Hyphens: We Miss Them When They’re Gone
The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation
Hyphens: We Miss Them When They’re Gone
Most people ignore hyphens. Those who don’t ignore them often misuse them.
“Nothing gives away the incompetent amateur more quickly than the typescript that neglects this mark of punctuation or that employs it where it is not wanted,” wrote the language scholar Wilson Follett.
The writer-editor Theodore M. Bernstein was more sympathetic: “The world of the hyphen is anarchic. Such rules as there are tend to break down under the pressure of exceptions.”
No wonder the hyphen has been called “the pest of the punctuation family.”
Still, if we did not need hyphens, they’d be long gone. One of their chief functions is to serve as connectors in compound adjectives, which consist of two or more words. We see hyphens used this way all the time: an author who is well known is a well-known author; an athlete who is out of shape is an out-of-shape athlete.
To illustrate the indispensability of the humble hyphen in compound adjectives, we offer these examples from print and online media:
Hard to find plants at garden center The article that follows this headline has nothing but praise for a startup whose specialty is exotic vegetation, but two hyphens are needed in the opening phrase: hard-to-find plants. Otherwise, the headline is deceptively negative: who wants to go to a nursery where it’s hard to find any plants?
The drop in fee is $15 It appears there was a fifteen-dollar drop in the price of admission to this event. On the contrary, the price of a ticket at the door—that is, the drop-in fee—stayed firm at fifteen dollars. The writer subverted the sentence’s meaning by leaving out the hyphen.
He drank a single malt scotch If you don’t know scotch whisky from Scotch Tape you might suppose that the man limited himself to one drink of “malt scotch.” But no, he was drinking a single-malt scotch, and he consumed quite a few that evening.
No parking rules enacted As it stands, this headline says that no legislation was passed regarding public parking. But the article contradicts the headline: the city council issued an extensive list of no-parking regulations, effective immediately.
A bomb survivor tells his story What a profound difference this missing hyphen makes. Anyone who survives a bomb has a harrowing story to tell, but this piece was about a man who survived the atomic bomb, also known as the A-bomb, that was dropped on Nagasaki in 1945. The anguish of surviving a bomb blast cannot be minimized, but even that pales in comparison with enduring the hellscape wrought by the most devastating weapon ever unleashed upon humankind.
If the article or the existing discussions do not address a thought or question you have on the subject, please use the "Comment" box at the bottom of this page.
Thanks for useful site! I have a question: are quizzes made according to American English? I’m especially interested in punctuation quizzes
Yes, this site and The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation represent American English rules.
Hyphens and their correct usage is one of my pet peeves, too. But I’m missing your point of using the hyphen in “A bomb survivor tells his story.”
Are you saying it should be “bomb-survivor?” If so, I don’t see how the hyphen makes anything clearer in this case. Could you give more explanation?
Thanks.
We are saying it should be “A-bomb survivor,” meaning a person who survived the atomic bomb of 1945.
I work with corporate executives and wealthy families. I often see my market described as “high net worth individuals.” I think it should be “high-net-worth individuals.” I need a ruling! Many thanks!
You are correct. High-net-worth is a compound adjective used to describe the noun individuals.
I use the same rationale that you do, in explaining my use of the hyphen in compound adjectives. Just today (16 Sept. 2016), I did some work in translating written material, between two languages. (The ‘target language’ was English.) The article that I translated had to do with some “aperitif” items one would find at a specific, fine-eating establishment, in an upscale district of Barcelona (Spain).
There was a long phrase which I will abbreviate to “onion-confit pizzetes”. (And, although I am now a retired senior citizen nearing 70 years of age, I will freely admit that I never really knew just exactly what a “confit” (pronounced “con-FEE”) was. But, in creating a compound adjective from an “onion confit”, I inserted the hyphen and told the other (online) translators that this newly-formed adjective now asks the same question that all other adjectives ask:
“What kind of … pizzete*?”
ANSWER: “An onion-confit pizzete*.”
_____________________________________________
* a small pizza (in Spain Spanish)
We’re sure this properly punctuated pizzete will be delicious.
I have a question on hyphens.
The technology is state of the art.
The new software is cutting edge.
The investigation was in depth.
The test was multiple choice.
The exam is fill in the blank.
His performance was spot on.
It was on point.
Is okay to leave out hyphens like I did in the phrases following the be verbs? If not which ones would you include the hyphens in after the be-verbs?
