Colons and Quotations (and some other stuff...)

Forums: English
Email this Topic • Print this Page

These questions have been bothering me, so could you boffins please help me? Please don't answer me with American English, only Standard English please.

When is the colon : (or is that semi?) used to introduce direct speech? I saw it while I was reading "The Secret Journey" by Rosemary Weir (I know it's for children, but I enjoyed it.) It was used to introduce direct speech that began in a new paragraph.

Is connexion a valid spelling of connection? I've seen it here and there.

'Really' in place of 'very'. I have often seen sentences like "It was a really good book", using 'really' where 'very' should be. Is this correct? If not, when is really used?

Differentiate. It seems to me that this is a new word that is not Standard English. It is used to mean "Explain the difference between", as in "Can you differentiate between the two type of xyz".

Punctuation. When are single- and double-quotation marks used (i.e ' and ")? I have heard it doesn't matter as long as you are consistent in your usage. Also, where and when do full stops (question marks, commas etc.) go at the end of writting inside quotation marks, direct speech or otherwise?

Than-you for your help. I may have more questions later Very Happy

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,354 • Replies: 20

No top replies

Re: Colons and Quotations (and some other stuff...)
When is the colon : (or is that semi?) used to introduce direct speech?

When the writer decides, or is required, to use that style.

This is a colon : and this is a semicolon ;

The University of Central Lancashire Department of Journalism style guide says...

Quote:

Direct speech

This means that you report the exact words of the speaker and you signal this to the reader by putting the words between quotation marks. By using quotation marks, you are giving the reader an undertaking that you have not changed anything - they are the exact words the speaker used.

Using direct speech, there are two styles you can use:

Style 1 - the full-sentence

This style is used when the speaker's sentence is so striking that you want to record the complete sentence or paragraph.

For example:

The mayor said: "I am suspending the meeting until members have calmed down."

With this style, there are seven rules that have to be followed strictly:

1. The quote is introduced by said or added. Don't search for elegant variations such as demanded, opined, queried. You may have been encouraged to use long words as a vocabulary-widening exercise years ago, but journalists try to keep things simple.

2. The word said is followed by a colon. Again, you may have been taught to use a comma, and many books use commas, but please follow newspaper style.

3. The quote itself is opened by double quote marks in the form of a number 66.

4. The first word of the quote is in capital letters.

5. The quote (when introduced by a said or added) must be a complete sentence.

6. It is followed by a full stop, before the final quote marks.

7. The final quote marks are in the form of a 99.

(Style 2 is "The vivid phrase")

Is connexion a valid spelling of connection?

The Columbia Guide To standard English usage says

Quote:

Connection is the American spelling, connexion, the usual British one.

That may have been true about 100 years ago, but "connection" is the more usual British spelling these days. "Connexion" is not wrong though.

'Really' in place of 'very'. I have often seen sentences like "It was a really good book", using 'really' where 'very' should be. Is this correct?

Using "really" in place of "very" is acceptable, if a little informal and conversational. "Really really" is as slangy and unacceptable in written English as "very very" would be.

Differentiate. It seems to me that this is a new word that is not Standard English. It is used to mean "Explain the difference between", as in "Can you differentiate between the two type of xyz".

This is a perfectly normal and acceptable standard English word, and has been used in the sense that you describe for many years. However it has a number of specialised meanings eg in mathematics, biology, chemistry, philosophy, and therefore many people prefer to use "distinguish"

Punctuation. When are single- and double-quotation marks used (i.e ' and ")? I have heard it doesn't matter as long as you are consistent in your usage.

Single or double quotation marks are used to denote either speech or a quotation. Neither style is an absolute rule. A publisher's or even an author's style may take precedence over national general preferences. The important rule is that the style of opening and closing quotes must be matched.

Also, where and when do full stops (question marks, commas etc.) go at the end of writting inside quotation marks, direct speech or otherwise?

Again, there are national differences. The traditional convention in American English is for commas and periods to be included inside the quotation marks, even if they are not part of the quoted sentence, while the British style shows clearly whether or not the punctuation is part of the quoted phrase. The American rule is derived from typesetting while the British rule is grammatical. As with many such differences, the American rule follows an older British standard. The typesetter's rule was standard in early 19th century Britain; the grammatical rule was advocated by the extremely influential book The King's English, by Fowler and Fowler.

I am not sure if your rather provocative insistence on being given "Standard English" answers is going to be much use. I am not sure if there is such a beast.

You may find that American explanations of UK/American differences are woefully out of date as far as UK practice is concerned, if not plain wrong.

