Dialogue is a conversation between two or more persons in a drama or prose work. Or a philosophical and journalistic genre, which includes an interview or a dispute between two or more persons; was developed in antiquity: the philosophical dialogues of Plato, Lucian ("Conversations of the Gods", "Conversations of Heteras", "Conversations in the Realm of the Dead"). It spread in France in the 17-18 centuries: "Letters to the Provincial" by B. Pascal, "Dialogues of the Ancient and New Dead" by F. Fenelon, "Ramo's Nephew" by D. Diderot. As a genre, dialogue usually does not have an accompanying epic text, approaching drama in this respect.

In the works of M.M. Bakhtin, the term "dialogue" has significantly expanded its meaning. The word "dialogue" and its derivatives are used by Bakhtin in the following senses:

1. compositional-speech form of life statement (conversation of two or more persons);
2. any verbal communication;
3. speech genre (daily dialogue, pedagogical, cognitive);
4. secondary genre - philosophical, rhetorical, artistic dialogue;
5. a constitutive feature of a certain type of novel (polyphonic);
6. vital philosophical and aesthetic position;
7. the shaping principle of the spirit, the incomplete opposite of which is the monologue.

The spiritual sphere of meaning is its own locus of dialogical relations, which are “completely impossible without logical and subject-semantic relations”, but for this they “must be embodied, that is, enter another sphere of being: become a word, that is, a statement, and receive an author, then is the creator of the given statement, whose position it expresses. This makes MM Bakhtin's interpretation of dialogue and dialectics understandable. Dialectics is a reificational relation transferred to the realm of meaning, and dialogue is a personifying relation in this spiritual realm. According to Bakhtin, dialogic relations are not logical, but personological. Ignoring this provision most of all contributed to the erosion (and devaluation) of the meaning of the category of "dialogue" in the mouths of Bakhtin's interpreters. Until now, it is customary to consider object and subject-object relations - a person and a machine, different logics or linguistic units, even neurophysiological processes - and not subject-subjective, as dialogical. Personality, personification, subjectivity - the second (after the "meaning-spirit") differential feature of dialogical relations. The participants in these relations, according to Bakhtin, are the “I” and the “other”, but not only them: “Each dialogue takes place, as it were, against the background of a reciprocal understanding of the invisibly present “third”, standing above the participants in the dialogue (partners).” Bakhtin's third participant in the dialogue event is both the empirical listener-reader and, at the same time, God.

Bakhtin's approach, while maintaining the status of a real life relationship for dialogue, not abstracted (not abstracted) from the empirical situation, not turning it into a convention (not metaphorizing it), at the same time gives rise to a special kind of extension of the meaning of the word "dialogue". The dialogue understood in this way covers a wide range of relations and has different degrees of expression. To determine the lower limit of dialogic relations, the concepts of "zero" degree of dialogicity and "unintentional dialogicity" are introduced. An example of “zero dialogic relations” is “a situation of a dialogue between two deaf people, widely used in comics, where there is real dialogic contact, but there is no semantic contact between replicas (or imaginary contact) - here “the point of view of the third person in the dialogue (not participating in the dialogue, but understanding it. Understanding the whole statement is always dialogic". The lower stage also includes the "unintentional dialogicity" that occurs between whole statements and texts, "remote from each other in time and space, knowing nothing about each other" - "if between them there is at least some sort of semantic convergence". In this case, as in the zero degree, the role of the explicator of dialogical relations is played by the "third", who understands. In another case, to identify "a special form of unintentional dialogicity", Bakhtin uses the formula "dialogical shade".

