Direct and indirect speech

[Ivan Ivanov]

Is it correct to say that indirect speech is a kind of that-clauses? And what is direct speech grammatically?

[Joe Carillo]

No, I don’t think it’s correct to say that indirect speech, which is also called reported speech, is a kind of “that”-clause. (Indirect speech or reported speech is, of course, simply the kind of sentence or statement someone makes when he or she reports what somebody else has said.) The correct way to say it is that indirect speech may use or take the form of a “that”-clause, but that clause isn’t by itself a generic kind of “that”-clause. Indeed, even in those usual instances when indirect speech grammatically needs “that” as a conjunction, “that” is often optional in actual usage (especially spoken) and may be dropped without being missed at all. And from a structural standpoint, the “that”-clause becomes totally unnecessary when the attribution is positioned not up front but elsewhere in the indirect-speech sentence.  

Consider this example of indirect or reported speech that uses “that”:
 
     The manager said that workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks.

In actual usage particularly in spoken English, “that” can often be elided or dropped without altering the meaning of the original sentence:

     The manager said workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks.

That’s when the attribution (“the manager said”) of the indirect-speech sentence is up front. Now see how “that” becomes totally unnecessary when the attribution is placed within the sentence:

     Workers who do highly repetitive routines, the manager said, need more frequent rest breaks.

The same thing happens when the attribution is placed at the tail end of the sentence:

     Workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks, the manager said.

It should be clear by now that a “that”-clause isn’t absolutely necessary in constructing an indirect-speech sentence, thus making it untenable to say that indirect speech is a kind of “that”-clause.

Now, in contrast to indirect or reported speech, a direct speech is someone’s report of the exact words used by a speaker or writer. The sentence or statement is stylistically set off by quotation marks and accompanied by a reporting verb, signal phrase, or quotative frame, as in this rendition of the previous statement we analyzed above:

     “Workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks,” the manager said.

Structurally or stylistically, that direct-speech statement can also have its attribution positioned up front or within the sentence, as follows:

     The manager said: “Workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks.”  

     “Workers who do highly repetitive routines,” the manager said, “need more frequent rest breaks.”

The crucial semantic difference between direct and indirect speech is in the words used in the reported statement. The words in direct speech are exactly what was said by the person or entity that originally uttered or wrote them, while the words in indirect speech are just a close rendering—a paraphrase—of the original utterance or writing in the reporter’s own words.

Keep in mind that the presence of the quotation marks in direct speech is the reporter’s way of telling the reader that what is being reported are the exact words of the person or entity that uttered or wrote them; the absence of those quotation marks, as shown in the examples we used earlier for indirect speech, indicates that the statement is just a paraphrase of the original utterance or writing in the reporter’s own words.

FURTHER FORUM READINGS ON INDIRECT AND DIRECT SPEECH:
The proper way to construct sentences for reported speech
The two ways of paraphrasing quoted statements in reportage
Reported speech needs advanced grammar skills and a quick mind

VERY INSTRUCTIVE READING ELSEWHERE ON THE WEB:
Reported Speech & Direct Speech: Handout by the St. Louis Community College

[Ivan Ivanov]

Is it better to say then that in ‘The manager said that workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks’ ‘‘The manager said’ is a reporting clause and ‘that workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks’ is a reported clause? (I saw something like this somewhere). And is it possible to include that kind of clauses in the list of the main clauses – noun clauses, relative clauses and adverbial clauses? I wonder how direct and indirect speech can be named in the ‘clause language’, so to say.

[Joe Carillo]

It’s actually the norm in English grammar—not a matter of whether it’s better terminology or not—to use the terms “reporting clause” and “reported clause” for the two clause components of this sentence that I presented in my previous posting: “The manager said that workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks.” As you correctly pointed out, the main clause (“the manager said”) is the reporting clause, and the subordinate clause (“that workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks”) is the reported clause. Sentences of this form, whether the reported clause is a quoted statement (direct speech) or a paraphrase of that statement (indirect speech), are all categorized in English as reported speech.

The common element in all reported speech is, of course, the reporting verb, and “say” is just one—but the most often used—among the wide repertoire of reporting verbs in English.

Other than “say,” the reporting verbs that are typically followed by a “that”-clause are the following: “add,” “admit,” “agree,” “announce,” “answer,” “argue,” “boast,” “claim,” “comment,” “complain,” “confirm,” “consider,” “deny,” “doubt,” “estimate,” “explain,” “fear,” “feel,” “insist,” “mention,” “observe,” “persuade,” “propose,” “remark,” “remember,” “repeat,” “reply,” “report,” “reveal,” “state,” “suggest,” “suppose,” “tell,” “think,” “understand,” and “warn.”

