Using pronouns in thought

Can you use the pronoun I and my when written in the third person if the person is reading his thoughts on a screen and if they are simply thoughts, are they in single quotation marks?

For example,
Lombard paused for thought and read on. I must take stock of a significant fact. I am an expert in genetics, the most controversial of all the sciences, lest we forget the incredible advances in my field.

I will be grateful for any help here, please.

 

Yes, I thought of that but is it acceptable in writing?

 

The other question I would like to pose would be; if the words were spoken in quotation marks, they would start on the next line as a new paragraph. Would this be the same for the thoughts in italics? Thanks.

 

absolutely, people do it all the time

Quotations don't have be put in a new paragraph. If there are quotations from more than one character, then the usual practice is to separate them into different paragraphs to avoid confusion, but multiple quotations from the same character can appear in the same paragraph. I suppose the same rule would apply to thoughts in italics--although it's probably kind of rare to have thoughts from multiple characters right next to each other.

 

oh yeah, forgot about Dune haha

 

I meant that if the thoughts were in italics, they reverted to narration for a bit; that would be a new paragraph. Then maybe back to his or her thoughts again; that would be a new paragraph in italics. Example:

Lombard paused for thought and read on.
(New paragraph) I must take stock of a significant fact. I am an expert in genetics, the most controversial of all the sciences, lest we forget the incredible advances in my field.
(New paragraph) He paused and looked out of the window, his train of thought momentarily interrupted. He realised what he had written then; his thoughts drew him back to his writings, and he carried on reading in his head.
(New paragraph] I am delving into the realms of something evil where the blame will lie with me along with my colleagues.

I tried to format the new paragraphs with indents in the right places, but it did not show the indents when I posted on the forum. That is why I put ‘New Paragraph’ in the places where new paragraphs start.

 

I wouldn't start a new paragraph until you revert to narration, but it depends on the length of the narration preceding the thought.

 

I always thought that when you came out of the thoughts from a person you automatically started a new paragraph with narration as it is a new section of writing. Hmm... need some pointers from an expert as you say.

I know the rule about two people conversing with each other and that being a new paragraph when each of them speaks.

 

I instinctively do that, ending the paragraph with the thought. I don't use italics, though, just thought tags.

 

If you read sci-fi/fantasy, you may have heard of Anne McCaffrey. She wrote books about dragons, and her dragons communicated with humans telepathically. Rules or no rules, considering the millions of books she sold I hold her as a pragmatic example. This is from book II of the Dragonriders of Pern series:

 

There you go then; this lady used her telepathy in italics, so why not thoughts in italics?. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. You have also answered my initial question about the legitimacy of using pronouns when somebody is in thought or is in dialogue when writing in the third person.

 

It is best to break down thoughts into at least 3 categories. One is indirect thought. Two is direct thought. Three is internal monologue. At no time is it best to use quotes for any of these, but internal monologue, (which is usually a form of direct thought, but not always), is treated just like dialogue. The way you know it is not spoken dialogue is italics are used in place of quotes. I should pause this analysis here by saying that researchers show that half the population never talks to themselves internally like dialogue, which I find fascinating and also a likley reason why half the population seems to be so ignorant. But I digress.
Let me illustrate these three components (found in 1st or any limited 3rd application).

What does she know? Will that flying woman come back and take them all, one by one? Is she out there right now, waiting to grab somebody else? “Why does it matter?” Pawa pulled her pillow into the pile she’d made of herself in the corner of her cell and wished she could close her own door. She could at least do that at home. Then again, Mother would come barging through whenever she liked, for whatever she wanted, whatever the mood.

So, let's break that down into the categories:

Internal monologue (sometimes called internal dialogue, one side of the brain speaking to the other side), in italics, present tense because it's monologue, and in this case also direct thought) No need to say, she thought, which would be redundant: What does she know? Will that flying woman come back and take them all, one by one? Is she out there right now, waiting to grab somebody else?

Because we are not doing the mistake of making internal dialogue in quotes, we can shift right to untagged spoken dialogue in quotes: “Why does it matter?”

Indirect thought, loosely meaning the author is telling us who is thinking, even though in limited 3rd or 1st, we'd already know that: Pawa wished she could close her own door. She could at least do that at home.

Direct thought, not internal monologue, but just basic, much more common, direct thought (we assume the viewpoint is the one thinking): Then again, Mother would come barging through whenever she liked, for whatever she wanted, whatever the mood.

By properly using italics, properly using quotes, not head hopping, being in control, one can engage in the most efficient forms of free discourse. On the other hand, all sorts of other ways of handling thoughts are advised, all over the web, sometimes by credible sources, although none of the alternatives are as liberated and automatic as the one suggested above, as you can easily see by the example that has no tags or even comments about the viewpoint thinking. The author vanishes. The viewpoint is in control.

Let me go through the mistakes that I strongly advise against:
1) Using any form of quotes to denote thoughts.
2) Using all italics for all thoughts, or even using italics for all direct thoughts. Neither makes any sense, and this habit reduces your capabilities to shift from common direct thought to less-common internal monologue.
3) Never using italics because you never go to internal monologue, but that is at least consistent, should you never use internal monologue, and like I say, half the population has no idea what internal monologue is, anyway.
4) Breaking every form of thought into separate paragraphs, as if subject, person or time has shifted, which it hasn't. There is zero criteria by which one would pull thoughts out from under an actor's words, actions or other forms of thought. This idea of pulling thought forms apart has the secondary problem of killing pace and confusing the reader who rightfully will assume new actor until they catch up, when that would not be the case.

 

^ Excellent post! I just want to add that internal monologue/dialogue, like spoken dialoge, is always in present tense, because nobody thinks in past tense. Even when the story is in past tense thoughts and dialogue are in present:

"Hey, what's goin' on? Where's George? I thought he was coming here with you?" (1st person present tense for dialogue) Pete craned his neck scanning the crowded street. (3rd person past tense for narration)
​

Of course sometimes in dialogue or inner monologue we're actually talking or thinking about something that happened previously, in which case you do use past tense. Like "I thought he was coming with you?"