Has anyone noticed a trend toward massive, cumbersome multi-word modifiers in the written word? I'm thinking of constructions like:

"We can't continue this I-have-to-spend-my-paycheck-as-soon-as-I-get-it mentality." (I made this one up, but you get the idea.)

Sometimes I find it to be a clever way to communicate; other times I lose track of the sentence. (What was the subject again?)

Any wisdom out there? Egregious examples? gs

Egregious examples?

Try a board Search based on 'emoticon' !

[glancing-askance-at-maverick-since-the-reference-wasn't-lost-on-me emoticon]

glancing-askance-at-maverick

[luv-yah-to-bits-emoticon]!

Hi garynamy: I've just finished reading Oscar Hijuelos's "The Mambo Kings play songs of love" in which one whole chapter (approximately a page and a half) is composed of hyphenated words. Here's a brief example:

" … then coconuts-falling-out-of-the-trees-and-thumping-against-the-ground drums, then lion-skin drums, then the-whacking-of-the-hand-against-a-wall drums, the-beating-of-a-pillow drums, heavy-stones-against-a-wall drums, then the-thickest-forest-tree-trunks-pounding drums, and then the-mountain-rumble drums, then the-little-birds-learning-to-fly drums and the big-birds-alighting-on-a-rooftop-and-fanning-their-immense-wings drums, then a-boat-down-the-river-with-its-oars-dropping-heavily-into-the-water drums … "

When writing in scientific english (as used in reports, technical papers and theses) ALL hyphens are treated as superfluous and deleted (well, at least the publications for which I prepared papers). As I recall however, the only exception is when listing an assemblage of mineral or chemical constituents eg ".....the Broken Hill lead-zinc-copper-silver deposit".

To be frank, hyphen deletion is not a bad way to go!! Try it in your next paper or report at work and you'll see that their removal often leads to more correct use of the language. Look at the hyphens in something you've written previously. Could you replace them with (a) a better word, (b) a full stop (ie "period"), (c) a comma or (d) could they simply be deleted with no effect on the sentence? (BTW MS Word just LURVS hyphens. I spend a lot of time NOT accepting those proffered by the spell checker!!)

The rules of scientific writing also rank adverbs as slovenly, incorrect and unnecessary! For instance, "...the process is usually accepted..." carries scientific oomph when "usually" is deleted. Guess that the rule forces one to write in the assertive rather than the passive. When I was working in the scientific world, the spell checker was always sent on a " *ly" search and destroy mission. The only one I used to let through was "only"!!

Since email has been around, I've taken up hyphen usage - it works for me as the written version of an afterthought or if I wish to make an aside in the middle of a sentence.

stales

"I don't like your I-can-use-anything-as-an-adjective attitude."

(attributed to Larry Wall)

Without using a hyphen how would you differentiate between "Applicants must submit six-monthly reports" and "Applicants must submit six monthly reports"?

Bingley

Howsabout "Applicants must submit a report every six months."

stales

Well, you could, but why should you? I would agree that the hyphen can be overused, but surely the way round that is to cut them down to where they are essential to preserve a difference in meaning rather than abolish them altogether?

Another example: Because of the recent floods, some of the paintings in the gallery's collection need to be re-stored/restored.

Bingley

My English teacher would've said, "Re-stored eh stales, a case of making your own American word perhaps?"

What's wrong with "...stored again?"

stales

I think there is a difference between stored again and re-stored. I'd be more likely to use stored again if, for example, the paintings were displayed and then put back into storage, while I'd be more likely to use re-store, if they were moved from one place of storage to another because the first was unsuitable or could no longer be used for whatever reason.

Be that as it may, since I can show a difference between restored and re-stored in speaking by shifting the stress, why do away with a handy way of showing the difference in writing and then force me to rephrase the sentence?

Bingley

The word 're-create' is in common use but almost always (I would say) misspelt as 'recreate', which to me is the obscure verb of harmless enjoyment, pronounced rek-.

Hyphenation is not a problem, over-hyphenation is. (That wasn't an intentional example, but one word 'over-hyphenation' is quite as clear as 'too much hyphenation' and much clearer than fused 'overhyphenation'.)

Rewriting for clarity is good; rewriting to conform to imposed rules is like writing sonnets: fine if you want to but not compulsory.