Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/47212
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/47212
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

First, if the context is obvious, you don't need a dialogue tag at all.

> "Albert, you're already drunk! Stop it!" she implored him.
> 
> "Nah, if I stop drinking, I won't have an excuse to miss work tomorrow!"

Second, if the dialogue ends in anything but a period, I prefer the attribution up front. Not all authors agree, and I don't always do it myself, but if the reader should be putting any spin on the tone, it helps if they know up front how to read the words.

> Alice implored him, "Albert, you're already drunk! Stop it!"
> 
> Albert giggled. "Nah, if I stop drinking, I won't have an excuse to miss work tomorrow!"

In general, as I have done here, you don't even absolutely **need**"said" or a dialogue tag. You can indicate who is talking by directing the reader's attention to a character by describing an action on the same line. "Albert giggled."

Instead of "implored" we can describe Alice's expression:

> Albert poured himself another glass, and Alice knit her brow in concern. "Albert, you're already drunk! Stop it!"

Now I **do** use "said" frequently, as Galastel says it is transparent to readers. But I also think every time a person talks, you have an opportunity to aid the visual and action imagination of the reader by describing an action instead of a tag. It is an opportunity to add visual body language and facial expressions to the conversation, which is important in avoiding the sense of disembodied talking heads.

Original score: 14