The upper limit of dialogicity is the attitude of the speaker to his own word. They become possible when the word acquires a double intention - it turns out to be directed not only to the subject, but also "to someone else's word" about this subject. Such a statement and word Bakhtin calls two-voiced. Only when the author refers to a two-voiced word does the compositional-speech form of the dialogue cease to be an external form and become internally dialogic, and the dialogue itself becomes a fact of poetics. The range of dialogical relations implemented by a two-voiced word does not come down to confrontation and struggle, but implies both disagreement and mutual conversion of independent voices, and agreement (“rejoicing”, “admiration”). The highest degree of development of the dialogic word and the dialogic author's position was found in Dostoevsky's polyphonic novel, but a certain degree of dialogicity, according to Bakhtin, is a necessary condition for authorship: "The artist is the one who knows how to be extra-vitally active, not only involved in life and understanding it from within, but also loving it from the outside - where it is not for itself, where it is turned outside of itself and needs outside and extra-sense activity. The artist's divinity lies in his communion with the higher being outside. But this being outside the event of the life of other people and the world of this life is, of course, a special and justified form of participation in the event of being. Here we are not talking about abstracting from the event, not about one-sided ("monological") outsideness, but about a special kind of ("dialogical") presence of the author both inside the event and outside it, about his immanence and at the same time transcendence to the event of being.

The word dialogue comes from Greek dialogos, which means conversation.

from the Greek dialogos - a conversation, a conversation of two) - a type (type) of speech in which there is an exchange of interdependent statements-replicas (with visual and auditory perception of the interlocutor). All features of D. - speech structure are associated with its specificity as an education that occurs as a result of intermittent, mainly oral spontaneous speech of interlocutors, occurring under certain conditions. The very nature of D. suggests its complexity. D.'s dimensions are theoretically unlimited, and its lower limit may seem open. However, in fact, every D. has a beginning and an end. The unity of D. in its theme, content, meaning. The specificity of the dialectic as a complex unity is most closely connected with its thematic integrity, with the nature of the development of content, and with the movement of thought. Dialogic unity is the basic unit of dialectic. The question of the boundaries of D. and its internal structural features is connected with the difference between the concepts of D. as an integral structure and dialogic unity. The replica, as a component of dialogical unity and the dialectic as a whole, has a two-pronged character, combining the meaning of action and reaction, as a result of which the dialectic is a complex chain of interrelated statements. With the study of D. as a complex complex, which often includes a chain of intertwining or parallel replicas of several persons, the identification of various structural types of D. (paired D., parallel D., polylogue) is connected. The study of D. is impossible without taking into account a number of extra-verbal aspects: the purpose and subject of statements, the degree of preparedness of the speakers, the relationship between the interlocutors and their attitude to what was said, the specific situation of communication. The nature of the disease is determined by the action of all these factors in the aggregate, and as a result of the specific manifestation of each of them, a disease of a certain structure is created. The immediate social situation and the wider social environment determine the structure of the utterance, reflecting the nature of the dialogic behavior. It is the situation that forms the utterance in the form of a request or an assertion, in a florid or simple style, confidently or timidly pronounced. The nature of the logical-semantic relations between the parts of the dialogic unity is connected with the situation of communication, the attitude of the participants in speech to the content of speech, and in this regard, various types of replicas and types of speech are distinguished, the nature of the reaction, the speaker's assessment of the facts of the situation and speech, the modal characteristic of speech are established. The cue that starts the conversation, defines its topic and purpose, is built relatively freely. This remark is called a stimulus, as it encourages the interlocutor to a response or action. The response cue, the cue-reaction, in its lexical composition and syntactic structure depends on the cue-stimulus. D. usually consists of alternating stimulus replicas and response replicas. It is important to study the features of both components. From the structural and compositional side, reciprocal replicas-pickups, replicas-repetitions, etc. are distinguished. At the same time, attention is drawn to the logical and semantic meaning of the replica and its corresponding relation to one, stimulating statement. An important type of D. in this respect is the question-answer complex. Great importance is attached to the nature of the reactions. In this regard, replicas-contradictions, agreements, additions, replicas accompanying the topic, transferring the topic to another plane are distinguished. According to the nature of the reaction, the corresponding types of D. are determined: D.-contradiction, D.-synthesis (E.M. Galkina-Fedoruk), D.-spore, D.-explanation, D.-quarrel, D.-unison ( A.K. Solovieva), D.-message, D.-discussion, D.-conversation (O.I. Sharoiko). At the same time, the structural and grammatical features of D., extralinguistic moments associated with the implementation of speech, embodied in D. of various types, are clarified. The specificity of D. is also associated with such a phenomenon as the degree of preparedness of the speaker for speech. L.P. Yakubinsky noted the fast pace of uttering replicas and their change as one of the properties of D., during which preparation for the utterance goes simultaneously with the perception of someone else's speech. This is reflected in the structure of dialogical statements, being one of the factors in the formation of its syntax. The structure of D. is also affected by the degree of awareness of the interlocutors about the subject of the conversation. L.P. Yakubinsky emphasized that the understanding of someone else's speech is determined by the experience of the interlocutors, who make up the apperceiving mass of speakers, that each subsequent speaking falls on prepared ground, pointing out the great role of conjecture with the identity of the apperceiving masses of interlocutors. The general experience of the interlocutors, its permanent and transient elements determine the possibility of decoding in speech exchange. Speech always needs a listener. An additional means of transmitting information in direct communication are facial expressions, gestures, various body movements, socially determined and corresponding to the intellectual and emotional state of the speaker. One of the important aspects of D. is intonation, with the help of which certain information is transmitted and dialogic units are formed as part of a complex structure. The informative and connecting role of intonation in D. is noted in the analysis of dialogic units with replicas of various types - repetitions, pickups. Various functions of intonation can be intertwined, since the replicas simultaneously represent a sentence (or a combination of sentences) with their own internal intonation and an element of speech. The actions of all extra-speech factors in the aggregate are decisively reflected in the structure of speech and, above all, on its grammatical features. The choice of certain structures is associated with the specifics of oral speech and the specifics of speech as a speech interaction. Ellipsis, simplicity of syntactic construction, the use of sentences of various functional types, modal words, repetitions, connecting constructions, and other characteristic features owe their origin in D. to its specificity as a special speech construction. The word order characteristic of dialogic sentences, the peculiar actual articulation of sentences in D., are also associated with the action of the diverse conditions in which the dialogue proceeds as the embodiment of intermittent oral speech. The cohesion of the replicas leads to the question of the relationship of D. to the concept of a complex syntactic whole, since D., as a product of speech exchange, is ultimately a sounding and often recorded single text of a special kind, belonging to more than one person. It is important to compare the structure of such a text, the development of thought, the modal characteristics of statements and other features of such a complex whole with the characteristics of non-dialogical texts. For the first time, D. as a complex syntactic whole was paid attention to in the works of N.Yu. Shvedova, G.A. Zolotova. Lit .: Valyusinskaya Z.V. Issues in the Study of Dialogue in the Works of Soviet Linguists (Text Syntax). - M., 1979; Vinokur T.G. Dialogic speech // LES. - M, 1990; Lapteva O.A. Russian colloquial syntax. - M., 1976; Radaev A.M. On some components of the speech impact of dialogic and monologue texts and witty statements // Psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic determinants of speech. - M., 1978; Yakubinsky L.P. On Dialogic Speech // Izbr. work. Language and its functioning. - M., 1986. L. E. Tumina

