Dear Dr. Ink:
Is it acceptable to attribute a quote with a "said [name]," rather than "[name] said"? I dimly remember, somewhere along the way, a journalism teacher telling me only "[name] said" is acceptable. To me the opposite seems wrong, but I can't find this rule in writing, and try searching Google for "said" and see where that gets you.
Thanks,
Mike Janssen
Current Newspaper
Washington, D.C.
Answer:
Dr. Ink has no idea, and doesn't really care. But in honor of the earnestness of this reader, he will take a flying leap. Doc's preference is for: "…said Smith." He too remembers some finicky editor turning his preference into a fetish. His point was that "Smith said…" represents the natural narrative and syntactic order: subject followed by verb. That works in those cases where the attribution precedes the quote.
But when part or all of the quote comes first, the syntax gets wobbly. Consider the following sentence:
"The mayor is a crook," Mitchell said.
In such cases the whole quote acts as object of the verb 'said.' So the order is Object, Subject, Verb. By inverting the attribution to 'said Mitchell,' I change it to Object, Verb, Subject. Putting the order backwards seems better to Doc than turning it inside out.
It will also place the name of the speaker in a more emphatic location, at the end of the sentence.
But, in the spirit of the 1960s, this reader should, without guilt, do whatever feels good and doesn't hurt anyone else.
