I know many of you are fiction writers, aspiring writers, or just shake
your heads when you read non-traditional grammar in fiction stories. I thought
it might be fun to hear from someone who has to manage the crazy grammar that writers
try, and often succeed in, to put through the editing process.
A sentence fragment is something that isn’t a complete sentence. Often,
sentence fragments are missing the subject that would be present in a sentence,
but they can also be missing the predicate.
Example 1:
“You’re not welcome here, Paul.”
Most places in the world, a statement
like that sounded normal. Unfriendly, perhaps, but still common, still
acceptable.
If you’re like me, it’s perfectly clear to you what is being said here.
Granted, the lines have a certain clipped cadence that may not be everyone’s
stylistic cup of tea, but they make sense.
There’s Always a Catch
The catch here is that apart from the line of dialogue, there’s not a
single “real” sentence in that excerpt. And this example is hardly an outlier.
Fiction writers bend the rules of grammar on a regular basis. Fragmenting in
particular is a useful device, in part because, if wielded properly, it can let
an author get across information more economically than would be possible with
proper grammar, with no loss in clarity.
Example 2:
Echoing gunfire from above. Pookie
looked in that direction and saw something amazing. A man leaping off the
cavern’s ledge. Rising up, then arcing down, his legs bicycling beneath
him...
This kind of fragmenting is a regular bone of contention. The action is
conveys the descriptions using machine-gunning fragments. On the one hand, this
is a perfectly valid stylistic move: it conveys the way a viewpoint character,
seeing things through a cloud of adrenaline, takes in the action in a series of
disjointed snapshots. And fragmenting helps you write economically, right? So
if by doing this you are helping an action scene flow along quickly, it should
be a big plus.
But for me, this method can potentially read awkwardly, especially when
it’s used often. It feels unpleasantly choppy. And it’s fairly easy to tweak
these lines in a way that doesn’t actually cost us much in terms of added words
— or, putting it differently, the fragmenting here is not, actually, doing much
in terms of efficiency.
What Is the Right Way to Use Sentence Fragments?
At this point you’ve noticed a problem with all this talk about what
works and why: it’s completely subjective. That’s the thing about fragmenting,
and all the other grammar-breaking tricks fiction writers often employ. They’re
risky. When authors write without the safety net provided by the rules of
subject, verb, object, etc., the only real guide for what’s right or wrong is
their ear. The results can be ugly. Also, fragmenting can easily turn into
stylistic tics —or, even worse, ways to excuse sloppy, lazy prose.
Use Sentence Fragments Sparingly and When the Story Calls for It
Sentence fragments in fiction can be a useful way of conveying pace, tone,
and intensity. However, overuse can lead to lazy writing – fragments should be
used sparingly, and for a good storytelling purpose.
In this article, I questioned whether sentence fragments could potentially make editors reject your work. So, if you are
breaking rules, make sure it’s because it’s necessary and adds something, not
just because it’s just easier.
2 comments:
Oh dear. This is the start of something more than you expected, my precious Sam, for it is indeed a very subjective topic.
I understand the need for proper sentence structure in writing. Without the formal structures of writing things can get a tad out of hand. But, and this is where it gets tricky, the question that has to be asked is: does this actually work with the voice of the writer? Let's be honest here when you read a story, any story, you tend yo have a quiet voice in the back of your mind for each author.
As an example, read a piece here: reisonance-words.blogspot.com; and compare it with one of your own pieces. Do you get a sense of the author as you read?
So should writers sacrifice their individual voices simply to apease the gods of gramatic convention?
As a writer myself i have a sense of what each scene in the story needs as such have to use a variety of devices to get the right pace. Some stories need grama that is emollient on the reader's imagination, while others need staccato, disjointed textures.
It would be interesting to hear what formally trained writers think on this.
No , no Nic-Nac. This is exactly the reaction I want. I do hope that more people send through their feedback.
Personally, I am a stickler for proper grammar and writing. However, little words like “emphasis” and “context” seem to throw a spanner in the works. And I am not entirely sure that I can completely disagree with them. Unfortunately, there are times when the usage of sentence fragments play a vital role in relating an intended message to the reader. All of my training in English (be it formal English or legal), has directed me to not using fragmented speech. However, don't think Socrates would have anticipated telling stories of mythical fantasy, nor writing one, so that would probably explain the natural inclination to steer clear of it I am an extreme OCD case. I don't even write shorthand when texting (except for when there are character restrictions like on Twitter).
See, the problem with a fragment is its incompleteness. A sentence is supposed to express a complete idea (subject – verb – object), but a fragment neglects to tell the reader either what it is about or what happened. This could go on forever, so to summarise: as much as I am a lover of completeness, I do however still stand by context. So I don't agree with my colleagues in discriminating nor abolishing sentence fragments anytime soon...Still, I am sure you will agree that when and how to use fragments – must be carefully chosen? In the right context it will work marvellously but incorrectly, it’s disastrous.
Post a Comment