Write stuff: Avoid using dialect, phonetic spelling

 Mike Strain wrote to the WordWitch:

I have two style questions.

Today we had a quote that said “Helluva win! Thassaway to battle!”

My questions:

1) What do you think of running the word “Helluva?” First, is it objectionable? I don't have a problem with it, but I'm sure some readers won't like it. Second, if we run “helluva” should it be “hell of a?”

2) In the portion: “Thassaway to battle!” I had a copy editor who wanted to change that to read: “That's the way to battle.” I told him to leave it alone, because I thought “Thassaway” represented Mike Stoops' enthusiasm. I can actually hear him saying that. My copy editor thought I was nuts and said our style manual says we “clean up” quotes. Do you think this should have been cleaned up or do you think what we ran was OK?

--- Mike Strain

Thanks for asking, Mike. This is a question that comes up frequently during discussions among editors and reporters.

I will divide my answer in three parts. As to “helluva,” the word is in the dictionary as a slang adjective that is an alteration of “hell of a.” This word follows a long tradition of amelioration of blasphemy and vulgarisms that gives us dang, darn, doggone, dadgum and freaking. Although some readers might find it objectionable, most people would have no problem with its use in this context.

As to “cleaning up” quotes, it’s true the Sports section of the stylebook recommends that. However, as a general rule at the World, it is left up to the reporter and editor to make that decision. It is often based on whether the interview was one-on-one or in presence of an electronic medium and whether the person speaking is a public official.

Now, for the most important part, “Thassaway to battle!” This is an example of an attempt to use dialect, defined as a pecularity in pronunciation or syntax, like a twang or drawl of a particular region or the accent of an ethnic group. It can also be viewed as phonetic spelling.

Here are some other recent examples from our paper:

Them bullets be hot./ Sports

“… big ol’ pie” / News

…glad they have a chance to geter done/ Sports

… a truckin’ number by ../ Scene

Git-r one/ Spot

Many experts discourage the use of dialect in quotes. Some newspapers have written policies against using it.

The reasons are four-fold:

1. Dialect is distracting, according to “News Reporting and Writing” by Alfred Lawrence Lorenz and John Vivian, (1996, Allyn & Bacon).

The authors write: … “Writers of nonfiction generally avoid it because it diverts audience attention from what was said to how it was said, which usually is gratuitous.”

They conclude, “In rare situations you may judge that dialect is essential to a story, you should let the reader know that the speaker spoke in a dialect but without actually reproducing the peculiarities of expression.”

2. We practice it subjectively, selectively and inconsistently. At the World we have done it most often with country singers, hip-hop artists and rappers or in feature treatments. It is often used by writers who have a degree of creativity and want to add authenticity to their quotes.

However, our selection of the speakers is sporadic and even within the story itself, its use is inconsistent. For example, the first paragraph in Mike’s example is the only time we attempt to write a phonetic spelling of Stoops’ words. Plus, can we be sure we heard them and are interpreting them right?

The New York Times Stylebook says, “Even writers with the keenest ears and most thorough notes must satisfy themselves that readers will understand why a class or group is being tarred selectively with quirks.”

3. The spelling is making the quote incorrect.

ASNE guidelines say that we shouldn’t attempt to capture dialect or mangled pronunciation, unless it is an essential element of a story. If someone says “gimme” instead of “give me,” it’s OK to write “give me” because that’s the correct pronunciation.

“Gonna” is the way many, perhaps most, people pronounce “going to.” To write “going to” is not changing the quote, but is making it more accurate. However, we should leave the idiosyncratic sentence construction in tact, according to Bill Walsh, chief copy editor for national news at the Washington Post.

“To change ‘I be doing that’ to ‘I am doing that’ or anything else is to lie to the reader. Go ahead and change ‘I be doin' dat’ to ‘I be doing that’ (again, it’s a matter of pronunciation, and we should leave dialect re-creation to the fiction writers), but don't ever put words in people's mouths,” Walsh writes on the Poynter.org Web site.

We correctly left the structure alone in our use of: .Them bullets be hot. (More on this later).

4. It can be insulting. Most experts agree that a dialect is considered substandard and that if we use it, we are being condescending or even insulting to the person being quoted. Some newspapers have a rule against it in their codes of ethics.

Says Theodore M. Bernstein, author “The Careful Writer”: “There is such a thing as false condescension – like patting a midget on the head in the belief that he is a small boy. …” (Wordwitch objects to that example!)

Bernstein goes on to say: “From a broader point of view, dialect is a touchy problem. Aside from the danger of error, there is the danger of suggesting class, social or racial snobbery. The danger maybe slight in fiction writing, but it is real and present in other writing, particularly in newspaper writing.”

“A form of it is the attempt to represent dialect by misspellings that merely tender the normal pronunciations of words. Is “sez” different from “says? …. What kind of dialect, if any, do those spellings suggest?” Bernstein asks.

Bryan A. Garner, editor of Modern American Usage, agrees that dialects that conflict with Standard English are not “socially acceptable,” so we are insulting people by suggesting that people aren’t speaking “properly.”

“The rule is simple: Change pronunciation peculiarities into Standard English. Following that rule, you would not write: “I’m a’ go’in’ to town … Instead you would write, “I’m going to town,’” he says.

The ( Newport News) Daily News Press has a policy against using dialect, stating: “Inappropriate use of dialect in print can convey a bundle of unintended messages: racism, classism, condescension, ridicule.”

Some tips for conveying distinct speech:

1. Let the reader know that the speaker spoke in a dialect but without actually reproducing the peculiarities of expression (Lorenz and Vivian.) For example, with “Them bullets be hot.” if it had been a feature story rather than a Q&A, we could have added, “he joked in a mock gangsta voice.” This “out of context” is inherent in Q&As, perhaps a good reason for not using the format. The humor intended didn’t come through; the speaker came off as a gang member. So the best choice might have been to use another quote or format.

2. A writer with a good ear can “suggest” dialect by using normal peculiarities of construction, says Bernstein. “That is a more foolproof and more satisfactory way of conveying dialect.”

NYT stylebook agrees, saying: Usually the decision should be that word order and turns of phrase paint a clearer picture than eccentric spelling.

3. Find another way to convey ethnicity, national origin or colorful speech and do it without patronizing or holding the speaker up to ridicule for nonstandard speech, offered Ben Kaufman, adjunct instructor/lecturer at Northern Kentucky University

Otherwise, it is best to follow the advice of William Strunk Jr. and E.G. White in “The Elements of Style”: Do not use dialect unless you are a devoted student of the tongue you hope to reproduce.”