0 Replies

Thank you contrex. With regards to your first answer, I am a bit unsure, as that is about journalism. In ordinary prose, in novels and such, he colon is almost never used, and descriptive words such as 'demanded' instead of 'said' are commonly used. I get the feeling that those are journalistic standards you quoted and not ordinary prose standards, if that makes sense.

Quote:

Using "really" in place of "very" is acceptable, if a little informal and conversational.

Is that to say, that in a formal context, very is preferred to really?

In referring to Standard English, I meant the English we're taught at school, as being the English the Queen (should) speaks.

Thank you again contrex, and I may have a few more questions, but I need to hang up the washing now....

0 Replies

With regards to your first answer, I am a bit unsure, as that is about journalism.

Isn't journalism legitimate? You asked when colons are used to introduce direct speech. I gave you an example. I hope you have grasped my point about choosing an appropriate style, and that style is a matter of choice.

Is that to say, that in a formal context, very is preferred to really?

In general, yes.

In referring to Standard English, I meant the English we're taught at school, as being the English the Queen (should) speaks.

"The Queen's English" refers to Recieved Pronunciation (RP). This is a spoken dialect of UK English. It has nothing to do with the written form of the language. Maybe you mean "UK English".

0 Replies

when I saw colons and quotations I figured this was another bushisms thread....

0 Replies

Bi-Polar bear, you prevented me from editing my spelling mistake! "Received".

0 Replies

contrex wrote:

Bi-Polar bear, you prevented me from editing my spelling mistake! "Received".

I'm a trouble maker... I can't control myself...

0 Replies

Quote:

Isn't journalism legitimate? You asked when colons are used to introduce direct speech. I gave you an example. I hope you have grasped my point about choosing an appropriate style, and that style is a matter of choice

.

Yes, yes. I should have worded it differently. I meant in ordinary non-journalistic writing- in novel, letters etc.- am I correct in saying that it is not the norm to introduce direct speech with a colon?

Quote:

Maybe you mean "UK English".

Yes, I think that's it Laughing

Thanks contrex.

A few more questions:

When using two or more adjectives to describe one thing, they should be seperated by commas, yes/no? E.g. '...the grey, rusty, old van...' instead of '...the grey, rusty old van...' or even '...the grey rusty old van...'

When are adjectives hypenated? Like '...the seemingly-old van...'

Nonetheless/nevertheless or non-the-less/never-the-less ?

Thank you.

0 Replies

Actually, far more people in the world for whom English is not their mother tongue want to learn to speak the American language for sound business reasons. Therefore, Quincy expresses a personal prejudice when attemping to make a distinction between the American language and "standard English." If for no other reason than that there are more than 300,000 speakers of the American language in North America, and hundreds of millions more people in Asia who study the American language in order to learn English--there is no functional distinction between the American language and standard English.

As for the colon, it is vital to protect the health of your colon. I suggest a diet high in dietary fibre and high in anti-oxidants.

0 Replies

am I correct in saying that it is not the norm to introduce direct speech with a colon?

When using two or more adjectives to describe one thing, they should be seperated by commas, yes/no? E.g. '...the grey, rusty, old van...' instead of '...the grey, rusty old van...' or even '...the grey rusty old van...'

Commas may be used to separate items in a list, including a sequence of adjectives

The red white and blue British flag
The red, white and blue British flag
are both OK

A green, yellow, red and white lizard
looks better with commas

When are adjectives hypenated? Like '...the seemingly-old van...'

Again, this is a matter of style.

The seemingly old, but well maintained van
The seemingly-new van had an ominous rattle

These are all matters of style and/or typographical aesthetics rather than "correctness". A colon to introduce direct speech rather than a comma is a matter of choice. I happened to quote a journalism style guide where the colon was advised; either is correct whether in "literary" or "journalistic" prose. The important thing is to be cosistent.

Nonetheless/nevertheless

Always

or non-the-less/never-the-less ?

Never

Two very good places to get useful if sometimes opinionated advice are the Usenet groups alt.usage.english and alt.english.usage.

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/alt.usage.english/topics

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/alt.english.usage/topics

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

there are more than 300,000 speakers of the American language in North America

Considerably more, I'd have thought...

0 Replies

Thank you very much contrex for all your answers.

Quote:

Actually, far more people in the world for whom English is not their mother tongue want to learn to speak the American language for sound business reasons. Therefore, Quincy expresses a personal prejudice when attemping to make a distinction between the American language and "standard English." If for no other reason than that there are more than 300,000 speakers of the American language in North America, and hundreds of millions more people in Asia who study the American language in order to learn English--there is no functional distinction between the American language and standard English.