Wandering around the Internet, I found a wonderful article.
The original source is here https://www.avtoram.com/kak_pisat_dialogi/

Main problem

Dialogue is one of the most problematic places in the manuscripts of novice writers.

The most common type of error is redundancy: unnecessary attribution, unnecessary cues, unnecessary embellishments.

In dialogue, it is especially important to observe the principle of "brevity is the soul of talent": a few extra words can make the conversation of the characters sluggish or ridiculously pretentious.

Tightness

Continuous dialogue should not be too long, otherwise it slows down the dynamics of the piece. The conversation of the characters implies a real flow of time, while in general the plot develops much faster. If a long dialogue is still necessary, then it should be diluted - for example, with a description of the actions, emotions of the hero, etc.

Do not litter the dialogue with phrases that do not carry useful information.

The girls said goodbye
- Goodbye!
- Good luck!
- I was very glad to see you!
- Come to visit us!
- We'll definitely come. We really liked it last time.
- Well, really, it's not worth it. Well, goodbye!

It could be limited to one phrase: The girls said goodbye.

A similar problem is repetitions of the same thought:

“Is that what she said: go away?”
- Yes exactly.
- I can not belive it.
— I swear! I gave you everything word for word. So she said, go away.
- I don't believe. You must have confused something.

Of course, there can be exceptions to this rule, but it should still be remembered that empty dialogue is boring, and the reader skips boring.

Unnatural

Dialogue should sound natural. You should not use compound sentences for five lines or expressions that are not used in live speech in a conversation.

