Vernacular Question

[Vandal]

I would like to know how some of you have handled the use of dialogue in settings from earlier centuries. The first part of my story takes place in colonial New England from the late 1600s through the mid 1700s with a good amount of dialogue. Rather than making everyone sound like they stepped out of the pages of The Scarlet Letter or Pilgrim's Progress (yikes), I toned it down and made the dialogue sound "old" by eliminating contractions and modern-sounding terms.

I don't really know what townspeople sounded like in 1676 or 1736 and I'm hoping the readers don't either. I even checked the transcripts of the Salem witch trials to get an ear for the times, but the readers would need subtitles if I wrote dialogue similar to that (and those witches were a wordy bunch).

I want to be both accurate and readable, but I'm not sure if I can achieve both. I went with readable.

[PeeDee]

I would like to know how some of you have handled the use of dialog in settings from earlier centuries. The first part of my story takes place in colonial New England from the late 1600s through the mid 1700s with a good amount of dialog. Rather than making everyone sound like they stepped out of the pages of The Scarlet Letter or Pilgrim's Progress (yikes), I toned it down and made the dialog sound "old" by eliminating contractions and modern-sounding terms.

I want to be both accurate and readable, but I'm not sure if I can achieve both. I went with readable.

Good. when in doubt, go with readable. Accuracy is wonderful, up until the bit when no one has the faintest idea what your characters are saying.

As for how to make it old, I'd say you've got the right idea. Heck, you can probably keep contractions. A contraction tends to be the blurring together of two words, so even if they didn't officially call them "contractions," I bet you they still used them.

(They may HAVE called them contractions, for that matter, I don't know.)

But don't have your colonial fellow say "Homie don't play that," and I think you'll otherwise be fine.

[CaroGirl]

I agree with going for readable. If you make your reader work too hard, you'll lose your reader every time. Dialect is a distraction if overdone or badly done, but is an enhancement when done well.

Read some good novels that are set in your time period and see how the author handled the dialogue. You can also read novels set in other places and other time periods to see how dialect is managed. Determined whether you think it's done well or poorly. Take what you like about it and leave what you don't.

[vrabinec]

I would like to know how some of you have handled the use of dialog in settings from earlier centuries. The first part of my story takes place in colonial New England from the late 1600s through the mid 1700s with a good amount of dialog. Rather than making everyone sound like they stepped out of the pages of The Scarlet Letter or Pilgrim's Progress (yikes), I toned it down and made the dialog sound "old" by eliminating contractions and modern-sounding terms.

I don't really know what townspeople sounded like in 1676 or 1736 and I'm hoping the readers don't either. I even checked the transcripts of the Salem witch trials to get an ear for the times, but the readers would need subtitles if I wrote dialog similar to that (and those witches were a wordy bunch).

I want to be both accurate and readable, but I'm not sure if I can achieve both. I went with readable.

Mine's set in the 1890's. While my problem isn't quite as complex as yours, I am still amazed as I read through my book of etimology as to how many words we commonly use today that were not in use back then. I wouldn't worry so much about sentence structure, but specific words that weren't used yet should be avoided. Publishers will know the history of words and will likely be put off if a word like "diesel" shows up in your dialogue.

[jonereb]

I'd probably split the difference. I'm reading Red Badge of Courage. Some of the dialogue is difficult. Give it the flavor of the period, but make it readable.

[Jamesaritchie]

I think word choice and syntax make the difference. Perhaps the biggest mistake I see is writers goofing and slipping in modern words and phrases into historical fiction.

[IrishScribbler]

I think word choice and syntax make the difference. Perhaps the biggest mistake I see is writers goofing and slipping in modern words and phrases into historical fiction.

I agree.

Something you may try is to write the dialogue more formally than you're used to writing. Then it's readable, and still sounds (perhaps) old.

[Jenan Mac]

But don't have your colonial fellow say "Homie don't play that," and I think you'll otherwise be fine.

Yeah. It'd be "Goodman Homie don't play dat", wouldn't it?

[Vandal]

Something you may try is to write the dialogue more formally than you're used to writing. Then it's readable, and still sounds (perhaps) old.


Yes, I definitely wrote it formally. Perhaps "proper English" is a better term. I asked some of beta readers about the sound of the dialog and none of them had a problem with it. I will check again for anachronisms and such.

Thanks for your input, everyone.

[Jenan Mac]

You can give temporal flavor by a few judicious choices-- forms of address, exclamations, cultural references, people's names. Otherwise, yeah-- standard English, for readability's sake.

[Raphee]

I would stick with readable English. No tongue twisting, or putting in the latest slang ; thats all.
'If thou gets what I meaneth.'

[jodiodi]

In my fantasy works the world is a pre-industrialized setting (almost medieval). One of the races never uses contractions while another one uses them sparingly. Then I have an alleged 'modern' character who uses them all the time. Formality of the language is used to distinguish one group from another, but it's all still readable. I hate to try and sift my way through archaic terms and metaphors so I know my readers would likely feel the same.

[HorrorWriter]

But don't have your colonial fellow say "Homie don't play that," and I think you'll otherwise be fine.

Exactly, PeeDee! Too funny. :ROFL: