 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / March 2010How to quote multiple parts in direct speech?
Which is the right way to write sentences uttered by a suspect in a video footage. 1. Let us look at this part of the video carefully. I think he said, "kill him" in this part and "burn that" five seconds later. 2. Let us look at this part of the video carefully. I think he said 'kill him' in this part and 'burn that' five seconds later. If none of them are correct, please tell me the correct way to write such sentences. A few things I want to know are, a. Do we have to put a comma after 'said'? Usually, while writing a sentence in direct speech, we put a comma after 'said'. b. What about 'burn that'? It neither seems to follow the rules of direct speech nor does it seem to follow the rules of indirect speech completely. > Which is the right way to write sentences uttered by a suspect in a > video footage. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > direct speech nor does it seem to follow the rules of indirect speech > completely. Style books offer reliable rules for this sort of problem, and there may by now be specialist style books for the transcription of film/tape material. (News agencies and private contractors in a few big cities do this. You could ask them.) When in doubt, follow standard styles for print. Brief answers: In 1 and 2 the quoted phrases should each begin with a capital letter "Like this." a. To avoid doubt and delay, put a comma after "said" every time it precedes directly quoted speech. b. This is direct speech, thus follows standard rules, i.e. the first word should be capitalized.  SignatureDon Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada) >> Which is the right way to write sentences uttered by a suspect in a >> video footage. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> 2. Let us look at this part of the video carefully. I think he said >> 'kill him' in this part and 'burn that' five seconds later. Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use single quotes, but some use double quotes. But I assume that's not what you were asking about. >> a. Do we have to put a comma after 'said'? Usually, while writing a >> sentence in direct speech, we put a comma after 'said'. No comma. The convention of setting off quoted speech by a comma as well as quotation marks only applies in narration, i.e. telling a story. As soon as you get into constructions like the above where you're *discussing* what was said, there's no need for it. >> b. What about 'burn that'? It neither seems to follow the rules of >> direct speech nor does it seem to follow the rules of indirect speech >> completely. As above. > Style books offer reliable rules for this sort of problem, Maybe; I'm not sure this is a case that would be covered. > In 1 and 2 the quoted phrases should each begin with a > capital letter "Like this." Wrong. Again, that's a convention in narration. It would also apply if the quotations were complete sentences. > a. To avoid doubt and delay, put a comma after "said" every > time it precedes directly quoted speech. > b. This is direct speech, thus follows standard rules, > i.e. the first word should be capitalized. This is not narration, and those rules do not apply. SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "This one isn't close. It's not even close to msb@vex.net | being close." --Adam Beneschan My text in this article is in the public domain. > Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use > single quotes, but some use double quotes. I think most *publishers* use single quotes in Britain, but I'm not at all sure whether this applies to how ordinary people write. I learned to use double quotes at school. What do other Brits say? SignatureJames >> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >What do other Brits say? I learnt to use single quotes (which were called inverted commas) around embedded quotations, and double ones for speech. "I learnt to use single quotes (which were called inverted commas) around embedded quotations, and double ones for speech," said Katy. She went on to question whether Mr Hogg's reference to 'how ordinary people write' was likely to apply to people who post to aue. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people >>> use single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > She went on to question whether Mr Hogg's reference to 'how ordinary > people write' was likely to apply to people who post to aue. Good point about the ordinary people, but I've never seen any rule prescribing a distinction between "quoted speech" and 'embedded quotations'. SignatureJames >>>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people >>>> use single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Good point about the ordinary people, but I've never seen any rule > prescribing a distinction between "quoted speech" and 'embedded quotations'. I've never seen it expressed as a formal rule, but I've seen it done. In a paper of mine the publisher chose to impose this, and I thought the result looked arbitrary and weird. (I complained after I read the proofs, but fixing it, as there were many instances, would have incurred a major risk of introducing new erors.) Signatureathel >>>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people >>>> use single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >Good point about the ordinary people, but I've never seen any rule >prescribing a distinction between "quoted speech" and 'embedded quotations'. It wasn't quoted speech, exactly: it was how we were supposed to do it if we were writing a story, which was why I cast it as I did. Quite common in novels. [Pause] I've been randomly picking novels off bookshelves to see if I can find one which uses both, as I described them. All that's happened is that I've got sucked into reading them, and I haven't found it at all. The first three novels I looked at had double inverted commas for speech, the second three single. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >>> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > She went on to question whether Mr Hogg's reference to 'how ordinary > people write' was likely to apply to people who post to aue. That makes sense but I was taught to use quotation marks i.e. double quotes for everything so I've never understood what single quotes were really for. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) >>>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most >>>> people use single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > quotes for everything so I've never understood what single quotes > were really for. Saving space, perhaps. If you submit a manuscript to a British publisher you will probably find that all your double quotation marks have been replaced by single ones in the printed version. Katy's usage might come under the following principle from "Copy-Editing: The Cambridge Handbok for Editors, Authors and Publishers": "Some authors have their own system of quotation marks, which they are anxious to retain: for example double quotes for speech and single for thoughts, or double quotes for quotations and single quotes for words or phrases used in a special sense. If you retain an unusual system, warn the typesetter not to 'correct' it." SignatureJames >That makes sense but I was taught to use quotation marks i.e. double >quotes for everything so I've never understood what single quotes were >really for. The only use I remember for them was feet and minutes (not smart quotes, of course, but in the old days they didn't come smart and dumb). Katy >> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What do other Brits say? 'I agree' with you. SignatureRay UK >>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >>> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > 'I agree' with you. I'll take that as a 'don't know". SignatureJames >>>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >>>> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > I'll take that as a 'don't know". That illustrates, incidentally, one of the objections to singly le quotation marks: a closing quotation mark then looks exactly the same (and is printer wsith the same glyph as) an apostrophe. I remain undecided, however, about whether Musika really agrees with you. Signatureathel >>>>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >>>>> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>> >>> 'I agree' with you. The Oxford Style Manual prescribes the single marks primarily, with the double ones for nesting, e.g.: Alice said, 'Bob said, "Ouch!"' The Chicago Manual of Style prescribes the double marks primarily, with the single ones for nesting, but the single ones primary for "special terms". I can't remember if the CMOS defines that, but American linguists use the single quotes for glosses. (On the other hand, the LSA stylesheet prescribes single quotes for everything except embedded quotations, following the British rules.) (Then there's the issue of transposing punctuation, on which I have strong opinions....) >> I'll take that as a 'don't know". > > That illustrates, incidentally, one of the objections to singly > le quotation marks: a closing quotation mark then looks exactly the > same (and is printer wsith the same glyph as) an apostrophe. I agree; using primarily double quotes improves fast readability. Alice said, "Wait, I'm followin' too!" Alice said, 'Wait, I'm followin' too!' So I use primarily double quotes whenever I can get away with it. SignatureLeila: "I don't think he knows." Agent Rogersz: "Increase the voltage." Leila: "What if he's innocent?" Agent Rogersz: "No one is innocent. Proceed" (Cox 1984) >> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What do other Brits say? I agree entirely, both about what I was taught (and still practise) and about what most publishers do. Signatureathel >> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >> single quotes, but some use double quotes. > >I think most *publishers* use single quotes in Britain, If you exclude newspaper publishers. > but I'm not at >all sure whether this applies to how ordinary people write. I learned to >use double quotes at school. > >What do other Brits say? Last time we looked at this I concluded that in Britain single quotes are usual in books and magazines, but that double quotes are usual in more utilitarian outpourings particularly where space is at a premium. In UK newspapers the custom seems to be for quote marks in headlines to be single and those in body text to be double. The same seems to be the case with some US newpapers. Washungton Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/29/AR2010032903305.html Environmental Protection Agency will list Bisphenol 'chemical of concern' Tuesday, March 30, 2010 The Environmental Protection Agency announced Monday that it is formally listing Bisphenol A -- a chemical found widely in consumer goods -- as a "chemical of concern." The New York Times does not seem to use quote marks in headlines, but it does use double quotes in body text, as do the Miami Herald and The Times-Picayune (New Orleans). It is possible that the bulk of the printed or online material "outpoured" each day by publishers in both the US and the UK uses double quotes. I (BrE) always use double quotes by default. