Should there be a punctuation mark for whispered speech?

[occam]

(Thought triggered by mention in AUE of the "BBC Radio 3 presenters'
whisper)

We use punctuation marks for questions (?), excitement/surprise (!),
hesitation/pause (...), and sometimes for expletives (yes, we eff!ng
do). Does anyone else think there is a need for a punctuation mark for
whispered (sotto voce) speech, or is it just me?

[Don Phillipson]

"occam" <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:mflp62$mki$1...@dont-email.me...

> We use punctuation marks for questions (?), excitement/surprise (!),
> hesitation/pause (...), and sometimes for expletives (yes, we eff!ng
> do). Does anyone else think there is a need for a punctuation mark for
> whispered (sotto voce) speech, or is it just me?

This question hints at rejection of the traditional
distinctions between (1) literary English (written to be
read by the eye) and vernacular English (replication of
the speech of a particular person) and (2) direct and
indirect speech. Taking them together, we write things
like (in literary form, direct speech):
"It is hidden," he whispered so that we could hardly hear him.
or (literary form, indirect speech.)
"He whispered almost inaudibly that it had been hidden."

If we supplied "a need for a punctuation mark for whispered (sotto
voce) speech" we would produce an annotated play script,
not a piece of literary English narrative.

We see nowadays that the literary/vernacular distinction is
no longer universally taught (as used to be normal) and
some people do not recognize it. When this happens
we cannot ascribe the nonrecognition in advance
to simple ignorance of the convention or to a reasoned
conclusion that it is somehow defective or inadequate.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

In a context such as this newgroup we could use
<sotto voce> ....... </sotto voce> [1]
or abbreviated to
<sv> ....... </sv>


[1] That is an example of what I think of as "self-defining mark-up
tags".

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[occam]

On 03/04/2015 14:42, Don Phillipson wrote:
> "occam" <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> news:mflp62$mki$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>> We use punctuation marks for questions (?), excitement/surprise (!),
>> hesitation/pause (...), and sometimes for expletives (yes, we eff!ng
>> do). Does anyone else think there is a need for a punctuation mark for
>> whispered (sotto voce) speech, or is it just me?
>
> This question hints at rejection of the traditional
> distinctions between (1) literary English (written to be
> read by the eye) and vernacular English (replication of
> the speech of a particular person) and (2) direct and
> indirect speech. Taking them together, we write things
> like (in literary form, direct speech):
> "It is hidden," he whispered so that we could hardly hear him.
> or (literary form, indirect speech.)
> "He whispered almost inaudibly that it had been hidden."

I follow your theory, but feel it does not explain the question mark,
the exclamation mark etc.

"Where is John" he asked is not the same as "Where is John?". For one
thing, it forces the use two more words. Ditto "I say!"

[occam]

On 03/04/2015 16:26, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Apr 2015 12:13:59 +0200, occam <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>> (Thought triggered by mention in AUE of the "BBC Radio 3 presenters'
>> whisper)
>>
>> We use punctuation marks for questions (?), excitement/surprise (!),
>> hesitation/pause (...), and sometimes for expletives (yes, we eff!ng
>> do). Does anyone else think there is a need for a punctuation mark for
>> whispered (sotto voce) speech, or is it just me?
>
> In a context such as this newgroup we could use
> <sotto voce> ....... </sotto voce> [1]
> or abbreviated to
> <sv> ....... </sv>

I like the suggestion, as it appeals to my programmer's mindset. It
would also avoid many a misunderstanding if used for other contexts e.g.

<irony> ....... </irony> ( shortened to <Fe> ..... </Fe> )

On the down side, it would make most pages look like a dog's dinner.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Fri, 03 Apr 2015 15:26:56 +0100, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
<ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:

>In a context such as this newgroup we could use

... newsgroup...

[David Kleinecke]

Worse even than Lisp?

[Mike Barnes]

<pick object=nit>Did you mean to write "down side" as two words, rather
than one?</pick>

<sig>
--
Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England</sig>

[Peter Moylan]

))))))))))

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[Robert Bannister]

On 3/04/2015 10:26 pm, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Apr 2015 12:13:59 +0200, occam <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>> (Thought triggered by mention in AUE of the "BBC Radio 3 presenters'
>> whisper)
>>
>> We use punctuation marks for questions (?), excitement/surprise (!),
>> hesitation/pause (...), and sometimes for expletives (yes, we eff!ng
>> do). Does anyone else think there is a need for a punctuation mark for
>> whispered (sotto voce) speech, or is it just me?
>
> In a context such as this newgroup we could use
> <sotto voce> ....... </sotto voce>

> or abbreviated to
> <sv> ....... </sv>

I prefer d/a (Dimbleby-Attenborough) although it has been taken up by
many other commentators on wild life - less so by commentators on royal
weddings.
--
Robert Bannister - 1940-71 SE England
1972-now W Australia

[Robert Bannister]

Are we going to semi-get back to colons soon?

[occam]

<embarrassed> yes, 'downside', sorry </embarrassed>

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

In practice, we would probably use just the opening tag to introduce the
sentence or paragraph to which the tag applied. That would be less of a
dog's dinner.

[Joy Beeson]

On Fri, 03 Apr 2015 12:13:59 +0200, occam <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> Does anyone else think there is a need for a punctuation mark for
> whispered (sotto voce) speech, or is it just me?

