# Dialog Tags, you sly dogs.



## Xipoid (Feb 15, 2008)

This little diatribe has to deal with dialog... tags to be specific. I'm sure we are all familiar with what those devilish spawn are.

My concern deals with the dialog that forgoes the standard he-says-she-says form. It has to deal with when you say things like:



```
John leaned in and stared intently at the register.
"I fail to see the importance of this."
"Nonsense! I do hereby declare you a buffoon!" 
"Now see here, Mr. Wilks!"

as opposed to

"I fail to see the importance of this." John said.
"Nonsense!" Mr. Wilks cried. "I do hereby declare you a buffoon!"
"Now see here, Mr. Wilks!" he said raising a threatening finger.
```

Not hard, but there is a time when I get confused with indentions. Let's say for instance that I wish to add a tag after the third line that went along the lines of "John turned aghast." that makes it obvious that it is not a tag for Mr. Wilks said but does not say something like "John turned aghast at the sudden outburst."


```
John leaned in and stared intently at the register.
"I fail to see the importance of this."
"Nonsense! I do hereby declare you a buffoon!" John turned aghast.
"Now see here, Mr. Wilks!"
```

To my eyes, that is a bit misleading. It seems to give the line to John, though the previous indention and context indicates a different speaker. However, I do not want the reader to stop and have to think. So, it seems logical to drop the line to the one below.


```
John leaned in and stared intently at the register.
"I fail to see the importance of this."
"Nonsense! I do hereby declare you a buffoon!"
John turned aghast. "Now see here, Mr. Wilks!"
```

Now here's my question. What is the grammatical rule for this? (Does it warrant its own indention, a new line, and whatnot?) Or was my second example completely correct?


----------



## Poetigress (Feb 15, 2008)

It seems to me that the original could stand with one change:

*John leaned in and stared intently at the register. "I fail to see the importance of this."

"Nonsense! I do hereby declare you a buffoon!" 

"Now see here, Mr. Wilks!"*

It's confusing because it's just "voices in the dark," without knowing who we're listening to in every line, but from a formatting standpoint, it's correct.  If you want to add the "John turned aghast" line, it would, again, be the start of its own paragraph and go immediately before John's line, as you have it in your final example.

Your second example is confusing on two counts: It reads as if "I fail to see" is spoken by Wilks (or at least someone other than John), because of the paragraph break, and it reads as if "Nonsense!" is spoken by John, because of the lack of a paragraph break between that line of dialogue and John's action.

Basically, you want the action and the line of dialogue to be in the same paragraph.  When a new person speaks or does something, that's a new paragraph:

"Now see here, Mr. Wilks!"  John leaned in, his face turning red with anger.

Wilks stared back.  "It's perfectly obvious."

"What, that I'm a buffoon?"

"Not only that."  Wilks smiled.  "Take another look."

Admittedly, that first line sounds very clunky to me because I prefer to set the action up before the dialogue -- "John's face reddened.  'Now see here!'" -- so that it's clear from the start who's speaking, but I put it after just to illustrate the formatting.

Hope that all makes sense.  >^_^<


----------



## Xipoid (Feb 15, 2008)

So in essence, when giving a new speaker give them a new line and indent including all tie-ins such as speech related/relevant actions. New person --> new paragraph (basically).



I had always learned the rule was give a new speaker a new line and indent only when their words actually come. Preceding actions remain in the paragraph. Forthcoming actions follow in the new paragraph, if applicable. It made me wonder.


----------



## Poetigress (Feb 15, 2008)

Xipoid said:
			
		

> I had always learned the rule was give a new speaker a new line and indent only when their words actually come. Preceding actions remain in the paragraph. Forthcoming actions follow in the new paragraph, if applicable. It made me wonder.



I don't know what the rule technically is, but as I'm understanding it, something written that way would have me too confused to want to continue past a few paragraphs.  This may also be a stylistic issue that's changed over the years as writing has gotten a little less formal and more conversational; I don't know.  I'm sure if I'm wrong, someone will come along and enlighten me.  :wink:


----------



## TakeWalker (Feb 15, 2008)

I'm kind of having a difficult time getting the exact problem here. I did have a conversation of this sort with someone recently, however.

What you did in that final example was either tack on John's turning to his conversation partner's line, or drop his words to a new paragraph, thus making it seem as though they were being said by the other guy and not him.

The rule I follow is that it's easiest to follow conversation if all tags occur colinear with their respective dialogues. Yes, you're supposed to start a new paragraph when someone begins speaking, but if you're throwing in a tag to let us know who is saying what how in between their opening dialogue and what follows, then consider it an entire "say", if you will. You don't have to start a new paragraph. I also approve of starting a dialogue paragraph with the tag or even action, instead of the dialogue itself, but then I'm all about breaking the rules. :3


----------



## Stratelier (Feb 16, 2008)

> The rule I follow is that it's easiest to follow conversation if all tags occur colinear with their respective dialogues.


Same here.  Viewing from the perspective where each paragraph represents a discrete thought, or unit, identifying a speaker and giving their dialogue are related and should go together in the same paragraph.

My dialogues, I often start a new paragraph with a short interjection by the speaker, followed by the action/tag, then continuing on the dialogue.  Equally often, I also give the tag first and then the character's dialogue.  I guess the tag is a useful way to present a slight 'pause' between sentences without specifically saying "they paused for a moment".

Because repetition of any verb, tag or action gets boring fast.


----------

