When should you use contractions when writing a story? I know they'd be part of dialogue but is it ok to have them outside of dialogue?
I keep running into the problem and I"m not exactly sure what to do. I'm guessing it would depend on point of view and style.
My preference is damn near always. In first person, it's how people talk. In third, it's still how we think.
Notice I didn't say "it is how we think." the only time to do that is when you're emphasizing, it is how we think.
Otherwise, to me, whenever I come across missing contractions I feel like I'm reading see spot run, run spot run.
Very well said Thuggish. That's exactly how I feel about them. Love em. I hate when people feel the need to articulate every single 'is' and 'can not'. Especially when it's first-person. That's not how people talk and tell stories. And that 'is'--though necessary in places--it usually sucks the life out of the description anyways. A better verb usually works...well, better. Duh Redd, of course a better verb works better.
Just read your work out loud and ask yourself, does this sound natural? And if not, should it?
No problem. :)
I think the best bet really is to read it out loud to hear the flow.
Not just better, natural. Or real.
What about in Fantasy writing? I can't help but feel like the contractions is a modern day thing and that people spoke stiffer in the past.
Then again maybe I'm just arguing here to argue.
I'd say there's an argument for that. If the character warrants it, if it's a matter of making the narrative voice or dialogue authentic to a certain time period or particular dialect, then whatever works. Though, as I've never even written in third-person, I don't know how that should go for the narrator. If the narrator's not actually a character, how much should they sound like a real person from whatever time period?
If the goal of first person is to replicate a story being told by someone who's been affected by the story, is the goal of third person to be a clean, impartial witness? At some point I'm going to have to try it. For some reason I always go for first person.
Actually Hannes makes a great point. I don't really do Fantasy or historical fiction and all that, didn't even think of it.
When writing in third-person, you still have to consider the narrator's voice. Very little third-person is actually a detached, impartial witness - and evern that carries with it a separate "voice." Your narrative voice can and should have a personality.
When I write in third-person, I try to think of who it is that is telling this story. Why is the narrator observing this? I'm not necessarily trying to create a name or a face or a person, but what kind of entity is it observing and reporting? Is the narrator amused by the characters? Is the narrator dismissive of them? All of this factors into drafting the prose and, as a result, impacts whether or not I'm going to use contractions (as well as my sentence structure, word choice, paragraph length, what details I focus on, etc.).
Good stuff. Personally, I find the idea of third person more challenging for some reason. But all of what you said makes sense Gordon.
I'm reading All the Beautiful Sinners by SGJ right now. It's in third person, but there is definitely a certain voice to the narrator. Just I've never really put a whole lot of thought into what goes into that kind of narrator, having never done it, so it seems a little daunting. I think I've always preferred first-person a little, in writing and reading. Feels more personal. But still, that's not to belittle third-person, I've read some great books in third-person too.
For the most part I just don't use them. Feels weird.
Good points here. As an aside, the ones like "It'd" and "could've" annoy me and I've noticed them a lot lately. I use contractions because it's how people talk but stick to standard contractions, not make up my own. No biggie but it's a little distracting.
Also, if a character didn't use any contractions in their speech, that would tell me something about that character. Maybe it would go with someone who was very formal and stiff or whatever.
Actually, Carly's right about that, some are kind of weird outside of dialogue.
Ever notice that they kind of read as contractions when they're not? Could have just goes to could've in my head, anyway. (Unlike "it is" which does not become "it's" if you say it fast.)
It reminds me of "want to," I'll have a character use slang, but still won't write "wanna."