http://www.englishforums.com/English/AltUsageEnglish/Forum7075.htmThe second forum for the usage of the English language.enXMOD (Build: 3607.32596)http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744584Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744584Usenet0http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744584http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744584.xmlUgh! That's even worse than the original it uses ... the scope of the construct extends as far as "refuge". I think it does: I recall being taught that one of the roles of an en dash is to carry the force of a hyphen with the power to extend its scope over white space. I will admit that as a possible construct (in monospaced text I'll write it was a spaced hyphen, but you may imagine an en dash) where the things on each side of the punctuation are have the same role, as in "the New York - Los Angeles flight". I don't accept it as valid when the hyphen is converting a word to an affix, as in the example "a New York - based company" posted elsewhere; that still has to be New-York-based as far as...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744466Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744466Usenet1http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744466http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744466.xmlI'm curious as to who would suggest this. In my experience, Garland, Routledge, Taylor & Francis; in Franke's, publishers of certain medical journals (see his post).http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#744454Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744454Usenet2http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#744454http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744454.xml... } First the original sentence: } In (the book) "Paradise", a convent-turned-women's refuge is } stormed ... from being a book to being a former convent, the revised version is certainly readable at a lower grade level. I screwed up, it seems. It's a book. Cancel the applause. Reset. Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744413Fri, 23 Jan 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744413Usenet3http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744413http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744413.xmlThe convention I go by, which I read in a ... may be, "New York-based company" just looks awful to me. But that's different! That's a hyphen! To refer to a company based in New York, you want an en-dash, so the phrase looks in print closer to how looks here. That may be true in the font you use, but in the monospace font I use, that is way too long to represent an en dash. in Google yields explanatory articles.) Best Donna Richouxhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744321Sat, 23 May 2009 07:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744321Usenet4http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744321http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744321.xmlThe convention I go by, which I read in a book somewhere, is that the capitalisation of "New York" makes a first hyphen unnecessary. But however that may be, "New York-based company" just looks awful to me. But that's different! That's a hyphen! To refer to a company based in New York, you want an en-dash, so the phrase looks in print closer to how looks here. ("New York-based companies win more contracts")? It might appear that companies recently established in York are winning more contracts, god bless em. Yes, that's right: that's what it means, because that's a hyphen there, not an en-dash. It may be best if as some publishers suggest we type two hyphens for an en-dash and three for...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#744277Sat, 23 May 2009 07:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744277Usenet5http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#744277http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744277.xml... I recall being taught that one of the roles ... York-based company" as one that would require an en dash. Why would it require any dashes or hyphens? "New York based company" does not leave any room for misinterpretation whatsoever, innit? The convention I go by, which I read in a book somewhere, is that the capitalisation of "New York" makes a first hyphen unnecessary. But however that may be, "New York-based company" just looks awful to me. And what happens if the sentence starts with those words ("New York-based companies win more contracts")? It might appear that companies recently established in York are winning more contracts, god bless em. * What intrigues me about the original...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#744253Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744253Usenet6http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#744253http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744253.xmlWhy would it require any dashes on hyphens? "New York based company" does not leave any room for misinterpretation whatsoever, innit? What's a "based company"? a misreading of "biased company"? In , Chicago wants an en-dash after , as Aaron said.http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#744230Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744230Usenet7http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#744230http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744230.xml... } First the original sentence: } In (the book) "Paradise", a convent-turned-women's refuge is } stormed by townsmen. } } Now the all new, vastly improved, fat-free and healthful revised offering } (may we have a BIG round of applause?) } } Here it is } } are you ready? } } "Paradise", a convent now turned into a women's refuge, is stormed by the } townsmen. } } Call the police! Don't let them get away with the panties! Is "Paradise" a book or the name of the former convent? The two sentences certainly say different things. There is no need at all for hyphens in the original version. Assuming that "Paradise" changes from being a book to being a former convent, the revised version is...