Which, if either, is correct? "I mean, look - she nodded to the crowd - you made a party." or "I mean, look" - she nodded to the crowd - "You made a party." I realize I am not using actual em-dashes here...not sure how to create them in this editor.
The first one is definitely non-standard and basically wrong. The only question is if the em dashes go inside the quotes or not. I think both may be acceptable but not certain. The action beats definitely don't go inside the quotes. Your second version is how I usually do it.
Em-dashes seem odd in dialogue to me. I think your example would work better just with a standard action beat, like this: "I mean, look," she nodded to the crowd. "You made a party."
It's all one sentence, so the second quote does not need to be capitalized. Use an em-dash inside first quote to show an interruption. "I mean, look—" she nodded to the crowd, "you made a party." How to type em-dashes on the keyboard: https://zapier.com/blog/em-dash-on-keyboard/
Always full stops with the beats. "I mean, look." She nodded to the crowd. "You made a party." I don't believe there are any exceptions, but I could be wrong. But not in this case. You can use an em dash to indicate an interruption, but the em dash indicates a full stop end of sentence anyway. Unless you include a tag, then you would get: "I mean, look," she said, nodding to the crowd, "you made a party." That makes it not a beat at all but a tag with a beat included, which is just an elaborate tag.
This seems the most elegant for what I'm doing. Yes! This is what I was looking for...how I recall seeing it in books I've read. Now that I see it though, it seems unnecessary. Thanks everyone!
The only problem with this version is it uses 'nodded' which is a non-standard dialogue tag. Many editors and style guides do not approve of a dialogue tag unless it involves actual speech (said, asked, uttered, etc.). You can't 'nod' a line of dialogue. But a full stop with a period as suggested by @Homer Potvin is a good alternative, or adding a participial phrase to a regular dialogue tag also suggested by him (the 'she said, nodding'). You can use em dashes, and should, if action clearly interrupts dialogue. (It may be acceptable in some cases for emphasis too, but I'm not sure about that). But whether the dialogue is truly interrupted may come down to style. In your case I'd probably say it's not a true interruption and could be considered continuous. But if it were, I'd probably do it like this: "I mean, look"—she gestured toward the three layer cake and decorations atop the table—"you made a party."
That is how I thought it should be, just going from memory, but visually it just doesn't look right. What I did initially, was how you typed it, but without the inside quotes, just the em-dashes. It looks better visually, but I had a feeling it wasn't grammatically correct. Does anyone else visually analyze what they wrote? I find I'm seldom grammatically correct when editing visually...usually because I don't know what is correct to begin with.
I had no clue how to use em-dashes in dialogue tags, I had to look it up: How to Punctuate Dialogue: Commas, Ellipses, Em Dashes, and More
Here's the standard: "I mean, look"—she nodded to the crowd—"you made a party." No spaces around the em dash there. Don't capitalize when coming back into dialog. Though it's possible to slip the em dash back into the dialog and just use a pure beat. Then it's like the beat is interrupting the dialog and you finish with a fragment. (Guess this one's not a true fragment. It usually is though.) More of a pause is implied, IMO. Of course your example kind of hints at a pause anyway. Just that "look" interjection's effect, I think. Even that introductory phrase ("I mean") forces a pause in with its natural comma. "I mean, look—" She nodded to the crowd. "You made a party." There's nothing to stop you from writing it that way. That top example is the preferred method though when the sentence is very connected.
I didn't think about it when I posted but would this be considered workshopping a story? The line I used as example in my OP is from a story I'm intending for one of the monthly prompts. In my defense I was only questioning the format of em-dashes in dialog, not the line itself, but I think it might be crossing that line?
I always use em dashes when there's some kind of break in what's being said. “Alex got a brand new car—a Mustang—and wants to show it off.”