- You need to water the sprouts regularly, because otherwise they will have nowhere to get the moisture that is so necessary for their nutrition and full development.

This is not the way to say it. The sentence is better rephrased:

Don't forget to water the sprouts, otherwise they will dry out.

An exception to this rule: the hero deliberately tries to speak in a bookish way, and it is clear that this is not a stylistic mistake, but the author's idea.

- Thousand devils! exclaimed the office manager, turning off the computer. "Ah, I'll be damned if I don't get my revenge on those rascals!"

To check the dialogue for natural sounding, read it aloud. Extra words will cut the ear.

Inconsistency between the dialogue of the situation or the character of the characters
In the novels of beginners, there are often scenes in which the villains in the heat of battle talk with the heroes about Good and Evil - long sentences with participial turns.

If you think this is normal, try bashing a pillow for five minutes while retelling the story of Kolobok.

Did you get something connected? Taking off my hat.

A runner immediately after a marathon cannot give lengthy interviews, a fireman in a burning building will not ask: “Be kind, Vasily Ivanovich, give me a hose!”

Bust with attribution

Ivan looked into Masha's face.
“What a fine fellow you are,” he said.
“If it wasn’t for you, I wouldn’t have succeeded,” she said.
“Come on, it’s not worth it,” Ivan said.

We remove “he said”, “she responded”, “Ivan said” - and the meaning is not lost. The reader is absolutely clear who said what.

Extra adverbs and other clarifications

- This is unfair! the girl whimpered.
In this case, the adverb duplicates the meaning of the verb. The word "sobbed" is enough.

Stamps look even worse:

"Now I'll deal with you!" The Emperor grinned ominously.
“I beg you, let me go!” the girl screamed heartbreakingly, wringing her hands.

Same type attribution

“Don’t forget to buy dryers,” Grandma said, counting out the money for her.
- And I candy! Dad said from behind the door.

You should not repeat the same attributive verbs over and over again, otherwise the reader's attention will be fixed precisely on these words. If you find it difficult to find an attributive verb, insert a phrase that will describe the action of the hero, and then - his remark.

“I went to the store,” Masha said.
Grandmother counted her money.
Don't forget to buy dryers.
- And I candy! Dad's voice came from outside the door.

Speaking verbs and labels

If possible, try not to supply the characters' lines with excessively speaking attributive verbs. Emotions should be conveyed by the very essence of the scene, and not by glued labels.

An example of such "steroid-pumped" attributive verbs is given by Stephen King in How to Write a Book:

"Drop the gun, Utterson!" Jekyll rasped.

- Kiss me, kiss me! Shaina gasped.

- You are teasing me! Bill pulled back.

The reader should also not be constantly reminded: this character is a scoundrel, but this one is a handsome prince. When the scoundrels "grin maliciously" and the princes "raise their eyebrows contemptuously" - this is a sure sign that the author wrote, "arrogantly ignoring common sense." Characterize the hero should be his words and deeds.

Long dialogue in short sentences

- Where are you going?
- To the village.
- And what's in there?
- Nothing.
- What for?
- Tired.
- Why?
- You will not understand.

Such a dialogue turns off figurative thinking. The reader begins to see not a mental picture, but letters. If a monosyllabic throwing of words is absolutely necessary for the plot, then it must be diluted with descriptions.

Accent and speech distortion

With the transfer of accent and speech distortion, you must be very careful. If the reader, even for a moment, has difficulty reading phrases like “evolution is cool”, then it’s better to just mention that the hero is burr.

Name use in dialogue

— Hello, Masha!
— Hello, Petya! I'm so glad to see you!

What's wrong? During a conversation, we rarely call people by name, especially if no one is around. Therefore, this dialogue sounds false.

Retelling someone else's words

- I met Masha. She said: “Petya, why do you come to visit me?” “Because I don’t have time,” I replied.

Try to avoid direct speech in direct speech or convey other people's words as they sound in everyday conversation.

- Today I met Masha. She asked where I had gone, and I lied that I didn't have time.

Retelling what the characters already know

“You know, a couple of years ago orcs attacked our northern borders and burned down five cities. And then King Sigismund the Fifteenth singled out three hundred thousand warriors on fighting dragons ...
- Yes, this battle is not without reason entered into the annals. Do you remember how they captured the Magic Stone of Omniscience?
- Of course I remember.

