Another speech tag thread, sorry

[Devor]

To me, using "asked" with a question mark is redundant. Using "replied" when the line obviously addresses the immediately prior statement is redundant.

Redundancy isn't always bad, but that's another topic. To put it simply, "asked" and "replied" are no more redundant than "said." But you have to use a word. The question, to me, is whether he asked it or whether he just said it. Not to make a big deal about it, but if you're looking for a right and a wrong, I think sometimes "said" can be wrong. We try to say that it's invisible, but if you really boil it down, "said" means that the words were spoken in a rather normal and straightforward manner. The question was not said out loud. The question was asked out loud.

But I'm only saying that because you're pressing. You're making it about a right and a wrong answer, and I'm responding in that way. But honestly it doesn't matter, and you should write in the manner that supports to your writing voice.

There's hundreds of ways to get across the tenderness of the romantic moment, the soft tone of voice, or any other perception. Adding an adverb to said only gives the writer two things. First, an economy of words. If for some reason you had to limit word count, then maybe I could see it. Still, I wouldn't do it myself. Second, it's an easier way to write, which is why I consider it lazy description.

This is assuming an awful lot about the context of a line to make a sweeping point. Even if this is all there is to it, there are plenty of times in even the most methodically well-written narrative that a short and easy line, I would say, can even be demanded by the context of the story, let alone appropriate. For instance, if the dialogue is happening quickly, a longer description can slow things down. Or if the emphasis of the moment is on other things, a longer description can be intrusive.

But why demand that authors need to waste words if "said softly" will do it?

Writers think modifying "said" gives the reader information they need, and therefore the use is justified. I disagree. If it's necessary information then it deserves proper description. What does "said softly" really give your reader? "Softly" could have many meanings. By itself it tells your reader nothing specific. It lacks clarity & steals emotion and power from the scene due to the unimaginative, nonspecific, and weak language. A writer is better off trying to depict the emotion of the scene through actions and dialogue.

I could replace "said softly" with "said," and nothing would change. Why give "said" the benefit of context to explain it, but suddenly if you add "softly," we're assuming it's vague with no context to support it?

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

For instance, if the dialogue is happening quickly, a longer description can slow things down. Or if the emphasis of the moment is on other things, a longer description can be intrusive.

Great points, both.

But why demand that authors need to waste words if "said softly" will do it?

I could replace "said softly" with "said," and nothing would change. Why give "said" the benefit of context to explain it, but suddenly if you add "softly," we're assuming it's vague with no context to support it?

Because "said" is a verb and, in some cases, a noun. "Softly" is a descriptor & a modifier. Descriptors shouldn't need context if they're doing their job well.

 

[Trick]

Wow, I'm surprised at how much attention this thread has gotten. It turned out that my problem seems to have been that more action and less 'speech tag' was perfect for my scene but all this extra discussion is helpful elsewhere.

IMO, it seems like the modifiers and colorful speech tags that reference volume and other physical aspects of speech should be totally acceptable in moderation. For instance, said softly, he shouted etc. But, I think that emotional modifiers should be avoided, ie, "You do it!" he said ferociously. That seems like lazy writing.

 

[BWFoster78]

To put it simply, "asked" and "replied" are no more redundant than "said."

"Said" is, unfortunately, a necessary redundancy. Sometimes, for clarity, it is the easiest and best way to convey to the reader who is speaking. When used for that purpose, I think its benefits outweigh its detriments.

"Asked" and "replied" are actually doubly redundant. They:

1. as "said" does, repeat the information conveyed by the quotes.
2. are redundant in the way I described above.

I see no benefit at all in using a double redundancy in the manner described.

I think sometimes "said" can be wrong.

No disagreement there.

A. You can choose a different method to convey who is speaking.
B. If you decide a tag is for you, I'd prefer, as I stated earlier, something like "shouted" to "said loudly."

The question was not said out loud. The question was asked out loud.

Again, to my mind, the only purpose of "he said" is to convey to the reader that it is "he" who spoke. "Said" fills this role perfectly. The question mark clearly conveys the fact that it is a question.

If you think "asked" is okay, how about: "No!" Bob exclaimed.

To me, that is complete amateur hour.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Wow, I'm surprised at how much attention this thread has gotten. It turned out that my problem seems to have been that more action and less 'speech tag' was perfect for my scene but all this extra discussion is helpful elsewhere.

Yes. This is one of those hot topics which always generates strong opinions. That's a great thing. People have different ideas regarding what they like and what is acceptable in their reading and writing. Find what works for you.

IMO, it seems like the modifiers and colorful speech tags that reference volume and other physical aspects of speech should be totally acceptable in moderation. For instance, said softly, he shouted etc. But, I think that emotional modifiers should be avoided, ie, "You do it!" he said ferociously. That seems like lazy writing.

I see no difference between "said softly" & "said ferociously" other than the difference between the word meanings. Neither provides clear and concrete description. Therefore, I question the value of the word and if there's not a better way to write with greater clarity and power.

 

[Devor]

B. If you decide a tag is for you, I'd prefer, as I stated earlier, something like "shouted" to "said loudly."

If you'll go back to my original point, I noted that "said softly," in a romantic setting, doesn't have a good alternative. "Said loudly" has several.

If you think "asked" is okay, how about: "No!" Bob exclaimed.

To me, that is complete amateur hour.

That's a bad example. "Bob exclaimed" is closer to "Sarah questioned" than it is to "Sarah asked."

 

[BWFoster78]

If you'll go back to my original point, I noted that "said softly," in a romantic setting, doesn't have a good alternative. "Said loudly" has several.

I'm not sure what this has to do with our discussion. I stated that I wouldn't rule out using an adverb inside a tag, though I don't favor the process in general. This seems to be your general thinking as well.

Perhaps there is some confusion between what I said and what T.Allen said?

That's a bad example. "Bob exclaimed" is closer to "Sarah questioned" than it is to "Sarah asked."

There's not much distance between "asked" and "questioned," imo, as they both mean the same thing. Why is "asked" acceptable and "questioned" not?

 

[C Hollis]

I tend to believe excessive use of "softly" and such is where the crime lies. A manuscript filled with these descriptors tends to come across amateurish. Personally, I avoid them like a visit to my mother-in-law's house, but, like those visits, they aren't entirely awful if they are infrequent. Then again, if there is a reasonable way to avoid it...