Double Contractions in Dialogue

Ciera_ · Jan 5, 2009

Inspired by the 'gonna or going to' thread, by the way.
So, I use double contractions in speech all the time, I'm sure a lot of you do, too. Examples:
Shouldn't've (I shouldn't've done that)
Wouldn't've (It wouldn't've mattered)
I'd've (I'd've done things differently)
She'd've (She'd've disagreed) (okay, this one isn't as common)
So, these aren''t actually words, obviously. And I'd never use them outside of dialogue/character thoughts. But do you think it's acceptable to use them, if that's how my character talks? Because that's how people do talk, at least, I do.
I've been avoiding it, well, just using a contraction with the extra part separated. (I shouldn't have done that). But to be honest, I don't actually see anything wrong with double contractions for dialogue.
Is there something legitimately wrong with it? Moreso than with spelling other words/phrases 'incorrectly' to make them more like how the character would speak?

Tepelus · Jan 5, 2009

I think what you are hearing is people saying 'I shouldn't of', and it's said so close together and quick that it sounds like the double contraction you are trying to create.

Chase · Jan 5, 2009

Tepelus said:
I think what you are hearing is people saying 'I shouldn't of', and it's said so close together and quick that it sounds like the double contraction you are trying to create.

The speaker means to say, "I shouldn't have."

In dialogue, "I shouldn't've" makes much more sense to me than the entirely incorrect and meaningless "I shouldn't of."

blacbird · Jan 5, 2009

Tepelus said:
I think what you are hearing is people saying 'I shouldn't of', and it's said so close together and quick that it sounds like the double contraction you are trying to create.

"I shouldn't of" is nonsensical. It's a pronounciational rendering of "I shouldn't have".

Generally, however, I think the phrase should be rendered as "I shouldn't have", even in dialogue, unless you're being seriously colloquial, and can do it well.

caw

Phoebe H · Jan 5, 2009

Chase said:
The speaker means to say, "I shouldn't have."

In dialogue, "I shouldn't've" makes much more sense to me than the entirely incorrect and meaningless "I shouldn't of."

blacbird said:
"I shouldn't of" is nonsensical. It's a pronounciational rendering of "I shouldn't have".

You're right, of course -- "I shouldn't of" is just a quicker pronunciation of "I shouldn't have."

*However* what is important to notice is that when people who have that phrase in their dialect write down what they are saying, they will usually write down "I shouldn't of." This is important because it means that in their minds, the word that they are using is "of". I remember this vividly from grammar classes in elementary school.

So...if you are writing colloquially, you are much better off using "I shouldn't of" than "I shouldn't've."

blacbird said:
Generally, however, I think the phrase should be rendered as "I shouldn't have", even in dialogue, unless you're being seriously colloquial, and can do it well.

caw

And I agree with this as well. Except to say that I think of "shouldn't of" as 'moderately colloquial' rather than 'seriously colloquial.' It's probably one of the first two or three bits of dialect that I would use -- but that's just me.

dpaterso · Jan 6, 2009

Ciera_ said:
So, these aren''t actually words, obviously. And I'd never use them outside of dialogue/character thoughts. But do you think it's acceptable to use them, if that's how my character talks?

Yep, I'm fine with this, although I would say that since I write 'em the same way.

-Derek

IceCreamEmpress · Jan 6, 2009

So...if you are writing colloquially, you are much better off using "I shouldn't of" than "I shouldn't've."

Do not do this. EVER. It will make you look like you don't know the difference, rather than that your characters don't know the difference.

The correct orthography is "shouldn't've" but if you're not comfortable with that, default to "shouldn't have." Remember that the writer is you, not your characters--the only place for "shouldn't of" is in a letter or diary entry written by a not-overly-literate character.

Ngaio Marsh was a big offender with "shouldn't of" and it just sets the teeth on edge. Authors are allowed, and indeed expected, to be at least as literate as their characters.

scarletpeaches · Jan 6, 2009

What the Empress said.

'Of' for 'have' is one of my biggest, biggest gripes when it comes to bad writing.

I'd rather run my fingernails down a blackboard than read that.

rugcat · Jan 6, 2009

scarletpeaches said:
What the Empress said.

'Of' for 'have' is one of my biggest, biggest gripes when it comes to bad writing.

I'd rather run my fingernails down a blackboard than read that.

I wouldana thought it would bother you so much.

Tepelus · Jan 6, 2009

I know that it's supposed to be shouldn't have, I was just expressing that I hear people use shouldn't of instead of shouldn't have.

Juliette Wade · Jan 6, 2009

I use colloquialisms often as part of character voice - things like the aforementioned "gonna" etc. But I agree that you'd be taking a risk with "shouldn't of" - it would either have to be very obviously marked as the writing of a person who doesn't know the difference (the literary equivalent of writing [sic]), or it could easily be construed as the author's error.

I personally avoid double contractions like shouldn't've because they aren't as visually clean as I would like. I suspect they would stick out of the text and distract the reader from the content that the author actually wants them to pay attention to.

