Why do UK publishers use apostrophes instead of speech marks?

[Brian G Turner]

The other day my daughter complained about why some stories used apostrophes instead of speech marks to denote speech, and had a little rant about it.

I could give no good answer, and the way she described it made the practice seem somewhat ridiculous.

I mean, we all know about the importance of proper punctuation - so why do so many UK publishers avoid double quotation marks for single ones instead?

 

[thaddeus6th]

Your daughter is wise.

I'm perplexed whenever I see that.

 

[HareBrain]

Saves ink?

I've never had a problem with it. It's been standard for decades. Personally, I think it looks neater.

(Also, they're not apostrophes, but single quote marks.)

 

[Ursa major]

First of all, everyone uses single quotes** in some circumstances: those who usually use double quotes for dialogue use single quotes when the dialogue contains quoted speech. So now we know the use of single quotes is quite valid, it isn't so odd to think of using single quotes instead of double quotes (with double quotes reserved for quoted speech within dialogue).


** - They're not apostrophes, although in some fonts they may look like them.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I just find it odd that single quotation marks might be favoured by UK publishers. I seem to recall in school being taught that 'speech marks' were specifically double quotation marks.

 

[Venusian Broon]

Piqued by your comment Brian, I picked up two UK books at random (that are living on my office floor at the moment). One used single and the other double quotation marks for speech.

I have to say I never noticed the single one till this spurred me to actually check. (Perhaps years of reading US SF has damaged me???)

+1 on what Ursa wrote.

 

[Foxbat]

It's been in vogue for quite a few years now (Cormac McCarthy being an example) for some writers not to use any quotation marks at all and seems to be quite prevalant in some modern Scottish writing.
Writing without it leads to some confusion in my opinion so single or double I don't mind as long as there's something there to indicate speech.

 

[Parson]

First of all, everyone uses single quotes** in some circumstances: those who usually use double quotes for dialogue use single quotes when the dialogue contains quoted speech. So now we know the use of single quotes is quite valid, it isn't so odd to think of using single quotes instead of double quotes (with double quotes reserved for quoted speech within dialogue).


** - They're not apostrophes, although in some fonts they may look like them.

But then how do they delineate between dialogue and quoted speech? It seems to me to be an affectation which could sully the meaning in some cases.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

But then how do they delineate between dialogue and quoted speech? It seems to me to be an affectation which could sully the meaning in some cases.

By reversing the process. Most of us in the UK read both ways without struggling or even noticing as Venusian Broom said.

From an entirely practical point of view I find ' much easier to type on a UK keyboard than reaching up for ". My stories use a lot of dialogue because I know it's something i'm good at so stories with ' can be produced quite a bit quicker than ones with ". If I remember rightly they are in different positions on a US keyboard but I could be wrong. (" is above the 2 and ' is under the @ to the right of the L)

 

[Parson]

By reversing the process. Most of us in the UK read both ways without struggling or even noticing as Venusian Broom said.

From an entirely practical point of view I find ' much easier to type on a UK keyboard than reaching up for ". My stories use a lot of dialogue because I know it's something i'm good at so stories with ' can be produced quite a bit quicker than ones with ". If I remember rightly they are in different positions on a US keyboard but I could be wrong. (" is above the 2 and ' is under the @ to the right of the L)

That is sensible, which a keyboard is not, when looked at realistically. (I believe the tale of the original typewriters changing the letters around so that the typing would be slower.) But I am really flummoxed to discover that there are differences between a British and an U.S. keyboard. Why would anyone do such a thing???!!! (' is the key to the right of the right pinky finger [not daring to suggest what the British equivalent might be] and " is the upper case shift of the ' key.) Now as I think on this a bit longer I believe that I was taught that you use " as a direct quote and a ' as an indirect quote, which seems to be a different rule altogether.

{@ is above the 2; the right pinky rests on ; with : being the shift}

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I use " and have never had a problem with UK subs, but I do know I'll have to change it should my books be published in the UK. I'm not sure of the why but it's been the UK publishing convention for as far back as I can see.

 

[HareBrain]

From an entirely practical point of view I find ' much easier to type on a UK keyboard than reaching up for ".

Very good point -- and " requires the use of the shift key whereas ' doesn't.

I use " and have never had a problem with UK subs, but I do know I'll have to change it should my books be published in the UK.

And in reverse, I had a US agent express puzzlement over my use of single quote-marks, which she'd never seen before (and said might be offputting to fellow Americans).

I'm not sure of the why but it's been the UK publishing convention for as far back as I can see.

I have two pre-WWII British books in my possession, and both use double quote-marks. You've probably got more than me -- does the same hold for yours? If so, I wonder if my previous comment about saving ink might be the truth -- or perhaps saving paper -- during or following WWII.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Interesting - I have a Paul Gallico from 1944 where the doubles were being used but the same writer and publisher had changed to singles by 1952. So, the war years seem to be where the change happened.

 

[Venusian Broon]

But I am really flummoxed to discover that there are differences between a British and an U.S. keyboard. Why would anyone do such a thing???!!!

Well we need a £ and € more than you and that shifts things about!

There are a few changes actually: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_and_American_keyboards.

Although it does not describe the horror of the AZERTY keyboard. My hands are trained for the QWERTY layout, so I almost revert back to one finger typing whenever in France.

Never had a problem with the shift-2 to get a ", my left pinky is forever hovering over the left shift key anyway when I type, it's second nature now this touch type stuff. I think that pinky is just in charge of Caps Lock, shift and Crtl. For some odd reason the next finger along gets the Tab above it...

 

[AnyaKimlin]

Never had a problem with the shift-2 to get a ", my left pinky is forever hovering over the left shift key anyway when I type, it's second nature now this touch type stuff. I think that pinky is just in charge of Caps Lock, shift and Crtl. For some odd reason the next finger along gets the Tab above it...

It's not overly difficult but I do notice a difference when I am having a day long writing marathon in the amount of words produced.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

I was in Switzerland for a while using German Windows, German Linux and German Keyboard and some German Applications. I barely manage English, never mind German. They managed to find an old IBM USA keyboard, which I only find mildly awkward compared to UK (it's missing keys!).
The 1950s certainly has many UK books with single quotes. But plenty with double. I only actually noticed this lately when studying how other people punctuate. I don't actually even notice the letters much, I read very fast.

I find quality of keyboards vary enormously and slows me far more than ". I don't use "pinky" but next pair of fingers for shift 2 to get "

 

[Vertigo]

I'm not too bothered either way but confess I do think the single quote marks look somehow 'tidier.'

The one that gets me is whether to but that closing period inside or outside those quotes; I do see both in my reading.

 

[HareBrain]

The one that gets me is whether to but that closing period inside or outside those quotes.

Found this earlier. Enjoy! (Muahahahhaa)

 

[Venusian Broon]

It's not overly difficult but I do notice a difference when I am having a day long writing marathon in the amount of words produced.

I think you're right. Eventually you do start to notice the two-step mechanism when you do it enough times.

My odd typing thing is, that for some reason that I just can't fathom, my touch typing goes to pot in the dark. Which is utterly bizarre because I'm definitely not looking at the keyboard when merrily typing away at sentences when it's light in the room. (Do my fingers have rudimentary eyes that they aren't telling me about ?!?!?)

 

[AnyaKimlin]

My odd typing thing is, that for some reason that I just can't fathom, my touch typing goes to pot in the dark. Which is utterly bizarre because I'm definitely not looking at the keyboard when merrily typing away at sentences when it's light in the room. (Do my fingers have rudimentary eyes that they aren't telling me about ?!?!?)

I have the same problem but a backlit keyboard solves the issue.