Some verbs can be followed either by a “that”-clause or a “to”-infinitive, namely “decide,” “expect,” “guarantee,” “hope,” “promise,” “swear,” and “threaten,” as in the variant sentences “The committee decided that the anti-corruption hearings be continued” and “The committee decided to continue the anti-corruption hearings.” A few other forms of clauses can follow certain reporting verbs, like the “if”-clause in “They asked if we are joining the picnic” and the “whether”-clause in “See whether our farmhouse is still flooded.”

Whatever form of clause follows the reporting verb, however, the defining characteristic of reported speech is that what’s written or being spoken about is what somebody else has said, thinks, or believes.

[Ivan Ivanov]

Have I understood it correctly that

1. Direct and indirect speech are kinds of statements/sentences which both consist of two parts: the reporting clause and the reported clause (which may take the form of a that-clause)?

2. “Workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks”   in “Workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks,” the manager said’ is also the reported clause and  ‘the manager said’ in the sentence is the reporting clause?

[Joe Carillo]

I’m afraid you didn’t understand my explanation correctly when you said that direct speech and indirect speech are kinds of statements/sentences that consist of a reporting clause and a reported clause. Instead, what I wanted to convey is this idea: that it’s a clearer, more functional, and more inclusive approach to use “reported speech” as the umbrella term for statements or sentences that consist of a reporting clause and a reported clause, regardless of whether the reported clause consists of the exact words or of a paraphrase of the statement being reported. As I explained in that posting, the common element in all reported speech is the reporting verb, and that the defining characteristic of reported speech is that what’s written or being spoken about is what somebody else has said, thinks, or believes.

With reported speech as the umbrella category, the reported clause takes the form of indirect speech when the words used are a paraphrase or representation (in the reporter’s own words) of the original utterance or writing of somebody else. A telltale sign of indirect speech is that no quotation marks are used to set off the reported statement; this makes it clear to the reader that the words used are a paraphrase or representation by the reporter of somebody else’s original utterance or writing. Example: “Mary said that there’s blatant sexual discrimination in her company.”

On the other hand, the reported clause takes the form of direct speech when the words used are exactly as phrased by the original speaker or writer; in this case, those words are enclosed in quotation marks and the reporting clause makes the attribution to that original speaker of writer, as in this example: “‘Oh, the sexual discrimination in my company is so blatant!’ Mary said.” When a change of any kind is made in the phrasing of the quoted statement, it is no longer direct speech but indirect speech; in this case, the quotation marks have to be dispensed with to alert the reader about that fact, as in the example for indirect speech presented earlier: “Mary said that there’s blatant sexual discrimination in her company.”

I actually anticipated that there might be some confusion over the terminologies I used for reported speech, so I’m glad that you asked for this clarification. As you must have found in your readings, many traditional grammarians consider the term “reported speech” synonymous with “indirect speech” in the sense that the sentence or statement is always in the form of a reporting clause followed by a reported “that”-clause that paraphrases—and never directly quotes—what somebody else has said, thinks, or believes. I think this view about reported speech can be very confusing because it no longer applies when the reported clause is in the form of a directly quoted statement. I therefore made it a point in my earlier posting to refer to indirect speech as not synonymous with reported speech but simply a component of reported speech.

As to your second question, yes, in the sentence “‘Workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks,’ the manager said,” the clause “workers who do highly repetitive routines need more frequent rest breaks” is the reported clause, and the clause “the manager said” is the reporting clause. This will be the case whether the reported statement is in the form of direct quotes or in the form of a paraphrase of somebody else’s original statement.

(I noticed that you use the British style of setting off quoted material with single quotes, so I’m alerting you that I use the American style in this Forum. For a discussion of the differences between these two quoting styles, check out the following postings in the Forum:
“Lesson #13 – Dealing with Quotations and Attributions”
“Which is which: the American or the British standard?”
“The two styles of handling quoted material in English”

This will be all.)

[Ivan Ivanov]

Thanks a lot, Joe! I think that now I have understood it.

As for the British and American style of setting off quoted material I have never thought about it I’ll read about the difference!

[Cagebreinne01]

Is it correct to say that indirect speech is a kind of that-clauses? And what is direct speech grammatically?

Let me clear you that a Clause is a particular and separate article, stipulation, or proviso in a treaty, bill, or contract.