Whose Line is it Anyways

One of these days I'm writing a book on writing. I'm looking for a term now for unattributed dialog. Orphaned dialog. Headless lines. Detached word balloons.

This is when there is a line -- usually of low semantic value -- that doesn't get attributed and can't be easily linked to a specific character.

So not what happens when there are two people in a discussion and you omit tags (like omitting the repeated header from MIDI "Running Status" messages). Aka:

"It is not," Alice said.

"It most certainly is," Bob countered.

"Is not."

"Is."

"Is not, and I have the graphs to prove it," Alice concluded triumphantly.

Also not the case when you have a speaker with such a distinctive voice, or a specific subject, or there was a previous line directed towards them:

"Engineering?" Kirk glanced towards his chief.

"I canna give ye nay more; mah poor wee bairns are burning oop!"

Well, I thought I had an example, from the scene in the station when Doctor Who is first mentioned, but it turned out to be a bad example. There's two or three orphaned lines in that scene but they could just as easily be attached to an alternating speaker.

I made the choice for Fox and Hounds to over-attribute. I am going with the general advice that "said" is invisible so I'm including it more often than is strictly necessary. I did notice, though, reading to see if I had a better example of an orphaned line, that I tend to leave off attribution of a lot of Penny's lines. The reason being; she's the POV character, and conversations happen because she is there. In many cases, she is reporting on it because she is part of it.

Well, that and she has a distinct voice.

***

I was glancing over the print version again -- I have a bunch of corrections, edits, and general tweaking to go still -- and right there on page 7 I hit a dangerous one:

“The task of the archaeological field worker,” Leslie said, “Is to get the data out of the ground."

Goddamn automatic capitalization! I feel like turning that off if it is going to do that sort of thing to me. The second quotation following the attribution should, of course, not be capitalized; "is to get the data out of the ground."

But since the automatic capitalization did this, it may occur multiple times in the manuscript. That means I have to go through the whole damn thing manually. And it has to be done by hand because it entirely depends on nuances of phrasing that automatic tools are very bad at understanding (heck, ProWritingAid doesn't do well with clauses. Dialog is pretty much beyond it.)

Well, I can probably find most of them by searching the combination (, ").

***

I am conflicted on directions here. I am eager to get Hounds in the store, but at the same time, I could build momentum better if I had another book coming out within a month or two after it. Add to this, I have beta readers currently working on Hounds, and I am still into the experiment of trying to finish Wedding in 4-6 months.

And I just got another email. Mom has been beating the bushes, and the family friends she's found have all been more than what I can ascribe to being merely supportive. Oh, yes. And not a one of them reads electronically. It's all print, all the time.

***

Just found this absolutely perfect guide to the proper capitalization of dialogue:

1. Steve said,  "Good morning."

2. "Good morning,"  said Steve.

3. Steve said,  "Good morning,"  then sat down.

4. "Ladies and gentlemen,"  said Steve,  "good morning."