Incorrect use of foreign expressions

Foreigners in novels of beginners often speak their native language with wild mistakes. If you are not sure how to spell a phrase correctly, consult a professional translator or native speaker.

Bust with slang and obscenities

If your hero "boats" exclusively "on the hair dryer", the reader may "not catch up" with him.

Mat in the literature is permissible only in small doses and only to the point. The exceptions are "avant-garde" novels, which are published in a circulation of 500 copies.

Remember that no one will judge us for the lack of profanity, but it is quite possible to lose readers due to the abundance of obscenities.

What properties should a well-written dialogue have?

1. It must be absolutely necessary, that is, without it, the development of the plot or the disclosure of the personality of a particular hero is impossible. Example: a conversation between Chichikov and Nozdrev (N. Gogol. "Dead Souls")

2. Each of the characters must speak their own language. He must be endowed with his favorite words, think in advance how he will build phrases, what is his vocabulary, what level of literacy, etc. This technique will allow not only to speak the information necessary for the plot, but also to create a reliable image.

- Nymph, swing her there, does it give goods? said the coffin-master vaguely. - Can she please the buyer? The coffin - it requires as much as one forest ...
- What? asked Ippolit Matveyevich.
- Yes, here is the "Nymph" ... Their three families live with one merchant. Already they have the wrong material, and the finish is worse, and the brush is liquid, there it swings. And I'm an old company. Founded in one thousand nine hundred and seven. I have a coffin - a cucumber, selected, amateur ...
I. Ilf and E. Petrov. "The twelve Chairs"

At the same time, it should be remembered that the heroes cannot behave the same way with everyone and talk in the same manner with both the queen and the port loader.

3. Heroes shouldn't talk in a vacuum. Create a living world around them - with smells, sounds, environments, weather, lighting, etc.

Evening at the end of June. The samovar has not yet been removed from the table on the terrace. The hostess cleans the berries for jam. A friend of her husband, who has come to visit the dacha for a few days, smokes and looks at her well-groomed round hands, bare to the elbows. (A connoisseur and collector of ancient Russian icons, a graceful and dry-built man with a small trimmed mustache, with a lively look, dressed as for tennis.) Looks and says:
“Kuma, can I kiss your hand?” I can't watch calmly.
Hands in juice, - substitutes a shiny elbow. Lightly touching his lips, he says with a stutter:
- Kuma...
- What, godfather?
- You know, what a story: one man's heart went out of hand and he said to his mind: goodbye!
- How did this "heart get out of hand"?
- This is from Saadi, godfather. There was such a Persian poet.
I. Bunin. "Kuma"

4. Let the characters not only speak, but also gesticulate, move, make faces, etc.

- Oh no no no! - the artist exclaimed, - did they really think that these were real pieces of paper? I do not admit the thought that they did it consciously.
The barman looked around in a wry and wistful way, but said nothing.
- Are they scammers? - the magician asked the guest anxiously, - are there really swindlers among the Muscovites?
In response, the barman smiled so bitterly that all doubts disappeared: yes, there are swindlers among Muscovites.
M. Bulgakov. "The Master and Margarita"

5. Make sure that the speech of the characters corresponds to the place, time, mood and individual characteristics of the characters. If a person woke up with a hangover, he is unlikely to be able to joke with girls; if a sledgehammer fell on a lumberjack's leg, he would not exclaim: "Oh, how it hurts!"

6. The length of the sentences in the dialogues should be correlated with the speed of events. In crisis situations, a person speaks briefly; at home by the fireplace can afford flowery phrases and poetic comparisons.

Human speech takes on different forms, and one of them is dialogue. Each student must understand what it is, what varieties this form of speech has and what features it is characterized by. It is curious that a person conducts dialogues every day, without even noticing it.

What is dialogue and why is it necessary

When people talk to each other, they are having a dialogue. A prerequisite for this form of speech is the presence of two or more interlocutors. The statements that they exchange are called replicas, which must necessarily be interconnected. That is, if Petya talks about an apple, and Masha talks about a pumpkin, then this is not a dialogue. Another prerequisite is the exchange of remarks, that is, the participants must speak in turn.

