Question(s)!

[rosalinda-143.livejournal.com]

Grammar issues again.

Which would be correct?

This one: I made sure that she was no where in sight and made sure that Dr. Garcia was preoccupied with what he was doing before I threw my legs over the side of the bed and walked over to Benny.
“Could I talk to you for a moment?” I murmured under my breath.

or

This one: I made sure that she was where in sight and made sure that Dr.Garcia was preoccupied with what he was doing before I threw my legs over the side of the bed and walked over to Benny. "Could I talk to you for a moment?" I murmured under my breath.

Also...

"And exactly what did you see?" he asked.

or

"And exactly what did you see?" He asked.

When to capitalize words like, Mom, Dad, North, South, etc., etc.

And where to put the comma.

Ex: North, South, East, and West. Do I put the comma after East or not?

And how do I know when to put the comma behind 'then'?

Thanks in advanced!

peace.love.happiness.

~ Rosie

Comments

[robin-karif.livejournal.com]

Ahha! The resolution of my screen makes it so that there wasn't a difference. =B

You can keep it in the same paragraph if you want to. I've read published novels where they have dialogue smack in the middle of description and keep it one long paragraph. I think as long as you create a break when two different people are speaking, you should be fine. Again, it really is a stylistic choice.

I've seen it go both ways (two characters speaking in a same paragraph vs. creating a break), but it has to be done in such a way as to not confuse the reader.


What you really need to do, in choosing to go against "rules", is to keep in mind that not everyone will understand what you're trying to achieve. Hemmingway, for example, breaks TONS of grammatical rules, but he does it for a specific purpose. People like to claim that he doesn't know how to write. In reality, he knows what the rules are, but he chooses to have fragmented or run-on sentences to create a specific feel for a scene. It's really fascinating, but the reader also needs to know the rules in order to understand what's going on.

Anyway, really my best advice is to experiment. "Rules" aren't REALLY rules, in my mind. They're more guidelines. You won't get punished for breaking them. Just realize WHY you're breaking them and be prepared to defend yourself when someone claims that your grammar sucks and you need to go back to school (Or just ignore their comments entirely).

*steps off soap box* XD

[rogerdr.livejournal.com]

robin_karif is right in several ways, but I think that I can add a bit here or there, if I may.

Paragraphs in non-dialog narration are generally used to differentiate ideas or themes, however trivial in comparison to the whole. For instance, one paragraph may show Jane leaving her house, while the next has a description of her walking down the street. It's the same trip, but the focus is different. On the other hand, if the whole trip to the store is given in six sentences, then it's given its own single paragraph...English 101.

Paragraphs in dialog, even in a conventionally written story, are a more subtle beast. Generally, they are used to differentiate speakers, but there are two exceptions right off the bat.

First, when a quick interjection or exclamation follows a speech too soon to be excluded from the commentary on that speech, it can be added into the same paragraph. For instance:

"What we once called love has become nothing but the biggest excuse for commercialism," Randy announced, with various shouts of "Boring!" and "Loser!" coming from the crowd.

Second, when a single speech has grown too long for a single paragraph, it is given a special format, with beginning quotes at the start of each paragraph, but only one end-quote at the very end (mass or block quotes are treated differently, of course).

Otherwise, it's (paragraph) speaker A, (paragraph) speaker B, etc. as usual. But even here, there can be problems that individual style probably has to address.

The "he said" stuff is an even more complicated mess. Basically, comments about the speaker or the speech attached to a quote are meant to differentiate speakers when there are more than two or the tête-à-tête is vague enough that it becomes hard to tell which person is saying what. One should never get stuck just alternating "he said", "she said", "he said", "she said". There should be enough clues in the quotes themselves to be able to drop some of these without losing clarity.

Using synonyms for "said" is also a generally bad habit, since they are basically redundancies which the quotes should make clear. For instance:

"The car wasn't just red, it was cherry metal flake," James clarified.

Here, James is obviously clarifying the term "red", so we don't have to be told the obvious. "James shouted" can be done away with by using an exclamation mark (sparingly). "James suggested" should never have to be used after a quote. These synonyms have their uses in other places, as in, "What was it that James suggested?" Using them to over-explain a quote is logically a lazy way to write. A better way to illustrate speech or just to give information indirectly related to the speech is to add comments within that paragraph or in their own. For instance:

"How many times have I told you, no wire hangers!" Mother was so angry that the veins were popping out in her neck.

There is no reason to add "Mother shouted" here. The exclamation mark does that and the extra comment illustrates her mood apart from the subject of the quote.

[robin-karif.livejournal.com]

I totally agree. Thank you for adding to my points. :)

"How many times have I told you, no wire hangers!" Mother was so angry that the veins were popping out in her neck.

Nice example. XD