dialogue, why insist on one rather than the other? That's exactly the point. Why insist on the most easily confused (and confusing) punctuation marks in English when others serve just as well, if not better, and have the added benefit of being more widely understood by the average reader?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Because, used right, it is an effective punctuation mark. And it should be used, if it is right, just like a colon should start a list and a comma closes dialogue before he/she said.

 

[Fishbowl Helmet]

Because, used right, it is an effective punctuation mark. And it should be used, if it is right, just like a colon should start a list and a comma closes dialogue before he/she said.

Absolutely. But look at the disagreement just in this thread among writers who arguably know exactly how to use them right. Now imagine the average reader who arguably doesn't have the first clue about semicolons. Who's the target audience? The reader or other writers?

But you're not just talking about using them properly, you've also mentioned using them to connect thoughts and action. Again, it's a matter of not only communicating effectively with the target audience, but not confusing them as well. It's honestly sounding a lot like a kill your darlings moment, man.

 

[alchemist]

But how will they confused? What possible misdirection could a semi-colon in dialogue cause?

 

[EricWard]

I suggest a slightly less contentious topic. Perhaps politics or religion?

 

[allmywires]

I don't think it's the confusion aspect, it's the slowing of the dialogue aspect. (I'm pretty sure I said this before). To me a semi-colon implies a reasonably long pause but also conversely indicates a sentence or idea that is lengthy and complex. I don't often write lengthy bits of dialogue, so I prefer my punctuation choppy: my pauses are full stops, which a lot of the time could be semicolons, but I prefer the short, sharp shock of a full stop. If I want it to flow I'll use a dash.

I'm quite tired so I hope this makes sense...

 

[Ursa major]

Ah, Eric, so you think some levity is required, do you?

Okay, a question: Are semicolons banned from use in periodicals?






* Expects some in this thread may now be comatose.... *

 

[alchemist]

Yes, we've had enough of it all. It needs to be washed away, perhaps with a semicolonic irrigation?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

But you're not just talking about using them properly, you've also mentioned using them to connect thoughts and action. Again, it's a matter of not only communicating effectively with the target audience, but not confusing them as well. It's honestly sounding a lot like a kill your darlings moment, man.

Woman, cheers. no, i don't think it is a case of that, at all. I think if that had been the case then in all the people who have read my stuff, including two full edits, one of which carried out a line edit of an 80000 word book, some uk readers, some american and several other nationalities in there (I get around ) someone, somewhere, would have said I had got them all wrong. Now, don't get me wrong, I get queries on some of them, but, frankly, more drop comma comments than semicolons, and we all know how subjective commas are.

You have one opinion, which is they should not be used, because they cause confusion, I have another, which is they should be used, and used well. We are polar opposites, but I can say that I find the use only comma and full stop school fragmentary and frustrating. I suspect, in this case, never the twain will meet.

Now, cuppa tea? Something stronger?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Couldn't disagree more. The semicolon is easily the most misunderstood, and misused, punctuation mark in English. I'd argue that most reader don't know what the hell it is, much less what it denotes, or its proper use.

I mean that most readers don't care because they don't notice it's there, or because they don't know the difference between it and a comma. (Or both reasons together.) Which is why, when it comes time to use it, they don't know how. If they were watching how others have done it, they'd have some glimmer of understanding about how to use it themselves. But they haven't, and they don't, so they panic. Until they decide to start writing themselves, it's invisible. Something they go past without a thought.

Which suggests the question: Why use it, if people can't tell the difference? I'd say that we use it in our writing for the readers who do notice the difference, and for our own satisfaction in writing a sentence with the rhythm and weight and emphasis we hear in our heads.

 

[Warren_Paul]

Which suggests the question: Why use it, if people can't tell the difference? I'd say that we use it in our writing for the readers who do notice the difference, and for our own satisfaction in writing a sentence with the rhythm and weight and emphasis we hear in our heads.

I agree. I think all this prim and proper writing, punctuation and grammar is more for our own sakes than the reader. For instance -- and I apologise to Twilight fans out there -- readers on a whole think Stephanie Meyer is a good writer. Most writers would argue differently. The difference is, writers mostly know the difference between proper and improper use of punctuation and grammar. The reader doesn't know, so they think nothing is wrong with it.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

For instance -- and I apologise to Twilight fans out there -- readers on a whole think Stephanie Meyer is a good writer. Most writers would argue differently. The difference is, writers mostly know the difference between proper and improper use of punctuation and grammar. The reader doesn't know, so they think nothing is wrong with it.

Exactly. It depends on the readers we're writing for. If we only want to reach readers who think Twilight is the best thing that ever happened to literature, then we don't need to worry about any of that. If we can get it past the editor, readers won't care. Most readers are interested in two things: the plot and the characters. If we give them the kind of stories they want -- vampires, and doomed love, and all the rest of it -- they don't give a hoot how the story is written. That's why they'll devour books where the writing is mediocre.

But if we want to reach readers who are more discriminating, who pay attention to the language and all the subtleties and nuances, then we have to think about these things. After thinking about them we may all reach different conclusions, but at least we're making our decisions mindfully instead of just scribbling things down.

 

[Culhwch]

As one of the critters who called you out on the whole semi-colon in dialogue thing, springs, it's obvious where I stand. I won't use a semi-colon in dialogue. It just doesn't feel right. Not saying that it's incorrect, mind - there's been enough to and fro on that topic in this thread already.

Reading through the many responses and examples and suggested replacements that have been thrown out, one occurred to me that hasn't been covered. Take HB's examples, for instance:

‘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.’

I think one alternative to the semi-colon in creating that pasue that you're looking for is attribution tags. Consider:

‘I understand,' she said. 'It’s sacred. But there’s nowhere private here for you to go.’

‘She hates magic,' he said. 'She’s told me so, more than once.’

‘The Mother is life,' she said. 'She can’t be dead.’

‘I can’t leave Tashi for that long,' he said. 'This morning was bad enough.’

Of course this is going to be contextual and depend on what attribution and direction was already built around the dialogue (sorry, HB, but I haven't read it), but in my opinion these are viable alternatives and, for mine, flow far better than having the semi-colon in there.