Hyphenation Hell

[calendula]

Damn those compound words.

There has to be an easy way to figure out what gets a hyphen, right?

I am currently looking up everything in my Merriams but it's so tedious.

Is there a list somewhere?

And how about this as an example.

detail oriented or detail-oriented

THANKS!

Deb

[Perks]

In that case it looks better without. How's that for scientific? I'm keeping an eye on this one to see if it's a 'by consensus' thing or if anybody knows a rule for this.

[MacAllister]

I sorta sprinkle 'em liberally throughout, so I've got something to obsess about later, on rewrite.

[calendula]

Great. So, I'll just keep pretending to know with my clients :-)

[ketch]

Here's a rule I was taught to go by (but I don't know if it's 100% right or not!):

If it is immediately before the noun it describes, use the hyphen:

He is a detail-oriented person.

If it is not immediately before a noun that it describes, don't use it:

He is detail oriented.

And, like I said, I could be wrong.

[reph]

You really need to know the basis for hyphenation if it's part of a service to clients.

For compounds consisting of a noun and a participle, the current practice in the U.S. is to hyphenate before the noun (i.e., use of the compound as an attributive adjective) and not after the noun (use as a predicative adjective). A detail-oriented analysis. The training was detail oriented.

I prefer hyphens in both situations, and I'm not sure all style books say to leave them out in the latter one.

If a compound is in quotes and nothing else is in the quotes, don't hyphenate. The quote marks set the compound off as a unit. Dr. Smith described the new training program as "detail oriented" and added that trainees had homework assignments every week.

[calendula]

The above info is what I thought but there seems to be so much inconsistency.

[reph]

Originally Posted by wordlancer

The above info is what I thought but there seems to be so much inconsistency.

Inconsistency among style manuals or inconsistency in published writing? If in published writing, disregard it; most people don't know how to hyphenate.

[calendula]

So what about:

He is a skilled decision maker

and

...uses poor resources to inform his decision making


Thanks!

[calendula]

Great insight. I do feel like a teeny grasshopper now :-) And yes, indeed, the above examples were straight from the pens of global business leaders.

[reph]

If you're hired to edit something lightly, clients may not expect, welcome, or pay you enough for a rewrite that would eliminate their occupational jargon. Besides, the treatment of "decision maker" applies to all compound nouns having the same structure, so here we go.

"Decision maker" and "decision making," as compound nouns, take no hyphens, because the noun "decision" is the object of the verb "make." A decision maker is one who makes decisions. Similarly for "cattle raising" and "dog breeder": the activity of raising cattle; one who breeds dogs. "Almond grower," "tool and die maker," "taxi driving," "housing inspector," "dress designing," "textbook writer."

As adjectives: "the decision-making process," "a cattle-raising enterprise."

[ComicBent]

Questions raised about:

1. The training was detail oriented.

2. He is a skilled decision maker.


My recommendations for American English style:

1. The training was detail-oriented.

There has been a movement to allow the omission of the hypen in a compound predicate adjective. Sometimes that makes for a simpler, arguably cleaner look, as in:

The old towel was gray toned.

But you are not under a compulsion to follow this "permissive" policy if you do not want to. I personally use the old-fashioned style of hyphenating the logical units, so I would write:

The old towel was gray-toned.

Check "The Chicago Manual of Style" for a full discussion of the issue.

2. He is a skilled decision maker.

This is perfectly correct in American style. It is not even disputable. Everyone who reads it knows that *decision maker* is a unit and that *skilled* modifies the unit.

In cases of ambiguity, you would need a hyphen to clarify:

He is a fine jewelry maker

vs.

He is a fine-jewelry maker.

[acousticgroupie]

yes if it's a modifier hyphenate it.

then that raises the question about hyphenating something as a verb aka the decision maker debacle. as a noun, decision maker would be fine. what about decision-making? (aka He was involved in the decision making?)

i've seen style so controversial in the newsroom over stuff like that.

[reph]

He was involved in the decision making. (noun; no hyphen)

He was involved in the decision-making process. (compound adjective; hyphen)