We indicate whispering by setting the words in smaller type.


--
Joy Beeson, U.S.A., mostly central Hoosier,
some Northern Indiana, Upstate New York, Florida, and Hawaii
joy beeson at comcast dot net http://joybeeson.home.comcast.net/
The above message is a Usenet post.
I don't recall having given anyone permission to use it on a Web site.

[Paul Ney]

"occam" <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote on 03.04.2015 11:13 GMT the message
news:mflp62$mki$1...@dont-email.me

"Should there be a punctuation mark for whispered speech?" -- your
subject line. I would like to generalize the problem, and, as
mathematicians like to do it, to deduct an answer to your question.

Some authority in charge of such things might propose changements to the
ortography, grammar, and other aspects of a language. In Germany, the
ministries of education (of the Lands etc.) and other concerned
institutions initiated the big reform during the 90ies. But it had to be
agreed with other German speaking countries like Austria and
Switzerland. Even the introduction of a few new punctuation marks could
prove to be a very controversial issue, I assume that English speaking
countries -- wishing to do so -- would seek agreement.

Information about the desired, or prescribed, style of speech, or
singing etc. is given in specialized texts: e.g. theatre scripts, or
sheet music. There are large glossaries of such terms. Moreover, the
protocol of a meeting not only records the text of the speeches, but the
way they were delivered too, also recording the public response, e.g.
"standing ovations". A really big choice ;-)

See e.g. the table "Dynamic's note velocity" defining the scale from
"ppp:16 = Whispering" (!) to "fff:126 = Yelling" here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamics_%28music%29
You could also use one day "furioso, ma non troppo", see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_musical_terminology

Now why only whispering? BTW, a lot of ASCII icons emerged during the
early days of the text message systems, e.g. ;-) or LOL etc. Some of
these are used in (modern) SMS or Twitter texts too, some peoples even
use them in everyday correspondence etc. Good answer? ;-)

Regards, PY [Paul_Ney/at/t-online.de]

[occam]

Yes, I can see how emoticons (the 'smiley' and its variants) can be seen
as the new generation of punctuation marks. No one had to approve or
agree to their introduction. If enough people use it, they become
standard. No need for reforms pushed by authorities. I like!


>
> Regards, PY [Paul_Ney/at/t-online.de]
>

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, April 5, 2015 at 1:31:08 PM UTC-4, Paul Ney wrote:
> "occam" <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote on 03.04.2015 11:13 GMT the message
> news:mflp62$mki$1...@dont-email.me
>
> > (Thought triggered by mention in AUE of the "BBC Radio 3 presenters'
> > whisper)
> >
> > We use punctuation marks for questions (?), excitement/surprise (!),
> > hesitation/pause (...), and sometimes for expletives (yes, we eff!ng
> > do). Does anyone else think there is a need for a punctuation mark for
> > whispered (sotto voce) speech, or is it just me?
>
> "Should there be a punctuation mark for whispered speech?" -- your
> subject line. I would like to generalize the problem, and, as
> mathematicians like to do it, to deduct an answer to your question.

deduct =/= deduce

> Some authority in charge of such things might propose changements to the

changes

> ortography, grammar, and other aspects of a language. In Germany, the

orthography

> ministries of education (of the Lands etc.) and other concerned
> institutions initiated the big reform during the 90ies. But it had to be

90s

> agreed with other German speaking countries like Austria and

"agreed" is transitive only in BrE. In AmE, agreements and such are "agreed to."

> Switzerland. Even the introduction of a few new punctuation marks could
> prove to be a very controversial issue, I assume that English speaking
> countries -- wishing to do so -- would seek agreement.

There is no mechanism (whether an academy or a government bureau) in any
English-speaking country that "agrees" to such things.

[Richard Bollard]

On Fri, 03 Apr 2015 12:13:59 +0200, occam <oc...@127.0.0.1> wrote:

Sotto Voce (Shaun Micallef)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o84uUs40ql4&noredirect=1

and from another site (I can't make tequilas rhyme with senoritas, but
sheilas works)

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/s/shaun+micallef/they+whisper+his+name_20880473.html

A stranger came to town one day
Something to prove, nothing to say
He drank his weight in neat tequilas
Made love to all the senoritas

When he was done he said what he had to say
We didn't catch it and he rode away

Singing...
They whisper his name Sotto Voce
His silence is his fame Sotto Voce
His enemies all fear him
And you can barely hear him
Invincible and inaudible Sotto Voce
Sotto Voce!

The bandidos they rode into town
Stole our corn, burnt our houses down
Stranger said something we did not hear
He spoke too softly for the human ear

Bandidos' eyes they began to harden
They said to him "I beg your pardon?"

Singing...
Susurran que su conocido Sotto Voce
Su silencio es su fama Sotto Voce
Sus enemigos todo el miedo ?l
Y usted puede o?rlo apenas
Invencible e inaudible Sotto Voce
Sotto Voce!

Never heard from Sotto Voce again
Nor in the first place did we hear him when
He came to town in the opening verse
When he left things were decidedly worse

But still the senoritas and the women swooned
At the man who speaks in a low volume

Singing...
Sotto Voce!
--
Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia

To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT.

[Charles Bishop]

In article <enceial61cah6fuio...@4ax.com>,

Standing applause.

--
charles