As I rewrite "Of Half-Breed Prey" and generate a second installment, I'm faced with a situation where the principal character (Kay) will have some rather involved dialog within her mind and two other believed entities or consciousnesses. Currently, the two are referred to as "the voice in her head/mind/etc.," "the Other" and "Scout."

The simplest dialog being obviously Kay verbally saying something.
Ex.: In response Kay said, "stop doing that."

Slightly more confusing would be the voice in her mind which I initially thought to present like;
Ex.: In response the Other said, stop doing that.

Looking at it however I wonder if a semicolon might help.
Ex.: In response the Other said; stop doing that.

When it will become really confusing is when all three are speaking, yet again it is just all in her head, so thoughts. Ex.:
In response Kay said, "stop doing that."

The Other refusing saying only; there is nothing you can do about it, and as always Scout said no more than; shhh, rest.

You always tell her to rest; the Other replied.

My thinking on it being that a semicolon and keeping where reasonable the dialog of the inner voices on one line might help it to be better understood.

Thoughts? Thanks for your help!

Hush....an alias

 

I'm not a grammar Nazi, but I'd think a colon would go better here:

In response the Other said: stop doing that.

Me, I'd probably just treat them all as real voices and quote them, and not use italics.

In response the Other said, "Stop doing that."

 

Just a suggestion, what about using double quotation marks for actual speech, and singles for thought speech? It might become confusing if more than one voice is speaking on the same line.

It would be interesting to hear what others think.

Dialogue in general is something I struggle with at times, using the correct punctuation before, during and after speech. It's further complicated by the fact that conventions of use differ between American English and UK English, and it's an error I've been picked up on a couple of times.

@ejls @ahorsewithnoname @wantsomefun @BlackRonin are probably the most frequent compy winners, and I'd be particularily interested in your opinions sirs and madam.

 

Try not to take this the wrong way: there is nothing you can possibly conceive doing with words that has not already been done.

There are established rules for everything you could conceivably do with prose. Everything. Really.

Here is a suggestion, before you go mangling punctuation: Why not consult a book on writing style? Like The Little Brown Handbook (Little Brown Co., a couple decades old but no doubt still published), or The Oxford Guide to Writing (Oxford University Press)?

Alternatively, I would kindly remind you that you've been skulking about in my Deer Sex stories. Do visit again, this time with paper and a sharpened pencil, and delve in with a studious attitude, for my uses of punctuation, grammar, and style on that thread are impeccable.

 

@Hush I wrote a story for one of the CAWs featuring a woman who was abused by her husband, and as a result, she spawned an alternate personality with which she could talk to and confide in. This "second persona" even came in handy during a climactic fight sequence. Here's a link to the story: Kung Fu Fighting. You don't have to read the entire story. Just read the bits where she talks with herself. The woman's name is Sharon. I used italics and parentheses-enclosed text to distinguish between the two Sharons, but kept both their dialogs in one paragraph because I felt that it showed how it was really one person with two different streams of thought, rather than branching into separate paragraphs. I was advised in the reviews I got for that story to separate the two voices as I would the dialog between two people, but in posting the story on stories side, I decided to keep what I had written because I liked it better that way.

Uh, on second thought, don't read my story. You have three voices in one person so it wouldn't be such a good idea to follow what I did. Following grammar rules would be the right thing to do in your case. I'm still figuring out those rules myself.

 

Hi Hush. My two cents on your situation...

When my character speaks out loud, I always use quotation marks, never italics.

"I see," said the blind man to his deaf son as he picked up his hammer and saw.​

When my character thinks to himself, I always use italics, never quotation marks.

I see thought the blind man about his deaf son as he picked up his hammer and saw.​

I've never had to invoke an alternative to include a split personality. However, I would not invoke punctuation in the form of colon or semicolon. Rather, I'd be left with two choices:

1. Separate the "splits" by using italics only and not just allow them naked dialog, but, force yourself to identify each entity each time:

Naked dialog:

I don't think it's a good idea to do that.

"Neither do I."

I agree, and that makes three of us.​

This just would lead to quite a bit of confusion. So let's try it another way:

I don't think it's a good idea to do that, said Scout.

"Neither do I."

I agree, and that makes three of us, confirmed The Other.​

The Other, Scout, and any other mental characters get italics for their dialog, and regular text for non-dialog that identifies them and/or adds to the sentence.

