 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2007Those pesky hyphenated words
I have always seen the word follow-up hyphened. But the phrase, "I'm just following up" is not hyphened. Am I correct in that or can that vary in American English usage? Also: backlogged, piled-up As in I am backlogged and the work has piled-up. Should it not be: I am back-logged and the work has piled up. Should back-logged take a hyphen? Thanks for any help. > I have always seen the word follow-up hyphened. But the phrase, "I'm > just following up" is not hyphened. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Thanks for any help. You are right. The variations you see are due to ignorance. Cece > I have always seen the word follow-up hyphened. But the phrase, "I'm > just following up" is not hyphened. > Am I correct in that or can that vary in American English usage? In general, verbs of this form are not hyphenated. Nouns and adjectives may be hyphenated or set solid. > Also: backlogged, piled-up > As in I am backlogged and the work has piled-up. > Should it not be: I am back-logged and the work has piled up. Did you even try looking these up in a standard dictionary? MWCD11 has "backlog" as a verb. There is no entry for "pile up" as a verb, so assume the generality is correct: "pile up." The noun form is given: "pileup." > Should back-logged take a hyphen? Start with a standard dictionary.  SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> <http://myspace.com/larseighner> Countdown: 724 days to go. >>Start with a standard dictionary. You guys are my dictionary..... ; ) Put it a different way, you guys are extremely knowledge and dictionaries go out of date fast. >>>Start with a standard dictionary. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Put it a different way, you guys are extremely knowledge and >dictionaries go out of date fast. You think dictionaries go out of date? You should see some of my ties. SignatureTony Cooper Orlando, FL > You think dictionaries go out of date? You should see some of my > ties. You're not patient enough, Tony. I've had my ties long enough for them to come back into fashion again. SignaturePeter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org Please note the changed e-mail and web addresses. The domain eepjm.newcastle.edu.au no longer exists, and I can no longer receive mail at my newcastle.edu.au addresses. The optusnet address could disappear at any time. Oh,and thanks for not pointing out in cruel fashion that the word I meant was hyphenated. Yikes. > I have always seen the word follow-up hyphened. But the phrase, "I'm > just following up" is not hyphened. > Am I correct in that or can that vary in American English usage? There are no punctuation rules for hyphen usage. Nonetheless, there are informal guidelines which are usually followed. Well, there are two hard rules. One is use hyphens for spelled out numbers, and use a hyphen when splitting a word at the end of sentence when this word will span more than one line, which is strongly discouraged. One-hundred-two is an example of a spelled out number. Here is a new- line break, "newline" is hyphenated over a span of two lines. Again, this should be avoided. If to hyphenate a word spanning two lines, split the word at a syllable. Watch out for gerunds! A special rule applies for splitting a gerund over two lines. Beyond those two psuedo-rules, hyphens are fair game for any usage. My favorite guideline, which "gets" many, is hyphenating a phrase which rhymes and is said so fast to sound a single word. An example is day-to-day and another example is time-to-time. Both are phrases which sound to be a single word being spoken so fast. There is a bit more to my hyphen examples immediately previous. For both case examples, a "single thought" is created. Our day-to-day creates a blending continuous passage of time, much like stating an "hour" or a "month" both of which are sum totals of fractional parts. Day-to-day is a singularity, a flowing unit of time which is also a sum total of fractional parts, although not identified. Of course there is this confusing case of hyphenated modifiers, more commonly thought of as adjectives. When two or more modifiers are strung together to create a single thought, such as in my "time" example, use hyphens. However, a true easy-to-recognize single thought must be created. "A wet-mad hen." We know hens do not like to become wet, not at all. We also know hens become mad when wet, much like cats. Intuitive, then, when we see a wet hen, we know she is mad; wet-mad. Same with cats; wet-mad cat. Hens and cats, historically, when wet, are always mad. We can write wet cat, and we know the cat is mad without writing so. For clarity and style, though, "wet-mad cat" is clearer and more creative. This stringing together of modifiers with hyphens only applies when those modifiers precede an object. Almost all would never write, "The cat is wet-mad" although I would simply to be creative. We typically write "The cat is wet and mad" which is a boring