Some phrases in your list require hyphens: state-of-the-art and spot-on are always hyphenated. Some editors would always hyphenate fill-in-the-blanks also. We recommend checking a dictionary with these sorts of phrases.
Thanks for this one. It was great and helpful.
I still have a question though. So should hyphens be used only when the words can be ambiguous like the examples you gave? Or should they be used whenever there are compound adjectives?
For example in the sentence, “there will be a lot of big-name celebrities and movie stars attending the event.”
“Big name celebrities” should not cause any confusion, right? Should the hyphen be used?
I also find using commas can be difficult sometimes, especially different style manuals have different requirements.
Would be great if you can do a piece on using commas for double adjectives, for example, “the beautiful, exquisite music.”
We do recommend using hyphens when words form compound adjectives, such as big-name celebrities. Writers have to be careful about deciding what is or isn’t ambiguous. Using a hyphen in these situations takes little effort, and can prevent big trouble that the writer never saw coming. We list many rules and guidelines regarding hyphens on our GrammarBook.com website to help you determine when to use them between words or with prefixes and suffixes.
Our Rule 2 of Commas covers your question regarding two adjectives. We also wrote about this in our article Commas, Part 3, which you can find under our Grammar Blog tab on our website. We do plan some time in the future to write another article addressing comma use with double adjectives.
Thank you for being a subscriber to our GrammarBook.com weekly e-newsletter, and thank you for the kind words.
I have a structure that supports itself and another one that doesn’t. The first is called a “self-supporting structure”. Is the second a “non-self-supporting structure” or is it a “nonself-supporting structure”?
Write “non-self-supporting structure.”
I had a quick question about hyphen usage in your following example:
Rule 3. An often overlooked rule for hyphens: The adverb very and adverbs ending in ly are not hyphenated.
Incorrect: the very-elegant watch
Incorrect: the finely-tuned watch
This rule applies only to adverbs. The following two examples are correct because the ly words are not adverbs:
Correct: the friendly-looking dog
Correct: a family-owned cafe
In your explanation of Rule 3, shouldn’t it be “An often-overlooked rule” and not “An often overlooked rule”? Or am I missing another rule about hyphens?
Since often is always an adverb (like very), it seldom needs hyphenation with an adjoining adjective. On certain occasions it does require hyphenation to avoid ambiguity, but not in the case of an often overlooked rule.
I have a question about using the possessive for three-year-old. One three-year-old and one gift. Would your write it three-year-old’s gift? or three years old’s gift?
“A three-year-old’s gift” is correct.
I know that technically we’d use suspended hyphenation in “a family-owned and -operated business,” but this looks hideous.
Could we style it without hyphens, like this?
a family owned and operated business
But we’d write “a family-owned business,” with the hyphen.
Correct to both above? I think this is a style choice.
In the world of grammar and punctuation, the truth is there are far more guidelines than hard-and-fast rules. Your method with suspended hyphens aligns with guidance for formal, written grammar. A case could also be made for a family-owned-and-operated business.
Your unhyphenated version may be considered less formal or proper. However, what would we lose in clarity by omitting the hyphens? Probably not much. Thus, the issue in this particular case is not necessarily negating ambiguity, but more a case of whether a formal or informal application of English grammar is preferred.
I have an example that I can’t find in your otherwise excellent list of hyphen examples. I’m hoping you can help. https://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/hyphens.asp
I’m writing a book. I have a question on whether to add a hyphen in the cases where you have two numbers separated by or before the noun. Here are a couple excerpts:
Ex: “It’s a five or six sentence story, one that you’ve practiced out loud beforehand.”
Ex: “This is the second example provided in this chapter of what a five or six sentence story looks like. ”
Ex: “Remember all you have to tell is one six sentence story that you’ve practiced beforehand.”
In the chapter we refer to both “five or six sentence stories” as well as “a six sentence story”. Do either or those require hyphens, and if so, where would you put them?
When I add hyphens throughout, “five-or-six-sentence story”, it seems too bulky.
My gut says, “five or six-sentence story” as well as “a six-sentence story”. What do you think?
Our post Hyphenating Between Words has more informaiton on this topic. The Chicago Manual of Style’s rule 7.84 says, “When the second part of a hyphenated expression is omitted, the hyphen is retained, followed by a space.
Therefore, write the following:
“It’s a five- or six-sentence story, one that you’ve practiced out loud beforehand.”