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744127Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744127Usenet8http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744127http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744127.xml}> I can see I have my work cut out for me on hyperhyphenation (q.g.). }> First of all, an ... there? That's not an equals sign; it's a hyperhyphen. Your computer should display it the same length as a hyphen. It displayed it as an equals sign. That's why I called it that. Why else? If it is displaying the same length as an en-dash, I don't wonder at your confusion. Hyperhyphens bind more tightly ... modifiers.) Didn't they teach this stuff in school back in the old days? Google "hyperhyphenation" or "hypohyphenation" for other discussion. Well, it didn't, so I skipped that paragraph. Sorry. } Never mind that's crap. It'd } sell, though. I don't see why not: Chicago sells....http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744113Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744113Usenet9http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744113http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744113.xml} }> I can see I have my work cut out for me on hyperhyphenation (q.g.). }> First of all, an en-dash is *never* used in hyperhyphenation it's }> only used in things like date ranges, and it's simulated with a }> hyphen (or with a slash when it's used in hyperendashation, as in }> George Washington (1730/9-1790/9)). } } How true, how true. } }> Second of all, "convent turned women's refuge" doesn't need *any* }> hyphens as a noun phrase. It's a convent that has turned (or has }> been turned) into a women's refuge. If necessary to avoid confusion }> with surrounding words, the "turned women's refuge" can be }> parenthesized. It's only when using the whole...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744112Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744112Usenet10http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744112http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744112.xml... } I think it does: I recall being taught that one of the roles of an en dash } is to carry the force of a hyphen with the power to extend its scope over } white space. The web page } gives the example "a New York-based company" as one that would require an } en dash. The web page cites the } Chicago Manual of Style as agreeing with me. (I'm sorry to be citing web } pages, but I don't believe I own a print book that contains a punctuation } guide.) This is merely to confirm that they say it. My shiny new 15th edition of The Chicago Manual of Style says that in section 6.85 on page 262. I reject it, but it says it. Counting on micrometer measurement of a hyphen-like thing to determine the scope of one end of the...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#744097Fri, 23 Jan 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744097Usenet11http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#744097http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744097.xml... I recall being taught that one of the roles of an en dash is to carry the force of ... space. The web page gives the example "a New York-based company" as one that would require an en dash. Why would it require any dashes on hyphens? "New York based company" does not leave any room for misinterpretation whatsoever, innit? The web page cites the Chicago Manual of Style as agreeing with me. Whoopee! (I'm sorry to be citing web pages, but I don't believe I own a print book that contains a punctuation guide.) I don't think that there are any that could be classified as being authoritative anyway, lacking any definite punctuation rules for the English language. Skitt (in Hayward, California)...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#744069Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744069Usenet12http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#744069http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744069.xml... if those are the words that the writer is ... "turned", and an en dash between "turned" and "women's refuge". Ugh! That's even worse than the original it uses two different punctuation marks where their force should be equal, but still doesn't resolve the basic issue by showing that the scope of the construct extends as far as "refuge". I think it does: I recall being taught that one of the roles of an en dash is to carry the force of a hyphen with the power to extend its scope over white space. The web page gives the example "a New York-based company" as one that would require an en dash. The web page cites the Chicago Manual of Style as agreeing with me. (I'm sorry...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744032Sat, 23 May 2009 07:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744032Usenet13http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744032http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744032.xmlI can see I have my work cut out for me on hyperhyphenation (q.g.). First of all, an en-dash is ... and it's simulated with a hyphen (or with a slash when it's used in hyperendashation, as in George Washington (1730/9-1790/9)). How true, how true. Second of all, "convent turned women's refuge" doesn't need *any* hyphens as a noun phrase. It's a convent that has ... in, and that is where the hyperhyphenation comes to the rescue. The gift shop, for instance, might sell convent-turned-women's=refuge T-shirts. Uh, what's that equals sign doing there? Never mind that's crap. It'd sell, though. It's a shame these linguist schools don't teach this stuff. It's the minimum I'd expect...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744017Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:744017Usenet14http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/2/wpzjd/Post.htm#744017http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-744017.xml} }> Saw this in the paper today: }> }> In (the book) "Paradise", a convent-turned-women's refuge is stormed by }> townsmen. }> }> The meaning is perfectly clear, but is there not a slight miscue here, }> to the effect that this was once a convent refuge? On the other hand, }> if the hyphens are dropped, a different miscue arises, as you might }> think initially that "convent" is to be the subject and "turned" the }> main verb. Is the writer is trying to tell us too much in too few words? }> }> What do you think? } } I think you're right that the writer is trying to tell us too much in too } few words. However, if those are the words that the writer is intent on }...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#743995Sat, 23 May 2009 07:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:743995Usenet15http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#743995http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-743995.xmlWhy the scare quotes? It is a refuge, isn't it? I don't think it improves anything. Isn't the intended thought that the place is a communal living situation for lesbians? Gosh, no! Not to me, anyway. Am I misunderstanding something? Don't the square quotes more clearly imply that? "Scare", not "square", but no, I would never have thought of that. I was thinking of battered women something more in the news than lesbians. Are there any homes for lesbians other than their own? Gosh, I know several of them, but none of them are in refuges. Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#743989Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:743989Usenet16http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#743989http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-743989.xmlHow about "convent-turned-women's-"refuge"? Why the scare quotes? It is a refuge, isn't it? I don't think it improves anything. Isn't the intended thought that the place is a communal living situation for lesbians? Don't the square quotes more clearly imply that? Gary G. Taylor * Rialto, CA gary at donavan dot org / http:// geetee dot donavan dot org "The two most abundant things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." Harlan Ellisonhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#743935Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:743935Usenet17http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#743935http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-743935.xml"convent-turned-women's-refuge". This is the *only* acceptable choice (other than recasting the sentence, of course). If you use a hyphenated construct like ... say. But these days there seem to be a lot of people who find the original construction reasonable. (Shakes head) Is that a "these days" thing? I thought it was old, too. In any event, it's certainly common, and logical, but often leads to barely-readable sentences, as above. The all-hyphens solution advocated by you (and used by me in informal writing (in formal writing, and sometimes even in informal writing, I try to recast the sentence)) is less logical, I think, less common, I think, and against taught rules of grammar (and, hence, presumably,...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#743757Sat, 23 May 2009 07:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:743757Usenet18http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#743757http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-743757.xmlA. Willis quotes: In (the book) "Paradise", a convent-turned-women's refuge is stormed by townsmen. ... if those are the words that the writer is intent on using, the correct way to punctuate it would be to use a hyphen between "convent" and "turned", and an en dash between "turned" and "women's refuge". Ugh! That's even worse than the original it uses two different punctuation marks where their force should be equal, but still doesn't resolve the basic issue by showing that the scope of the construct extends as far as "refuge". Also acceptable, I think, would be to have three hyphens in "convent-turned-women's-refuge". This is the *only*...http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#743669Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:743669Usenet19http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#743669http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-743669.xmlYes, I don't see any way to clearly express the ... and hyphens will not improve anything for the reading public. How about "convent-turned-women's-"refuge"? Why the scare quotes? It is a refuge, isn't it? I don't think it improves anything. Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#743653Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:743653Usenet20http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#743653http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-743653.xmlSaw this in the paper today: In (the book) "Paradise", ... too much in too few words? What do you think? Yes, I don't see any way to clearly express the intended thought without the adition of a few words. Playing with dashes and hyphens will not improve anything for the reading public. How about "convent-turned-women's-"refuge"? Gary G. Taylor * Rialto, CA gary at donavan dot org / http:// geetee dot donavan dot org "The two most abundant things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." Harlan Ellisonhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#743577Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:743577Usenet21http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/3/wpzjd/Post.htm#743577http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-743577.xmlSaw this in the paper today: In (the book) "Paradise", a convent-turned-women's refuge is stormed by townsmen. The meaning is ... main verb. Is the writer is trying to tell us too much in too few words? What do you think? Yes, I don't see any way to clearly express the intended thought without the adition of a few words. Playing with dashes and hyphens will not improve anything for the reading public. Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#743542Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:743542Usenet22http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#743542http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-743542.xmlSaw this in the paper today: In (the book) "Paradise", a convent-turned-women's refuge is stormed by townsmen. The meaning is ... main verb. Is the writer is trying to tell us too much in too few words? What do you think? I think you're right that the writer is trying to tell us too much in too few words. However, if those are the words that the writer is intent on using, the correct way to punctuate it would be to use a hyphen between "convent" and "turned", and an en dash between "turned" and "women's refuge". Also acceptable, I think, would be to have three hyphens in "convent-turned-women's-refuge". -Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whomhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#743510Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:743510Usenet23http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htm#743510http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-743510.xmlSaw this in the paper today: In (the book) "Paradise", a convent-turned-women's refuge is stormed by townsmen. The meaning is ... main verb. Is the writer is trying to tell us too much in too few words? What do you think? I read it as being a refuge for convent-turned-women, and that confuses me. Nikitta a.a. #1759 Apatriot(No, not apricot)#18 ICQ# 251532856 Unreferenced footnotes: http://www.nut.house.cx/cgi-bin/nemwiki.pl?ISFN "I get tired of being told what we are supposed to be. There is a man or woman out there to appreciate every kind of man or woman. Be yourself." ClaySkye (a.a.)http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htmThu, 23 Apr 2009 07:11:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:743464Usenet24http://www.englishforums.com/English/OddHyphens/wpzjd/post.htmhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/comments7075-743464.xmlSaw this in the paper today: In (the book) "Paradise", a convent-turned-women's refuge is stormed by townsmen. The meaning is perfectly clear, but is there not a slight miscue here, to the effect that this was once a convent refuge? On the other hand, if the hyphens are dropped, a different miscue arises, as you might think initially that "convent" is to be the subject and "turned" the main verb. Is the writer is trying to tell us too much in too few words? What do you think? Peasemarch.