A difficult part of writing for me is when a single sentence–especially dialogue–contains two tones. It sounds best as a single sentence, but ending with a period, or alternative punctuation, looks wrong. As well as this, using two sentences also looks wrong.

I can’t think of a great example right now, but I know I’ve wanted punctuation that doesn’t exist before. I’ve had moments where it would have been so useful to have a “;!” and a “;?” mark.

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’ve occasionally seen the exclamation mark put inside of parentheses. I interpret it as the writer saying to the reader, “are you seeing this shit?”

    Anyway, not sure if that’s what you’re going for here.

    • HEXN3TOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I’m only going for a semicolon with tonality. Overall, super simple and straightforward. It uses already existing marks with already established meaning, and provides a useful way to transcribe dialogue.

      Why does this not exist;? Something so damned simple!

      Edit: It’s not related to (!) or (?). I know, since I quite literally just used these a moment ago somewhere else. It is a little similar, but it’s different.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        So, for the record, these things come into existence in the first place simply because someone, somewhere, starts using them. Language is something that drifts over time, and punctuation is no exception.

        • Hawke@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s a bit harder to do this digitally though since the glyphs aren’t just marks on paper.

        • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          IIRC “something so damned simple” is a fragment or dependent clause, unless “[it is]” was somehow implied, in which case an em dash may be more appropriate. A simple comma might also suffice, since the clause modifies “this” from the next phrase.

            • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Agreed, the virtue of a living language is change. I don’t always agree with the change but over time it makes language more expressive. A recent example is the word aesthetic used as a standalone adjective, as in “that’s so aesthetic.” While it strikes me as painfully meaningless — which aesthetic? — it’s common enough now to have been widely adopted as a general marketing term. That’s become an accepted use of the word, and so be it. I’d welcome the ability to more easily indicate tonal shift inside sentences, the way we do verbally. Just need it to become popularized enough.