English is a terrible language to express in writing (he says, doing just that). Perhaps it's the choice of alphabet, which was never meant for English (which isn't even a Romance language, & we've dropped all of the Anglo-Saxon letters), or the fact that English just isn't anywhere near its roots, being about a third foreign by definition, or simply that, over time, we've tried to use writing (as a concept) for things it was never intended for.
Once, writing was done by professionals. The intended audience were the elite - those who could read. Now, everyone over the age of about three in the developed world (at least) could have a fair crack at writing their own name. 200 years ago, a fair percentage of the population couldn't do that. Not only are we using writing to do more things (like writing our own name & putting that down in a permanent state of spelling), but more people are doing it. Almost all adults in the developed world (I don't know how better to express the idea of places where there is a regulated education system) reads & writes daily. Social media has made it worse, because we're all obsessed with reading & writing opinions. That doesn't make us better at reading or writing, but it does make us all think we can do it, & attitude is everything.
We're far more likely now to write what we say. By that, I don't just mean speech bubbles as thought bubbles, but I mean, quite literally, inserting pauses & mumbling & contractions & incorrect word choices & bad grammar. That's making it real. Again, it doesn't make us better at writing, but it does give the writing attitude.
When I was in school (yes, don't ask how long ago), it was drilled into us to avoid contractions unless we were representing actual speech (or giving birth, which was also to be avoided as a teenager). Heaven forbid that you should actually write in Strine! For the uninitiated, Strine is the Australian dialect, where we proudly have a plural for 'you', being 'youse', which is pronounced like a herd of sheep. Sorry, no, it's pronounced in the same way that you pronounce 'ewes', which is a herd of sheep. This is not a load of bull.
It's about now that I get to my point - well, I'm getting closer. If you're writing all of these speech-oriented interjections & such, then you're going to have to somehow indicate ... well, attitude. There's no other way to describe it. Sure, you could write 'he said with a small voice' or 'she shouted', but you're kind of ruining the flow of the conversation if you're trying to represent two people freestyling & they're using their voices like musical instruments, producing a whole range of emotions & feelings in their choice of word, their volume, their pace, their ... yes, attitude.
English is so limited in giving you the capability to do this within the quotes!
A Norwegian friend of mine was telling a joke, in German, & then complained that you can't explain it in English because the joke's punchline was all about the pronunciation & tone, & English is atonal, to which I responded "Oh really?" & he didn't get it.
Neither can you! Did I use a rising or falling inflexion? A rising inflexion would have been a polite query, & a falling one would have been sarcasm or skepticism. How do you differentiate those without tone? How do you differentiate those in print? I'm sure that someone has come up with a system. I should have looked it up before I started writing this post, but I had all of the stuff I wanted to say in my head & I just had to voice my opinion without thinking too hard about my purpose or my audience, & just writing exactly as I would argue it if I spoke to you in person.
The real 'Aha' moment - by which, I actually mean 'Eureka!' without the bathtub - came when I tried to write each of
- 'Aha' = I understand you
- 'Aha' = I'm still listening (I'm not asleep)
- 'Aha' = I agree
- 'Aha' = I disagree
- 'Aha!' = Eureka (not the stockade)