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >>> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > are usual in books and magazines, but that double quotes are usual in > more utilitarian outpourings particularly where space is at a premium. Do double quotes really take up less room than single ones? SignatureJames >>>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >>>> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Do double quotes really take up less room than single ones? Not usually! The intention is to maintain visibility of the quote marks in small sized justified text. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>>>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >>>>> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Not usually! The intention is to maintain visibility of the quote marks > in small sized justified text. That seems a very good reason for preferring double quotation marks in the first place. Signatureathel >> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What do other Brits say? Same - double quotes for quoted speech. I am always surprised to read here that Brits use single quotes. I don't believe we learned about single quotes at school at all. SignatureDavid >>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >>> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > here that Brits use single quotes. I don't believe we learned about > single quotes at school at all. I don't remember coming across them either. SignatureLes (BrE) >>>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use >>>> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >I don't remember coming across them either. Likewise. SignatureRobin (BrE) Herts, England Robin Bignall wrote, in <qtp4r512g7j8lf9m9h2old2ofg5i3nsfoq@4ax.com> on Tue, 30 Mar 2010 22:06:59 +0100: > >>>> Double quotes are usual in North America; in Britain most people use > >>>> single quotes, but some use double quotes. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Likewise. Me too. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE > Robin Bignall wrote, in <qtp4r512g7j8lf9m9h2old2ofg5i3nsfoq@4ax.com> > on Tue, 30 Mar 2010 22:06:59 +0100: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Me too. Count me in. But The Oxford Guide to English Usage, which I use rather than Hart's, annoyingly promotes singles as the default. I find this quite irrational; and IIRC, British universities tend to specify American standards for dissertations. I may say, perhaps not for the first time, that OUP seem to have gone a bit crazy with reference books overlapping in titles and contents. I think I detect the deadening hand of the marketing department. SignatureMike. >I am always surprised to read >here that Brits use single quotes. Someone whose knowledge of British quuting style is gained by reading books from UK publishers could gain that impression. Many UK publishers seem to use single quotes as part of their house styles. Some very different books from dusty piles within easy reach of this computer: _Rosalind Franklin_, by Brenda Maddox, Harper Collins. _Brideshead Revisited_, by Evelyn Waugh, Penguin. _Talking to Terrorists_, By John Bew et al., C. Hurst. _Language and the Internet_, by David Crystal, Cambridge University Press. _The Cogwheel Brain_, by Doron Swade (Charles Babbage and the quest to build the First Computer), Little. Brown and Company (UK). all use single quote marks. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>I am always surprised to read >>here that Brits use single quotes. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >all use single quote marks. As do: _Beowulf_, translation by Seamus Heaney, Faber and Faber. _The Voyage of the Beagle_, by Charles Darwin, Wordsworth Editions Ltd. _The Famished Road_, by Ben Okri, Jonathan Cape. Britsh editions of American books sometimes keep the original publisher's style of quotation. _The Source_, by James Michener, Corgi Books. uses double quotes. But in: _Moby-Dick_, by Herman Melville, Penguin Books [UK]. the introductory "A Note on the Text" says "Double quotation marks have been changed to single; and single, to double". Singles are the primary (outer) quotation marks in the British edition. That "note" is 18 pages long. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>> Which is the right way to write sentences uttered by a suspect in a >>> video footage. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > single quotes, but some use double quotes. But I assume that's not > what you were asking about. That's what I assumed as well, but it's curious that [s]he used both in the same question. >>> a. Do we have to put a comma after 'said'? Usually, while writing a >>> sentence in direct speech, we put a comma after 'said'. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > As soon as you get into constructions like the above where you're > *discussing* what was said, there's no need for it. I agree, iu.e. I don't agree with what Don wrote. >>> b. What about 'burn that'? It neither seems to follow the rules of >>> direct speech nor does it seem to follow the rules of indirect speech [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > This is not narration, and those rules do not apply. I agree with the rest of your comments as well. Signatureathel |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.