Readability. Emphasis. Informality. And to show the speaker didn't originally intend to say the make of car. "Alex got a brand new car—a Mustang—and wants to show it off." "Alex got a brand new car, a Mustang, and wants to show it off." "Alex got a brand new car (a Mustang) and wants to show it off." The Oxford Guide to English Usage (2nd edition, 2001) annoyingly doesn't include the commas usage - the closest it has is:- * No comma in expressions like My friend Lord X or My son John. The Chicago Manual of Style I think clarifies this usefully. It depends whether the apposition is restrictive or non-restrictive. So the Oxford Guide's point doesn't apply. https://archive.org/details/chicagomanualofs16edunse/page/314/mode/2up About Em-dashes, it says they can be used as alternatives to commas to set off an amplifying or explanatory element. https://archive.org/details/chicagomanualofs16edunse/page/334/mode/2up The examples it gives don't correspond exactly, but 'a Mustang' amplifies and explains 'a brand new car.' I don't usually go to the Chicago Manual of Style. It's about 5 times the length of the Oxford guide - but here I think that's a benefit and it gives a better account of the common usage. Eats, Shoots and Leaves is often worth a look, but it doesn't have anything on this https://archive.org/details/eatsshootsleaves00trus_1/page/110/mode/2up Parentheses I think are okay here too - I try to only use them as a last resort, but here I think I prefer them to commas. But the question wasn't whether both options are open, it was why would dashes be preferred. Which is much harder, almost to the point of being mischievous. == Notwithstanding all the above, I think there's a case for trying to reserve commas for sub-clauses. , a Mustang, is like a grammatical orphan, or a stub. The speaker should have picked a subject for their sentence and stuck with it - not leave bits of other options floating around. When the text is having to document a character's grammar slipping, its own grammar should be forgiven. It wasn't me, dear editor, it was my character. == From another angle, the choice between em dashes and commas is about whether the apposition of 'a Mustang' contrasts with or extends 'a brand new car'. I tend to the view that the listener can either hear "Alex got a brand new car and wants to show it off" or "Alex got a Mustang and wants to show it off" and so the apposited substantives are in contrast because the listener has to choose between them. Mustangs can be brand new. But if it was a brand new Ford Model T the idea might be surprising - does the punctuation need to allow for this? "Do you really want to marry that girl—the leper?" is yes to the first part, no to the second. "Do you really want to marry that girl, the leper?" I think parses a little strangely - and might even imply that the listener is marrying the girl under-the-description-of leper. Just as the girl isn't necessarily a leper, Mustangs aren't necessarily brand new. So the listener can either know the make or the age. It's a much softer contrast, but I find them similar. The counterargument would run that no, listeners naturally merge the two substantives into one and the comma provides the shortest break for them mentally to do so. The speaker has stopped short of using a relative clause:- "Alex got a brand new car, which is a Mustang, and wants to show it off." so we get an ambiguity over whether the commas work alone or together with an omitted verb+relative pronoun Could it be a comma'd list of one? What if the list was more than one?: "Alex got a brand new car, a Mustang, a convertible, his babe-magnet, the top of the range, and wants to show it off." I think stretching the construction like that would be enough to push it back to an em-dash. 'a Mustang' is qualifying a noun, but it isn't adjectival. There might be a line of argument that if commas are used, should a personal pronoun also be added into the second part of the sentence? "Alex got a brand new car, a Mustang, and he wants to show it off." I think that would give a different tone - they've chosen the comma'd construction for clarity: perhaps more like explaining to a police officer than boasting at a garden party. == The guides didn't mention this but I wonder if it matters that here it's one indefinite explaining another. And it's in the middle of the sentence so some of the options available with commas and nominators (which Mustang might be) don't apply. If it was definite and at the end of the sentence:- "Alex wants to show off his brand new car, the Mustang." "Alex wants to show off his brand new car—the Mustang." "Alex wants to show off his brand new car (the Mustang)." ...then I prefer it the other way round: comma's best and bracket's worst. But it's also then a restrictive apposition so perhaps:- Alex wants to show off his brand new car the Mustang. If the two substitutable units of sense were reversed though, might the comma come back in?:- Alex wants to show off his Mustang, his brand new car. Or become a colon (as if introducing a list of one)? Alex wants to show off his Mustang: his brand new car. Alex wants to show off his Mustang: his brand new car, his birthday present, his means of transport. Verbal economy might provide a welcome get-out-clause:- "Alex got a brand new Mustang and wants to show it off." == I doubt this post has provided a firm reason why dash not comma that's objective and not in the eye of the reader. But perhaps food for thought.
