The Word Cloud

I've just read Child 44 by Tom Rob Smith. At first I thought reading speech would be difficult as it's laid out like this.

I personally like this style. Im using it in a piece im working on at the moment, I just find it is a lot easier on the eye.

Interesting, yes, it's clear enough when speech is intended, which is the point after all.
I associate this style with a more introverted feel - lots of internal dialogue (monologue?) - so can be tricky to work out whether the words are spoken out loud or not.
I'd say, if it suits the book - then it suits the book. And house styles come in to play as well.
Whatever you do, provided it doesn't aid and abet confusion and your intention is clear, then no style is an out-and-out howler.
It's certainly a style that's not widely considered.

BTW, this is in response to your reply on a thread on the main forum about quote marks, alerting us to this group thread.
It's a drawback of groups that members aren't informed of a new thread so unless they check in regularly, nobody knows its there.
Checking the tick box now so that I'll know if anyone else comments!

Hi Eddy. Thanks for this. I understand the 'hyphen to indicate speech thing' - if I can call it that - is much used on the continent - particularly French novels.

How do you go about it, though, if you want a hyphen to indicate a break or a pause in the dialogue.

- Because it could be confusing - in a lot of ways - she said

Yes, I'm with Trafalgar; it was my first thought. It may be fine as an alternative to normal speech marks, but it rules out the use of a dash for its traditional purposes. That could be very restricting. Also, how would this method cope with quotes within quotes: "I said to him, 'I'm not sure this method would work', and I'm awaiting his reply." And might there not be confusion when one speech runs over more than one para. Traditionally each new para starts with an opening quote mark, but with no closing quote mark at the end of the previous para. As the 'dash' style doesn't have a closing indicator, how do we know straight away if it's the same speech carrying on to a new para, or someone new talking? I'm surprised that some books manage to use this style. I must admit, I had never come across it. Do they just restrict themselves to a style writing that never involves any of the situations I have raised?

I guess you'd alternate italics with non-italics, to embed speech, e.g.
- What a palaver, I said to her, all this fuss over speech.
Dunno about other dashy things. Hyphens are longer than dashes, aren't they? This is a whole new kettle of kippers.

Actually a hyphen is the short one and is sometimes referred to as an 'n' dash (because 'n' is a short letter). A dash is the long one and can be referred to as an 'm' dash (because 'm' is a long letter).

Interesting discussion. In general, my first impulse is to look at history and try to learn from it: The various punctuation marks developed over time by trial and error, and eventually became regulated by practice (and by printing parameters), because experience told them this-or-that was the best way to use this-or-that punctuation mark to make the text easily readable, and that experience has stood the test of time since the 14th and 15th centuries. I tend to be skeptical of modern changes simply because the modern tendency is toward laziness, speed, and shortcuts. Having said that, if printers and publishers move toward the replacement of quotation marks for hyphens on a mass scale (i.e. not just the odd one here or there), then I'll go with it; but not until then! As it's been pointed out already, I think it would lead to far more disadvantages (limitations and confusion) than to any true advantage...

This is the way forward,I find quotation marks messy and double or single seems to overlap from novel to novel.

You won't find double and single speech marks used interchangeably in a novel. By and large (but not exclusively), in the UK publishers prefer single marks for speech. If there is speech within speech the internal dialogue is marked with double quotes to distinguish it. By and large, the reverse is true in the USA: double quotes for speech, with single quotes for speech within speech.

Also, where, for example , single quotes are used for speech, if a "particular" word needs to be in quotes in the narration, then double will be used to distinguish it from speech.

I'll be reading his second novel soon - when I get a break from editiong - and I'll be looking out for those sticky points raised, if I remember.

I guess I'm old fashioned. I prefer single quotaion marks for speech, not sure about internal dialogue it seems to differ so widely- italics, double quotes, italics AND double quotes?

I think that sometimes the speech punctuation can do much to convey mood: it seems... I dunno, starker? Less conversational? Without wishing to sound trite I think using non-standard marks can add significance to the speech. This could quickly get overbearing (if you're writing a conversational novel then trying to make every bit of speech 'significant' would soon become grandiose or ludicrous), but done right I think it really helps.

Interesting stuff Joshua. Why not post a sample so we can all see how it scans?

Sorry, forgot to watch this topic. A sample of mine, or someone elses? You can read the first chapter of my own work in the Critiques - General tab (it's called The Windfarmer).