Maybe it's snobbery. Maybe it's because we use UK (standard) English in South Africa.

And the two are different in my opinion. For example, in American English it is common (and acceptable) to use adjectives in place of adverbs and so on. YES, I am biased.

0 Replies

You are not only biased, you are wonderfully ignorant. Speakers of all languages include people who habitually make errors, but that doesn't mean that there is ever one group of people who never makes mistakes when speaking or writing a language.

Please provide me some examples of properly educated Americans using adjectives in place of adverbs--because, frankly, i think you are either lying or making things up. And the English spoken in the United Kingdom is not any more or any less "standard English" than is the English spoken in the United States. To refer to regional and colloquial speech habits as though that conclusively demonstrates that one habitual usage is superior to another not only displays your bias, it displays your ignorance.

The following are e-mails received by the web master at ChavScum-dot-co-dot-UK, and are, at least putatively from those who most people in England would identify as Chavs or Chavettes, including the correspondents themselves:

U hv nuhn btr t du thn make up sum wbsite bwt chavz?

Cuz ur kl!

**********************

listen up bruv , all des h8rs need ta stop dissin us chavs yer , coz we iz the future innit . n u like it or not bruv we is gna bust all yous up wit our grill, so you best hush ya gums yer?

**********************

donts dis chavs becuz i is one n i is da mint an my m8s r bangin 2 if ya
relly no. atleest we look mint wit r bling n reebok klasicks u r jus jeloos
coz all da birds like us n u r prob sum kin of yettie or hobo or summin.i
also got a relly cool seichento dun up car better dan pimp my ride cud do so
u r obviosly jus so jeloos of me. so go shuv me exost pipe up ya nostrell.
ya prick x

***********************

Tell me again about how the United Kingdom is the home of standard English--and while you're at it, try to feed me some more bullshit stories about how English is spoken in the United States.

0 Replies

contrex wrote:

Setanta wrote:
there are more than 300,000 speakers of the American language in North America

Considerably more, I'd have thought...

Good catch--that ought to have been 300,000,000. Thanks for spotting that.

0 Replies

You are right Setanta, I am wrong. Sorry.

0 Replies

It is a measure of your character that you are willing to say as much. I wasn't trying to beat up on you, but i did want to make the point that Americans also speak standard English.

I also attempted to introduce some levity into the subject--so i hope that you will protect the health of your colon with antioxidants and dietary fiber.

0 Replies

Quincy wrote:

You are right Setanta, I am wrong. Sorry.

OK Quincy you were big enough to apologize, now you should move forward with your head held high and ask some more questions!

0 Replies

It is late here contrex, tomorrow I think I'll ask some more questions. Thank you both for your time and replies.

0 Replies

Back for some more questions. Smile

Ok, abbreviations; when do they get a fullstop (er, also know as a 'period'), and when do they not?

Do sentences always start with capital letters? For instance, if someones surname is 'de Villiers', and you start a sentence with the surname, is the 'd' in capitals?

Moot; isn't it supposed to me 'subject to debate'? But, for example, when people say 'moot point' they almost always mean it's not a point at all; is this correct?

Protaganist can not mean 'a supporter of' right?

Is it 'can not' or 'cannot'?

Thank-you.

0 Replies

Ok, abbreviations; when do they get a fullstop (er, also know as a 'period'), and when do they not?

If the writer decides to use them, or is required to do so by eg style requirements imposed by a publisher. Rather old fashioned nowadays.

Do sentences always start with capital letters? For instance, if someones surname is 'de Villiers', and you start a sentence with the surname, is the 'd' in capitals?

Yes. The capitalisation required by the start of a sentence takes precedence.

Moot; isn't it supposed to me 'subject to debate'? But, for example, when people say 'moot point' they almost always mean it's not a point at all; is this correct?

Not sure what you mean here. "Not a point at all"? A moot point is one which is debatable, a matter of opinion that is not definitely decided.

Protaganist can not mean 'a supporter of' right?

Not exactly. Maybe you were thinking of "proponent", someone who argues in support of something; an advocate.

A protagonist (note spelling)

can be

1. The main character in a drama or other literary work.

2. In ancient Greek drama, the first actor to engage in dialogue with the chorus, in later dramas playing the main character and some minor characters as well.

3.

a. A leading or principal figure.

b. The leader of a cause; a champion.

Is it 'can not' or 'cannot'?

cannot for about the last 200 years or so.

0 Replies

Colons and Quotations (and some other stuff...)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know