2. You could employ another use of punctuation IF there are only two extra voices. If there are three, well, there's not enough choices here. I'm referring to the underline for one of the voices.

I don't think it's a good idea to do that.

"Neither do I."

I agree, and that makes three of us.​

I'm not a big fan of this option, but it is an alternative if you think you'd go crazy having to put Scout and The Other throughout, unless it was just two "people" having a conversation. But, it would work. You'd need to identify that The Other was using underline, and you could do it like this:

I don't think it's a good idea to do that, said Scout.

"Neither do I." It was good to talk with Scout and The Other together.

I agree, and that makes three of us, confirmed The Other.

What do you think?

Who, me?

No, her.

"I don't know just yet," and it was true, I was confused.

See? You always do this to her, pouted Scout.

Oh, bite me, bitch!​

The reader should be able to follow along this way. The only issue now is if "she" is talking with The Other and Scout, but not really talking aloud, but rather, in her mind to them. IF there is no time when she will be talking aloud to them, or, no time when she will be talking in her mind to them, then you can keep it as-is, to try and keep the confusion to a minimum. You don't want the dialog to become a distraction, that's for sure. If you do anticipate a scenario where she is going to engage The Other and Scout together in silent conversation, but at the same time have a conversation with another person (Joe, the bartender, for example), then you have just added another layer of complexity. As Jayne indicated, now might be the time for single quotes too, using double quotes for the out loud conversation, and single quotes for the silent, inner conversation. Again, though, you're going to need to identify the entities by name, at least at first.

I referred to the site's limitation. There are some word processing programs that allow you to bend italics the opposite way. I can't remember the term for this, but that would provide you with yet another option. Of course, you could also use colored text to indicate the various voices, but I think that could turn your story into a clown car, and that wouldn't be a plus.

Oh! I indented the above dialog examples just to set it off a bit. Maybe you could do that too? When she's having a conversation with herself (inner voices), you inset the dialog to help the reader. THAT might be a winner. I did that with a CAW story, The Light, and it allowed me to separate time period, the present, and the 1940s.

I hope some of this is useful to you.

 

Thanks for the vote of confidence, @JayneyRedd . I am probably one of the least educated writers here. I graduated from high school, but that's it. I've never been formally trained in writing. I'm sure there are rules for this sort of thing, but I don't know what they are. I can give you my opinion, as a reader.

If you have more than two involved in a conversation, need the participants identified I don't get lost. I like the idea of quotes for Kay and single quotes for the others, or italics where they are allowed. But to completely stop using their names in the conversation, you'll lose me and I will stop reading.

"I wonder what they'll think of me," Kay said, looking in the mirror.

The Other whispered in her ear, 'You already know what they think.'

'Shut up,' Scout shouted at the Other. 'You can be such a bitch! Kay, you'll be fine. Just walk in with the confidence we know you have.'

'I'm a bitch? You just yelled at me!'

'And I'd do it again, if you try to drag our girl down.'

Kay didn't need this now. "Please, both of you go away."

 

I would suggest maintaining conventional formatting, and gradually easing into less descriptive identification.

"I'm so happy!" said Hoppy, the happy voice inside Scout's multiple personality filled head.

"I'm so worried!" said Paula, Scout's panic disorder personality.

"I'm gonna smack all of you!" said Angie, the always angry voice.

"Keep calm, everyone." Scout said soothingly to her three voices. "If people keep reading this story, I won't have to make things as painfully obvious later on."

"If you say so, I'll trust your judgment." said Scout's happy personality.

"I... I'll try." said the Paula voice in her head, unconvincingly.

"I'll put away my nunchuks. For now." said the always angry Angie voice.

"Great job, everyone!" Scout said to the three other personalities inside her head.

"That chick asked what a Grammar Nazi would think. Clearly, the only acceptable answer from a Nazi would be to stick with the rules. Isn't this a great happy ending?" beamed Hoppy.

"It is. Let's just hope that no Grammar Fascists or Grammar Communists come along." said Paula, worriedly.

"If they do, they'll answer to me!" Angie brandished her nunchuks.

 

Mental speech of any kind is still dialogue and the normal rules of quoted dialogue apply.

1.) Direct quotes are in quotes.