“This is the second example provided in this chapter of what a five- or six-sentence story looks like. ”
“Remember all you have to tell is one six-sentence story that you’ve practiced beforehand.”
What do you make of the following slogan?
Gainesville.
Citizen centered
People empowered
Does the period negate the need for hyphenating these compound adjectives? Would it be any better with a colon?
Gainesville:
Citizen centered
People empowered
How about a colon and a comma and moving the period?
Gainesville:
Citizen-centered,
People-empowered.
How about a colon and a comma and no period?
Gainesville:
Citizen-centered,
People-empowered
Since there is no verb, the slogan is not a complete sentence; therefore, standard punctuation rules do not apply. With slogans and marketing in general, it’s a matter of writer’s preference.
This award recognizes excellence in Indigenous-owned-and-operated businesses.
Is that a properly punctuated sentence?
(Thank you!)
If Indigenous is being used in a way analogous to, say, women, minority, or other such nouns used as adjectives, then your hyphens are correct. However, if used as an adverb in a way analogous to locally, for example, then you would write Indigenously owned and operated businesses.
I recently came across a sentence similar to the following, and I think it may be incorrectly hyphenated:
Former engineer-turned-self-taught-baker John Doe has been producing toothsome treats out of his home kitchen since 2018.
Because there is no hyphen between “Former” and “engineer,” I believe “Former” applies to (modifies) both “engineer” and “self-taught-baker,” suggesting that the man is not only a former engineer but also a former self-taught baker, which is not the case—he’s still baking. And I’m not sure about the hyphen between “taught” and “baker”—should it be removed?
Now, what if I were to rearrange the sentence? Would any hyphens, other than the one between “self” and “taught,” be needed in this construction?
John Doe, a former engineer turned self-taught baker, has been producing toothsome treats out of his home kitchen since 2018.
I think it makes sense as written (with just the one hyphen), but I remain stumped when it comes to hyphenating compounds that include the words “former” and “turned.” Your guidance would be greatly appreciated!
“Former” only applies to “engineer,” not “self-taught-baker.”
The sentences below are both punctuated correctly; however, we prefer the second one.
Former engineer-turned-self-taught-baker John Doe has been producing toothsome treats out of his home kitchen since 2018.
John Doe, a former engineer turned self-taught baker, has been producing toothsome treats out of his home kitchen since 2018.
Thank you for your answer. But I don’t quite understand—how/why does an adjective placed before a hyphenated compound apply only to the first word (noun) of the compound rather than to the entire hyphenated compound? Given that “Former” is not itself part of/attached to the compound, I would assume that it applies to both “engineer” and “self-taught baker”—i.e., to all the nouns in the compound that follows it. That is why I figured the phrase was incorrectly punctuated, because the sentence was part of a newspaper article highlighting John Doe’s successful—and extant—home-baking business.
Your further questioning of the hyphenation prompted us to reassess the phrase from a different angle. It also reinforces why we will typically discourage such extensive hyphenation unless it is absolutely necessary. We believe that rewriting such phrases can often be a better alternative to trying to interpret them, especially when they are long and cumbersome.
The phrase itself is actually a noun phrase in apposition to John Doe (as opposed to being a compound modifier of John Doe). The appositive noun phrase is “Former engineer turned self-taught baker,” and it renames (further describes) John Doe.
As we mentioned in our initial response, a potentially desirable way to rewrite the sentence could be “John Doe, a former engineer turned self-taught baker, has been producing toothsome treats out of his home kitchen since 2018.” You’ll note that when the appositive phrase follows the main subject in this way, it is nonrestrictive and therefore set off by commas. It also includes the indefinite article “a.”
When the noun phrase appears before the name, it is restrictive and not set off with a comma: “Former engineer turned self-taught baker John Doe…”
Yes, rewriting cumbersome phrases is often the better solution. And I appreciate your distinguishing between appositive noun phrases and compound modifiers; for some reason, I failed to identify the phrase in question as an appositive, but I see it clearly now.
So, judging by your answer, I gather that this appositive noun phrase (and others like it, I assume) should NOT be hyphenated (except, of course, for “self-taught”)—whether it is restrictive and placed before the name/main subject (“John Doe”) or nonrestrictive and placed after it.
Thank you for your expanded explanation.
How about admission fee?
I see two entries in the OED: one hyphenated, the other without.
We see no reason to use a hyphen in “admission fee.”