construct compared to "A wet-mad cat." Another guideline is using a hyphen to prevent usage of a wrong word. A classic example is re-act and react. "She is to be told to re-act her difficult part performance, to which she will react." Another classic is switching from noun to adjective. She is having a real time of it dealing with this real-time character role improv." This case clarifies "real time" versus "real-time." Difficult versus concurrent. Most common guideline is usage of "self," "ex," "anti" and other words of vanity. Self-employed, ex-lover, anti-anal retentive. Opps.. there is a problem. We write "anti-crime" but cannot write an "anti" something when that something is a singular thought created by two or more words. We can write anti-acne and antibourgeois but we are not allowed to write, "anti-anal retentive." How do we handle, "anti-anal retentive?" I do not have a clue. This is a case example of failure in English language. Fortunately, in my native tongue, Choctaw, we never use hyphens. "Hattack isht kula ichapa" - person makes picky resist - resist a picky person. We do not have prefixes, either. No anti, no ex, no self, none of that nonsense. When dealing with hyphens, no real rules, use hyphens as you please! Common sense should be applied, though. Purl Gurl [ ... ] > There is a bit more to my hyphen examples immediately previous. For > both case examples, a "single thought" is created. Our day-to-day > creates a blending continuous passage of time, much like stating > an "hour" or a "month" both of which are sum totals of fractional > parts. Day-to-day is a singularity, a flowing unit of time which > is also a sum total of fractional parts, although not identified. [ ... ] Proving my point, Kira? Do you honestly think this says something? SignatureThe Liebs I write English > Proving my point, Kira? Do you honestly think this says something? * laughs * I hope you do not use this strategy in a courtroom. Point you have made is you made no point. What point is proved, that point top of your pointy little head? Yes, I honestly think your statement "says" something, although written not said. Your statement "says" a whole lot of nothing! Purl Gurl >[ ... ] > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Proving my point, Kira? Do you honestly think this says something? Stanley Unwin, all is forgiven! Don. Comments strewn about. > > I have always seen the word follow-up hyphened. But the phrase, "I'm > > just following up" is not hyphened. > > Am I correct in that or can that vary in American English usage? > There are no punctuation rules for hyphen usage. There certainly are! > Nonetheless, there > are informal guidelines which are usually followed. Well, there are [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > One-hundred-two is an example of a spelled out number. Which should have no hyphens in it. Were you thinking of twenty-one, or ninety-nine? > Here is a new- > line break, "newline" is hyphenated over a span of two lines. Again, > this should be avoided. If to hyphenate a word spanning two lines, > split the word at a syllable. Between syllables, please. Unfortunately, modern typesetting software does not know this rule, and no humans check. As a result, I have seen typeset material -- in books -- in which one-syllable words have been broken over lines. > Watch out for gerunds! A special > rule applies for splitting a gerund over two lines. What are you talking about? > Beyond those two psuedo-rules, hyphens are fair game for any usage. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > parts. Day-to-day is a singularity, a flowing unit of time which > is also a sum total of fractional parts, although not identified. Hyphenate these only in certain uses in the sentence. When used as adjectives! > Of course there is this confusing case of hyphenated modifiers, > more commonly thought of as adjectives. When two or more modifiers [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > typically write "The cat is wet and mad" which is a boring construct > compared to "A wet-mad cat." True enough. Although the example is very strange. > Another guideline is using a hyphen to prevent usage of a wrong word. > A classic example is re-act and react. "She is to be told to re-act her [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > How do we handle, "anti-anal retentive?" I do not have a clue. This is > a case example of failure in English language. Simple, if you have enough characters in your character set. Use an N- dash instead of a hyphen. The N-dash is also used to join two words both of which are capitalized, and to stand for "to" in a range (2 to 5, 1999 to 2007, January to June). > Fortunately, in my native tongue, Choctaw, we never use hyphens. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > When dealing with hyphens, no real rules, use hyphens as you please! Common sense > should be applied, though. Common sense -- and the rules. Cece > Purl Gurl >>There are no punctuation rules for hyphen usage. > There certainly are! Nope! Grammarians have been fighting over hyphens for centuries. There are no formalized rules for hyphen usage. We learn of "rules" from a variety of sources, such as our English teachers. However, there are no formal rules for hyphen usage. Nonetheless, I do set two rules following. >> two hard rules. One is use hyphens for spelled out numbers, and use >>a hyphen when splitting a word at the end of sentence when this word >>One-hundred-two is an example of a spelled out number. > Which should have no hyphens in it. Were you thinking of twenty-one, > or ninety-nine? Hyphens across the board. One-hundred-two is to be treated as a single word although constructed of multiple words. 1,900,003 : one-million-nine-hundred-thousand-three A single number, a single word, comma for numbers, hyphens for words. >>Here is a new- >>line break, "newline" is hyphenated over a span of two lines. Again, >>this should be avoided. If to hyphenate a word spanning two lines, >>split the word at a syllable. > Between syllables, please. "At a syllable" This indicates between syllables. >>Watch out for gerunds! A special >>rule applies for splitting a gerund over two lines. > What are you talking about? Gerunds, when split over two lines, are split at consonants, not syllables. Whichever case, spliting a word at line's end is not a good practice; poor form, poor style. >> This stringing together of modifiers with hyphens only applies when >> those modifiers precede an object. Almost all would never write, >> "The cat is wet-mad" although I would simply to be creative. We >> typically write "The cat is wet and mad" which is a boring construct >> compared to "A wet-mad cat." > True enough. Although the example is very strange. Very typical, very average example for my life history, especially my "wet-mad hen" example. Purl Gurl >>> This stringing together of modifiers with hyphens only applies when >>> those modifiers precede an object. Almost all would never write, >>> "The cat is wet-mad" although I would simply to be creative. We >>> typically write "The cat is wet and mad" which is a boring construct >>> compared to "A wet-mad cat." >> True enough. Although the example is very strange. > Very typical, very average example for my life history, especially > my "wet-mad hen" example. I like hyphens, but not as much as commas. Hyphens and commas lend well to creative writing and lend very well to reproducing spoken word through writing; single word or a pause in speech while reading. My example is not strange at all, rather creative and instructive. "Will you look at that wet mad cat!" Is this a wet mad cat as with a wet angry cat? Could this be a wet mad cat as with a wet crazy cat? "Will you look at that wet-mad cat!" No ambiguity. This is a cat mad about being wet. "Will you look at that milk mad cow!" This immediate example creates two problems. One problem is endearing. You, the reader, would have to live my farm life or a similar farm life to understand a milk-mad cow. This is a cow with milk swollen tender utters, a cranky mad cow, much like when I was late pregnant, much like when I was nursing our girl. Darn it, milk us or go away; not in the mood. Other problem is more modern day. With the advent of mad cow disease, today's younger generation, less likely to ever having been exposed to anything related to a farm life, today's x-gen kids will think mad cow disease. Use of a hyphen helps to clear away fog of confusion, least for those of average literacy, which is not many kids nor young adults, these days. "Well you look at that milk-mad cow!" With a hyphen, this lends to clarity but most younger people would still not understand this, nor would hard core city slickers. Nonetheless, a clear connection is made between "milk" and "mad" when without a hyphen, no connection is created in a reader's mind. "That there cob-butt woman (worm-man) is enough to rasp your daddle!" "Why that mule ain't worth a cob horse." So, Cece, what is a "cob-butt" person? A cob horse? You know "cob" and "butt" are related, are a single thought created by hyphen linkage. Not too hard to figure out. Nor is "cob horse" difficult to understand. You know without hyphen linkage, "cob" modifies "horse" rather than creating a single thought. Cece, you think my examples strange. However, in my world, those examples are common everyday phrases of no strangeness. You simply have not experienced my life's micro-regional dialect, just as I have not experienced yours. There is no strangeness rather there is a lack of effort to understand phrases new to you, personally. Should you be a man, Cece, you would probably be confused as all get out if I hollered, "Damn it, nurse me, I hurt like a milk-mad cow!" My husband and me grew up together, literally from childhood to today. Twenty some odd years back, when I hollered that, he knew what to do. Besides, if you do not milk a cow, do not nurse a woman, either will quit producing milk. This is not good for calf, nor child. No strangeness, simply a lack of understanding. Purl Gurl [ ... ] > Should you be a man, Cece, you would probably be confused as all get > out if I hollered, "Damn it, nurse me, I hurt like a milk-mad cow!" If you'd looked at the "from" line on Cece's post -- excuse me, article -- Kira, you'd have seen in her email address the name "Cecelia." Okay, Cece may be lying about her name, or she may be a man named Cecelia, but I'm betting on her being a woman. As for your ideas about hyphenation, they're about what I would have expected. SignatureBob Lieblich Attorney, lawyer, and counselor at law >>Should you be a man, Cece, you would probably be confused as all get >>out if I hollered, "Damn it, nurse me, I hurt like a milk-mad cow!" > If you'd looked at the "from" line on Cece's post -- excuse me, > article -- Kira, you'd have seen in her email address the name > "Cecelia." Okay, Cece may be lying about her name, or she may be a > man named Cecelia, but I'm betting on her being a woman. You are, as is your persistent habit, projecting. My take, based on your writings which may not be a full and fair assessment, my take is you view yourself as an icon of what all people should be. You view yourself as a near "perfect person" who serves as a role model for all to follow. You are projecting. You assume all think and behave as you do, or should think and behave as you do. Rather arrogant, yes? You examine email addresses. I do not look at email addresses. Your interest is those details found inside your nose while forgetting you have a nose. Your profession, a barrister, drives you to examine closely each and every word looking for inconsistency, looking for error, looking for a single word which forms a basis for courtroom argument. You look at email addresses. I read what a person has to "say" coining your choice of wording. You search for the slightest slipup, I look up slips to gain a notion of what a person is "all about." You examine each sentence with a magnifying glass. I sit back, read an entire article, give overall context some thought, then read again to be sure I understand and to develop a better feel for what an author is "all about." You like short tabloid headlines. I will use just such. You are arrogant nit-picker who could not find his own butt using both hands. Oppss.. I am being insulting. Actually, I like you, Robert. You are not such a bad chap. You are annoying but truly mean no harm to others. I accept you, as is, even enjoy swapping barbed comments with you. However, you really need to stop thinking you can brow beat me into submission, this will not happen! Taha * I do remove email addresses, as many notice, to help prevent others from being spammed. I do not read email addresses, I delete addresses. [ ... ] > You examine email addresses. Only when I'm looking for information that an email address may contain. I don't read them for pleasure. > I do not look at email addresses. Thereby hanging yourself out on a limb and handing me the saw. If you're proud of your methods of remaining in ignorance, who am I to deny you your pleasure? [ ... ] > Oppss.. C'mon, Kira -- you can't even spell "oops"? > I am being insulting. Surprise! > Actually, I like you, Robert. Aw, golly gee, my knees have gone weak. > You are not such a bad chap. You are annoying but truly mean no harm to others. Thank you, Kira. That's the nicest thing anyone has ever said about me on Usenet. Next time you're in Arlington, give me a call and I'll treat you to some firewater. > I accept you, as is, even enjoy swapping barbed comments with you. And you, Kindly Kira, are perhaps the greatest straight man I've ever had. > However, you really need to stop thinking you can brow beat me into > submission, this will not happen! You've missed the point yet again. I know you're not going to change. I twit you for my amusement. I've told you this before, but you seem unable to believe it. Is my language too convoluted for you to understand, or does your ego resist the notion that someone would make fun of you? You're making fun of me, aren't you? What's wrong with a little mutuality? Of course, the difference between us, at least as concerns the English language, is that I know what I'm doing and you don't. But I can forgive you this little peccadillo as long as you don't frighten the horses or mislead innocents, even if I have to ride to their rescue (the innocents, not the horses) every now and then. SignatureBarrister Bob > I have always seen the word follow-up hyphened. But the phrase, "I'm > just following up" is not hyphened. With time having passed to read my previous article which establishes a basis for hyphen usage, here is a cute lesson page on Royal X-ing. http://www.kfmaas.de/ger_surv.htm I really like the author's page; very creative! Your "follow-up" is a noun. Your "following up" is an action verb. This is one notion of many which sorts usage or not, of a hyphen. "I am activity-engaged." "I am engaging in activity." "I am engaging in a follow-up." "I am engaging in following up." Purl Gurl |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.