2.) Different speaker, different paragraph.

To clear up confusion I identify the speaker most of the time. If only two people are in the room then you don't have to clarify every paragraph. Example:

Johnny spoke softly into the mind of his love. "I knowthe distances are more than you can reach, even with the ESPI-generators to help."

Sonja sighed as she considered the vast distances between themselves and any other humans. The mission was almost halfway to the Andromeda galaxy, a million lightyears stood between them and any help. "I know, I just feel so isolated now. If anything happens to you, we have no way to contact anyone."

"You have the emergency procedure. If you collapse the ESPI field it will send a pulse even a R-20 can hear."​

Notice the last paragraph had no identifier but you still knew who was talking.

If a long story or speech (spanning several paragraphs) is being quoted, I break the monotony with an occasional re-identifier. This is easy to do in the following way.

Sonja began to project her story into the minds of the group. "I was young and dumb and I joined the Navy to try and get away from Earth. Tada Yada Yada Yada...

"Yada Yada...

"Yada Yada...

Sonja paused to take a breath and sip her water. Remembering her past had made her mouth dry. "Yada Yada...

"Yada Yada..."​

Notice only the last paragraph has closing quotation marks. This is the accepted convention for multi-paragraph quotes. It tells the ready the story continues.

If there are several people in the conversation, it is best to identify each speaker in each paragraph. This is also a good opportunity to add some descriptive text.

Sonja Stared out the Duraglass of the operations dome. The magnificent sight of the galaxy spread across her view always fascinated her. "Sasha, the passenger pods are ready for teleport. Why did you contact me instead of Johnny?"

Devain and Katy giggled as Sasha replied, "After I teleport you empty pod here, my husband and I will be climbing into it."

"Mom, is on her way there to talk to you and Johnny about something." Devain added.

"Your coming out here?" Sonja projected in a mental voice filled with surprise. The bands of the Milky Way spun on serenely, now forgotten as Sonja tried to keep from panicking.

Katy, sent a teasing tone across the million lightyear gap. "Johnny is going to get his ear bent."

Sasha smiled as she lay in her reclining chair on Station One. "I read the last crew report and noticed the status change on both yours and Johnny's records."

"Status change?" Sonja said as she continued to fight the panic.

Sasha sent a whipsnap pf mental power across the lightyears as she snatched the passenger pod back to Station One. "Both of your records changed from 'single' to 'married'."

Sonja felt the panic flood into her mind. She had told Johnny they needed to tell his parents, before they had the captain perform the ceremony. Now one of the most powerful psychics ever born was on her way here with her husband, to confront Johnny and her about their elopement.​

This example should be similar to how you would handle multiple voices in one head.

 

Thanks all, I'm considering what you have proposed as well as any other suggestions to be made.

Although I don't want to give too much away, what exactly is going on with Kay I want left up in the air. More than that, I'd like the reader to be on this maddening (yet not confusing) rollercoaster ride wherein their opinions on Kay will shift........Victim > predator > psychopath > possessed > multiple personality psycho > to explained "ghostly" possession > to implied (Godly) avenging spiritual manifestation > mildly crazy (simply talks to herself working things out)..Etc..

Now that sounds way-way too complex, yet it is really rolling out very smoothly and each shift in the readers opinion has valid reasons.....So it plays out like an evolution or learning of the character. IOW, the more you learn, the more you understand. Things that made little sense BUT were valid responses, soon have defined reasons behind them.

In any case, this is shown (to others in the story) through Kay's actions. So naturally, no matter the driving force, it is still Kay as an individual responding to all others in word or action. What I need to show is externally though it is Kay, internally it is something else, though part of Kay.

In the end however (spoiler), maybe Kay is just a little too overly-dramatic learning she simply is who she is, and that doling out justice doesn't need an excuse or a scapegoat.

Thanks again, I'm still considering everything proposed.

Hush....an alias

 

What a lovely thread this has become; various writers coming together to share their opinions and knowledge in order to help each other. This sort of community spirit is one of the things I enjoy most about XNXX.

 

I'm definitely no help with this question. I have actually left scenes of characters talking to themselves out of a couple stories for the very reason of not knowing how to do it.

I am learning new things reading some of the suggestions here. My simple thoughts are that if you can get across to the reader what is going on, then the manner in which you write it can be excused.