Comments From a Simple Treedog

[Sparrowhawk]

I for one can't tell the difference between "you're" and "your" as spoken, and therefore assumed it was just a sort of wink-wink reference for reviewers to enjoy. Kinda borderline breaking the fourth wall.

but maybe i'm wrong ;)

[Damask the Minstrel]

Yes, I have spoken incorrectly, many times, and it certainly would translate to vomit. But in this case... to the ear, "you're" and "your" sound alike, unless you really, really enunciate -- most people just slur the former, though. How could you know it was the possessive or otherwise just from speaking it (or hearing it, rather)?

Most of the time, I forgive any verbal SPAG errors. People don't speak grammatical conventions, on the whole. In that case, though, it seems a little forced.

[Sycamore]

I for one can't tell the difference between "you're" and "your" as spoken, and therefore assumed it was just a sort of wink-wink reference for reviewers to enjoy. Kinda borderline breaking the fourth wall.

but maybe i'm wrong ;)

Well, yes, that was part of it, too. Actually, that's the whole thing, but I'm taking it far beyond where it should go.

And to continued beating a dead stick with a horse, it was clarified by Liam's latter statement that he was speaking the possessive form. So Meadowbrook obviously corrected to account for it.

[Venril]

Speaking of which, who will be the first to say "SPAG isn't important" or something similar?

I'll be the third.  I only care about other people's SPAG if it inhibits me from understanding what the person is writing.  If I can understand everything and the post is enjoyable to read, I really don't care that much about the finer points of SPAG.

[Cairn Destop]

SPAG is important -- as Bells pointed out to me earlier -- but it shouldn't be everything. For instance, I'm fine if you use fragments for emphasis, especially in speech/thoughts. Not everyone speaks proper grammar, for sure.

Believe it or not, that is when such things as fragmented sentences are acceptable.  As you noted, people seldom speak properly, so dialogue has exceptions when it comes to SPAG.  As you noted, clipped and fragmented sentences can highlight the tension.  So even on the other site where I review, dialogue is primarily "fitting" a character and/or situation.

[Cairn Destop]

Again, I'll ask if anyone has ever said something so incorrect it looks like a vomit of letters on paper. I will frequently switch words around in sentences, and even letters in words. If that was down on paper, would my author be yelled at for SPAG and typos?

Short answer:  Yes. 

[Damask the Minstrel]

Yay! So hopefully you won't mind my fragments-for-emphasis in my next post. ^.^

(I promise not to use them too much, though, since that's just sloppy. And as a bit of extra info -- the ETA of said next post is tonight.)

[Sparrowhawk]

Okay, characters don't have to speak/think properly grammar-wise, we've established that.

The real question is, will you make exceptions and stay your SPAG hammer-wielding fist if fragmented sentences and other such devices are used for stylistic purposes in the narrative? :o

[Sycamore]

Short answer:  Yes.

Okay, I'll take a real life example that happened to me while dining with friends.

"These loaded waffle flies are dericious!" Jim said with enthusiasm. There was a solid, empty beat before he realized what had come out of his mouth. Everyone laughed at him, and then he found ten bucks.

SPAG ME.

[Damask the Minstrel]

(EDIT: Yargle! I won't argue further. You can type SPAG mistakes to be funny all you want, in my opinion, so I should just zip it and get to writing a post.)

[Sycamore]

YOU CAN'T DO THAT! WE WERE HAVING A GOOD CONVERSATION!!!

[Cairn Destop]

Okay, I'll take a real life example that happened to me while dining with friends.

"These loaded waffle flies are dericious!" Jim said with enthusiasm. There was a solid, empty beat before he realized what had come out of his mouth. Everyone laughed at him, and then he found ten bucks.

What you wrote there is something called a spoonerism, if I remember the term correctly.  It is when somebody reverses or mismatches words in such a manner that the sentence is almost nonsensical, but anyone hearing or reading the line would immediately recognize the gaff.  Such statements are either comical or unintentionally funny within the context of the story.

For your example, the person speaking wouldn't have INTENTIONALLY made that gaff and those around caught the humor, which in a story would be the author's intention.  

And sad to say, real life has this happen all too often.  In fact, I spoke such a spoonerism and where others laughed at the misspoken twist of words, one person charged me with racism.  The ruling, thank goodness, was that the other person didn't have a sense of humor.  (Wish I was lying, but it is all true.  Just wish I could recall it.)

[Sycamore]

For your example, the person speaking wouldn't have INTENTIONALLY made that gaff and those around caught the humor, which in a story would be the author's intention.

So then are you implying that my Liam bit was not intentional?

[Cairn Destop]

Had Liam's dialogue been WRITTEN correctly, and then Liam began his prattle about the usage of the words "your" and "you're," there would be no problem.  Having it written in that way was sloppy by the writer, which is why I commented.

A spoonerism is obvious in its written/spoken form.  If it is in a story, one can expand on it with the laughter of others or the speaker's discomfort when he realized his mistake.

[Cairn Destop]

The real question is, will you make exceptions and stay your SPAG hammer-wielding fist if fragmented sentences and other such devices are used for stylistic purposes in the narrative? :o

Depends on the reason for the fragmented sentences.  If the purpose is to highlight a tense situation, it might be acceptable, but for that specific paragraph.  Like anything else done "for stylistic purposes," too much can become signs of sloppy work or can be perceived as such.