Ciera_ · Jan 6, 2009

I never even considered using 'shouldn't of', if I saw that in writing I'd likely bash my skull in with a big stick of Toblerone.
Thanks for all the replies, at least now I know that the double-contraction is by no means totally not okay. Which is what I was looking for. ^.^

scarletpeaches · Jan 7, 2009

Tepelus said:
I know that it's supposed to be shouldn't have, I was just expressing that I hear people use shouldn't of instead of shouldn't have.

What you hear is their accent making 'have' sound like 'of', but that's not what they're saying.

Juliette Wade · Jan 7, 2009

Just a thought on the "shouldn't of" phenomenon...

Yes, the correct way of saying it is "shouldn't have."
Yes, the way people say it contracted is "shouldn't've."
The reason that "shouldn't of" shows up is because that reduced "v" is one of the ways that "of" is often pronounced, and for some people, they re-analyze the contraction as containing "of" rather than "have," essentially deriving it backward from the surface form rather than forwards from the root verb grammar.
This reanalysis is very common in the history of language. Sometimes it comes and goes and it's considered an error and nothing happens. Other times it becomes so widespread that the entire language system changes. Which is to say that reanalysis or re-parsing of surface forms is one of the historical sources of language change. That's why it makes sense that some people analyze it this way... but for the moment, the language as a whole is going for the verb-source parsing as correct (to my great relief

).

ideagirl · Jan 7, 2009

Ciera_ said:
I never even considered using 'shouldn't of', if I saw that in writing I'd likely bash my skull in with a big stick of Toblerone.
Thanks for all the replies, at least now I know that the double-contraction is by no means totally not okay. Which is what I was looking for. ^.^

Toblerone? I suspect that would take a while...

I use double contractions in my characters' dialogue all the time. Not the narrative, just the dialogue. I'd use it in the narrative if I had a first-person narrator who spoke like that, but I don't usually use first-person--not in my current novel nor my upcoming one nor in most of my short stories. (If I may be ungrammatical, I love me my third-person limited, and I also love me my third-person omniscient.)

But if you'd shown me your MS, I certainly wouldn't've told you you shouldn't've used double contractions.

IceCreamEmpress · Jan 7, 2009

scarletpeaches said:
What you hear is their accent making 'have' sound like 'of', but that's not what they're saying.

People write "shouldn't of" very, very frequently, both in informal settings (messageboards, blogs) and in published books (I think pretty much every Ngaio Marsh novel, as I mentioned earlier). It's what's called an eggcorn.

That said, it's wrong and we should all do better. Dame Ngaio is dead, but the rest of us aren't off the hook.

Fullback · Jan 7, 2009

Unfortunately, it probably is what they are saying. Don't overestimate the average person.

What if the character is an average person in current English-speaking societies who really does say "shouldn't of" because they think it's correct? The writer is supposed to correct the grammar of characters? Imagine the character Rocky speaking with perfect grammar. How silly would that be?

scarletpeaches · Jan 7, 2009

Characters can say what the hell they like.

Writers, however, should hold themselves to a standard higher than that of the lowest common denominator.

blacbird · Jan 7, 2009

Fullback said:
Imagine the character Rocky speaking with perfect grammar. How silly would that be?

"Please excuse my impertinence, Mr. Opponent, but I find I must take this opportunity to strike you in the face with sufficient vehemence to induce a temporary cessation of consciousness. I apologize for the inconvenience, and have confidence that, once informed of the situation, you will understand."

caw

ideagirl · Jan 8, 2009

Fullback said:
Unfortunately, it probably is what they are saying. Don't overestimate the average person.
What if the character is an average person in current English-speaking societies who really does say "shouldn't of" because they think it's correct? The writer is supposed to correct the grammar of characters?

No, it's not what they're saying. "What the character said" and "what the character would write down as a transcript of what he said" are two different things. If the character meant "should not have" and said it with the usual contractions, then what he said was "shouldn't've." He might misspell that if he were asked to write it down, but that doesn't mean the writer should misspell it too.

"Shouldn't've" and "shouldn't of" sound identical, which is why an average person might incorrectly write it down as "shouldn't of." For the same reason, the average person might also write "their" when what he actually meant and said was "there." But you wouldn't tell the writer to misspell "there" as "their" in that character's dialogue, now would you.

If the character said something incorrect that sounded distinctly different from the correct version, then you'd have a case. A character who says "ain't" is saying "ain't," so you wouldn't correct it to "isn't" in dialogue--that would just be bizarre; you'd be changing what the character said. But here, where the sound is identical, spelling it correctly doesn't change what the character said. It makes no sense to misspell an identical-sounding word just because the word is in dialogue and the character would misspell it if he wrote it down.

Double Contractions in Dialogue

Ciera_

Tepelus

And so...

Chase

It Takes All of Us to End Racism

blacbird

Phoebe H

dpaterso

Also in our Discord and IRC chat channels

IceCreamEmpress

Hapless Virago

scarletpeaches

rugcat

Lost in the Fog

Tepelus

And so...

Juliette Wade

Interprets for aliens

Ciera_

scarletpeaches

Juliette Wade

Interprets for aliens

ideagirl

IceCreamEmpress

Hapless Virago

Fullback

scarletpeaches

blacbird

ideagirl