How do you describe what a character does while speaking?
Editing grammar for accuracy
This post is part of a series of follow-ups to the article, “15 habits that make it harder for readers to enjoy your indie story.”
The Short Story
It’s an admirable thing for writers to try to combine dialogue with simultaneous or intermittent character actions, to paint a fuller picture for the reader. Alas, it’s an easy and common mistake of grammatical logic to conflate the speaking of words with the actions performed while speaking. An action might seem more interesting than a dialogue tag, especially “he said” or “she replied” for the umpteenth time. Yet, using non-speaking actions as dialogue tags is ultimately a (colorful kind of) comma splice that makes for imprecise writing.
The Real(ist) Story
Using a comma to splice together dialogue with narrative that describes other actions of the speaking character, not the character’s delivery of the dialogue, is the sort of fast-and-loose construction that can drive a discerning reader to brow-furrowing or head-scratching.
Will readers get your gist if you attach a speaker’s non-speaking actions directly to the dialogue, instead of putting the actions at proper arm’s length (in a phrase or clause that’s not directly attached)? Well, yes.
Can I imagine some writer, with a deliberately loose style, claiming it’s a legitimate choice to pull these types of grammatical maneuvers? Regrettably. But perhaps it’s worth rethinking a narrative style that hinges on logical errors or putting off people who understand written English. In my mind, it’s akin to missing the bullseye on purpose and calling yourself an expert marksman. You might be, but it’s a perplexing claim that’s difficult for passersby to take seriously.
Regardless, the conflation error (using non-speaking actions in place of speaking actions in dialogue tags) manifests as a comma splice. If there’s a sound defense for a comma splice in published writing, I’ve yet to meet it. A dialogue tag that’s not truly a dialogue tag might make a fine sentence in its own right, but instead it’s latched onto the dialogue like an unsightly growth.
Full disclosure: if you missed my memo on the subject, I hate comma splices. (With an exception for conversational writing like texts and emails, where I submit it’s okay to mimic the flow of spoken language more closely.)
If I were inclined to advice in the form of poorly phrased rhymes, I’d leave you with, “Don’t go splicing to spice up your writing.”
Here’s what you can do instead:
Option A
Don’t worry about the dialogue tag. After closing the dialogue, end the sentence.
Begin a new, complete sentence, in which you describe the speaker’s actions during or immediately after speaking.
Option B
Use a dialogue tag that describes the speaking of the words and, possibly, the manner in which they’re spoken.
Begin a new, complete sentence, in which you describe the speaker’s actions during or immediately after speaking.
Option C
Use a dialogue tag that describes the speaking of the words and, possibly, the manner in which they’re spoken.
Use a preposition or conjunction, and/or the necessary punctuation, to connect a separate phrase or clause describing the speaker’s other actions.
Story Time
For illustrative purposes, here’s a sentence1 in which a non-speaking action (shrugging) masquerades as a dialogue tag, along with rewrites that would avoid the error:
Wrong: Len shrugged, “Let’s head back. I’m done here for today, anyhow.”
Alternatives:
Len shrugged. “Let’s head back. I’m done here for today, anyhow.”
“Let’s head back,” Len said with a shrug. “I’m done here for today, anyhow.”
Godspeed and happy rewriting!
Derived from my Dustsong: Len the Wanderer novella (2023), currently behind the paywall here, available in paperback in my shop, or available unsigned from the online retailer who shall not be named.