It is dialogue that is the main form of human communication, that is, its main function is communication between people.

However, it does not have to be spoken - there is also a written kind of dialogue, for example, messaging in Viber or Skype. The written form also includes dialogues in literary works, they are an integral part of theatrical scenarios.

In the case of a theater production or a film, dialogue exists in two forms at once - written (when it comes to the script) and oral (when the actors exchange lines).

There is also a special kind of internal dialogue, when a person talks “to himself”, to himself.

In literature, dialogue is necessary in order to directly convey the thoughts and feelings of the characters.

Rules for writing dialogue in Russian

If everything is clear with the oral form, then how can you understand when reading that the characters are talking to each other?

For this, as in the design of direct speech, a dash is used. The remarks may be accompanied by the author's explanation of who said it and with what intonation, or they may simply go one after another. You can understand that another person said the remark by the fact that it is written on a new line, with a capital letter and there is a dash in front of it.

Here is an example:

- Hello, Kolya!

- Hi Masha!

Let's go to school together?

Come on, it's always more fun together.

Today, there is another form of speech - a conversation between a person and a bot, when the user selects replicas from the list, and the bot sends him answers. It is also a kind of dialogue form.

What have we learned?

From the article for grade 2, we learned that dialogue is a special form of speech in which two or more people exchange remarks that are interconnected with each other. At the same time, it can be both oral and written, as well as internal. A dash is used to highlight speech in writing. Also, the replicas of different people are written on a new line and with a capital letter. There are special rules for emphasizing the author's words, if they are used.

Topic quiz

Article rating

Average rating: 4.6. Total ratings received: 178.

- (Greek dialogos, the original meaning is a conversation between two persons) a verbal exchange between two, three or more interlocutors. The possibility, which opens up such a juxtaposition in a conversation of several people, has long forced writers ... ... Literary Encyclopedia

dialog- a, m. dialogue lat. dialogus gr. dialogos. 1. A literary genre in the form of a conversation between two or more characters. Sl. 18. Theodoret in the first dialosis .. this one says. Inc. 42. // Sl. 18 6 124. A dialogus is sent to you in French, which ... Historical Dictionary of Gallicisms of the Russian Language

The form of speech, the conversation, in which the spirit of the whole arises and makes its way through the differences of replicas. D. can be a form of poetic development. intention (especially in drama, where he opposes monologue and mass scene); form of education: then ... ... Encyclopedia of cultural studies

- (French dialogue, from Greek dialogos). A conversation between two or more persons: a form of presentation of drama. works. Dictionary of foreign words included in the Russian language. Chudinov A.N., 1910. DIALOGUE conversation between two parties, two persons. Also… … Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language

Dialog- DIALOG. Dialogue in a broad sense is called any interview; in particular, the exchange of thoughts (Plato's Dialogue). Dramatic dialogue The exchange of dramatic lines has a special content. The word in drama is effective. Every scene in the drama has… … Dictionary of literary terms

- - Association of Economists of Russia and Germany (dialog e.V. - Vereinigung deutscher und russischer Ökonomen) ... Wikipedia

- - Association of Economists of Russia and Germany (dialog e.V. - Vereinigung deutscher und russischer Ökonomen) Type Public association Year of foundation ... Wikipedia

dialog- (from the Greek dialogos) an alternating exchange of remarks (in the broad sense, a response in the form of an action, gesture, silence is also considered a replica) of two or more people. In psychology, D.'s research, related to the analysis of the social mechanisms of the psyche, began in the 20th century ... Great Psychological Encyclopedia

Cm … Synonym dictionary

Dialog- Dialogue ♦ Dialogue A conversation between two or more interlocutors concerned with the search for the same truth. Thus, dialogue is a type of conversation marked by a desire for the universal, and not the individual (unlike confession) or the particular (as in ... ... Philosophical Dictionary of Sponville

See Philosophical Dialogue. Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. Moscow: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editors: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983. DIALOGUE ... Philosophical Encyclopedia

Books

• dialogue, Ivan & Anton. The book is a fragment of a personal SMS-correspondence of two friends living in different cities. This dialogue is not a dialogue in the usual sense. It is rather a SPACE of communication. "Herbarium… electronic book