Speech tags when there is no actual speech

I believe you can use ordinary speech tags once you've established that they're signing, but make sure you don't fall into the quicksand that is sound. It's easy to fall into and almost impossible to get out of once you've made that mistake.

However, I was writing a story with two deaf characters and I found that finding different ways for them to communicate helped. There were characters who used sign language, there were characters who wrote to each other because one didn't understand sign language, and then just people who pointed to things or acted them out.

The biggest thing is make sure you have something to mark the difference between the dialogues. In my story (3rd person Omni) there were a few characters who were actually speaking to each other and then the characters who were signing. The speaking was in quotes, the signing was in italics. It's just something you've got to be careful about

Koschei said:

Basically, I'm writing a story where all dialogue is in sign language but I'm having a bit of trouble with speech tags. I find I'm using "(s)he signed" a lot and it's getting a bit repetitive but I'm struggling to find alternatives.
Does anyone have any advice? Should I just use the "(s)he signed" in the beginning to establish that sign language is being used and then start using ordinary speech tags?

Click to expand...

I'd not suggest using alternatives to 'said,' in general, if your characters were speaking, so I'm not sure what alternatives you're looking for exactly.

Just out of curiosity, is your dialogue straight sign or translated into English?

Wouldn't establishing early on that dialogue in italics represents dialogue delivered in sign language enable you to write it the same as any other dialogue.

See subsequent post

As I recall, there are accepted mannerisms to represent certain kinds of sounds. Like (I believe) waving the hands to represent applause. There are ways to yell and whisper, too. I think. I don't think those conventions are sign language, per se. Just accepted meanings to how a sign is presented.

You could set that tone with an early conversation physically described. Once you set it in the reader's mind, they'll come along for the ride, if you know what I mean.

When people write fantasy novels, the characters speak in english (often modern english), and no big deal is made of that -- even when the action takes place in the fabled land of Smoogendorf. So the concept of "translated" dialog is nothing new. When I watched 300, I didn't get hung up on the fact that the characters should have been talking in classical Greek.

As mentioned, you can use some font foolery to indicate sign language -- italics is kind of used for other things, though. Try out a few other devices -- changing font size, changing font, bolding, whatever. But otherwise, don't be self-conscious about how you write the signed dialog. Shouting in sign may be accomplished differently that shouting in spoken, but the intent is the same.

Changed my earlier post because I just realised you said ALL dialogue is in sign language in which case I agree with Angry Guy. Treat it like any other normal communication/dialogue.

If readers know everybody is using sign language- that's enough for them to understand and visualise it how they choose - they don't need to know all the precise signals.

Koschei said:

Basically, I'm writing a story where all dialogue is in sign language but I'm having a bit of trouble with speech tags. I find I'm using "(s)he signed" a lot and it's getting a bit repetitive but I'm struggling to find alternatives.
Does anyone have any advice? Should I just use the "(s)he signed" in the beginning to establish that sign language is being used and then start using ordinary speech tags?

Click to expand...

Have you read Clan of the Cave Bear, Koschei? Been a while since I read it but I believe that establishes early on that the clan uses a signed language, and then treats it like dialogue from then on. I seem to remember there's a fair bit of 'motioning' and 'signing' and 'gesturing', but also normal dialogue tags like 'asked' or just dialogue and a direction. Might be worth a look?

robjvargas said:

As I recall, there are accepted mannerisms to represent certain kinds of sounds. Like (I believe) waving the hands to represent applause. There are ways to yell and whisper, too. I think. I don't think those conventions are sign language, per se. Just accepted meanings to how a sign is presented.

You could set that tone with an early conversation physically described. Once you set it in the reader's mind, they'll come along for the ride, if you know what I mean.

Click to expand...

Those aren't mannerisms to represent sounds - that's simply applause, as the language is gesture-based, not sound-based. I think describing signs is a path to madness, personally. They're not, imo, something that makes much sense on the page, even diagrams can be confusing, nevermind descriptions, but it's just dialogue. Hence people applauded. If you'd describe it in English, I think it's valid - otherwise, it seems odd.

Angry Guy said:

When people write fantasy novels, the characters speak in english (often modern english), and no big deal is made of that -- even when the action takes place in the fabled land of Smoogendorf. So the concept of "translated" dialog is nothing new. When I watched 300, I didn't get hung up on the fact that the characters should have been talking in classical Greek.

As mentioned, you can use some font foolery to indicate sign language -- italics is kind of used for other things, though. Try out a few other devices -- changing font size, changing font, bolding, whatever. But otherwise, don't be self-conscious about how you write the signed dialog. Shouting in sign may be accomplished differently that shouting in spoken, but the intent is the same.

Click to expand...

I wasn't suggesting translating was odd, just wondering, as the poster said all dialogue was in sign. I kind of assumed it'd be translated, but one never knows.

As it's all the dialogue though, as you point out, no need to focus on it, thus I don't think changing fonts or whatever would help anything, and would read strangely.

I had this problem with my WIP. They're werewolves, and around 25% of their 'conversations' are while in wolf-form - which is mainly body language and scent. I solved it by having the narrator 'translating' it into English, a couple of sentences explaining how they communicate, then using italics to show when it's in 'wolf-speak'. Also it reads a bit better to say 'she told her brother where she'd been' than 'her brother sniffed her fur deeply, to find out where she'd been'. I use 'said' throughout and speech marks, to show it's still dialogue, even if it involves flattened ears, pawing the ground and waving their tails about. My betas were either neutral or positive about how I'd done it.

I'd use "said." ASL (for instance) is a language, just a different one from English. If the characters are talking, they're talking, and saying things, and I don't think it matters what language they're using.

You would need to be careful, though, that they stay in line-of-sight with those they talk with, and that they call attention to themselves by other means than calling out--moving into sight, tapping on shoulder, whatever.

Otherwise--but you could ask this on a deaf forum--I would guess that even terms like, "I heard she was sleeping with Joe," would be perfectly okay, just as blind people have no trouble with, "I see what you mean."

Well - if you call them 'speech tags' it's a lot easier to concieve of the problem you describe. But I've always heard them labeled 'dialogue tags' which makes them a bit easier to use with sign language &c.

Child 44 (link to Barnes and Noble preview) has some pretty weird dialog tags, but they didn't diminish
the book, so I'd say pretty much anything you do would be fine.

KarmaPolice said:

Also it reads a bit better to say 'she told her brother where she'd been' than 'her brother sniffed her fur deeply, to find out where she'd been'.

Click to expand...

Just my opinion, but I like, "Her brother sniffed her fur to find out where she'd been," much more than, "She told her brother where she'd been." The former is active and engaging, it's interesting! The latter is passive and weak. It might also be confusing, since you don't know how she's communicating with him.

Orianna2000 said:

Just my opinion, but I like, "Her brother sniffed her fur to find out where she'd been," much more than, "She told her brother where she'd been." The former is active and engaging, it's interesting! The latter is passive and weak. It might also be confusing, since you don't know how she's communicating with him.

Click to expand...

I second that entirely.

Ditto, if they're wolves.

I might just establish the fact that they speak with sign, once, and then use conventional tags throughout the remainder of the novel: she said, exclaimed, ejaculated, whispered, etc. (Readers may like you the more for it. Or they may hate you the more for it. Couldn't say for sure.)

edt/
seems I've crossposted with 50,000 others up above who've already said as much

shameful to be sure