I thought I'd cracked it....

[sr71plt]

Columned newspapers have nothing to do with what we produce here at Literotica--and that's being done manually, not by any program, at the newspaper.

Cite a story on Literotica that uses end-of-line word hyphenation. The file's huge. You should be able to find multiple examples of it if it exists here.

If you want to continue to think that end-of-line hyphenation has anything to do with what we are writing at Literotica or anywhere else in a computer, I guess it's fine with me if you live in the delusion. You probably still put two character spaces after terminal punctuation too.

 

[Green_Knight]

Columned newspapers have nothing to do with what we produce here at Literotica--and that's being done manually, not by any program, at the newspaper.

Cite a story on Literotica that uses end-of-line word hyphenation. The file's huge. You should be able to find multiple examples of it if it exists here.

If you want to continue to think that end-of-line hyphenation has anything to do with what we are writing at Literotica or anywhere else in a computer, I guess it's fine with me if you live in the delusion. You probably still put two character spaces after terminal punctuation too.

No, newspapers do not use manual hyphenation; it's virtually all done by algorithm but with a manual override. Sadly, with newspaper cutbacks, the people who knew when the manual override was needed are disappearing.

And, yes, Lit does not use hyphenation. It ranges the text left to avoid most of the need for it but this leaves a ragged right edge to the column which makes for more difficult reading, especially when it results in very short lines. Tools such as Kindle do not use hyphenation either. That is because they want to be able to allow the user to change the type size, etc, and the processors in these devices can only cope with basic repagination. It produces crap typographical results.

Perhaps Lit ought to be improving the typographic display of our stories. More worthwhile, perhaps, than prettying up the Control Panel.

 

[sr71plt]

So are we back to talking about what we actually do here?

 

[ChloeTzang]

So are we back to talking about what we actually do here?

Not yet. I think we're still on hyphens and I'm feeling very educated. All this stuff I had no idea about. This is so much more fun than kids commenting on Wattpad.

 

[sr71plt]

Not yet. I think we're still on hyphens and I'm feeling very educated. All this stuff I had no idea about. This is so much more fun than kids commenting on Wattpad.

Then you don't have to worry about end-of-line word hyphenation when you're using a computer. What you have to worry about is that computer spellcheck is no help on combined word hyphenation. You need the dictionary for that (there's no universal formula to know what combined word formation is done open, closed, or hyphenated). But sometimes you need more than that even; you need to know how the combined form is used in the sentence (combined adjective? combined predicate modifier?).

 

[Green_Knight]

So are we back to talking about what we actually do here?

As much as when you claimed that:

...Computers respace the lines...

which we don't do here. Lit uses fixed word spacing and leaves a ragged right edge. Lit stories would be vastly improved in terms of readability if it used decent typography. To be honest, I'd say that a decent standard of typography is of as much importance as the odd punctuation aberration that this thread was originally concerned with.

Question: since when was any discussion on here solely about what we do on Lit?

Answer: tuoba gnihton swonk tlp17rs tcejbus a otno steg ti nehw

 

[ChloeTzang]

Then you don't have to worry about end-of-line word hyphenation when you're using a computer. What you have to worry about is that computer spellcheck is no help on combined word hyphenation. You need the dictionary for that (there's no universal formula to know what combined word formation is done open, closed, or hyphenated). But sometimes you need more than that even; you need to know how the combined form is used in the sentence (combined adjective? combined predicate modifier?).

See. And without this thread, I'd have had no clue. Now at least I know what I don't know and where to come back and take a look - and who to ask

Question: since when was any discussion on here solely about what we do on Lit?

Answer: tuoba gnihton swonk tlp17rs tcejbus a otno steg ti nehw

誠實的。我不知道

 

[NicoleZ]

He not only wrote a book on it (it's quite a small book) but he also developed the best computer hyphenation program in the world.

Oh noooo! Not HIM again!?! And here I was thinking he was only Victor Mildrew and Hyacinth Bucket rolled into one and he has all that on his CV as well?!?

How will I ever be able to live this down?

 

[Green_Knight]

...What you have to worry about is that computer spellcheck is no help on combined word hyphenation. You need the dictionary for that (there's no universal formula to know what combined word formation is done open, closed, or hyphenated). But sometimes you need more than that even; you need to know how the combined form is used in the sentence (combined adjective? combined predicate modifier?).

When JaxRhapsody raised the questions of hyphenation, he was referring to break-hyphens, where a word is divided over two lines of text.

After suggesting that this discussion was drifting off-topic, I see you are know trying to encourage further drift by introducing the subject of compound words and the use of link-hyphens.

I find that it is genertally unhelpful in forums like this to introduce technical terms, such as 'open, closed, or hyphenated' and 'combined adjective and combined predicate modifier' without explaining what they mean. People do that to confuse others rather than to enlighten them. So, for those who are interested, a short tutorial in the use of link-hyphen.

All that a link-hyphen does is to combine two other words together to make a new one. Let's take the example of 'name-dropping'. Over time, such words tend to progress from being spaced or open (name dropping) through hyphenated (name-dropping) to closed (namedropping). Sometimes this progress can be extremely rapid; at other times it can take many years. While this progression proceeds, some dictionaries will show one form, some another. American English tends to adopt the closed form earlier than British English. However, some words never progress to the closed form because the result is unsatisfactory eg part-time > parttime. In essence, none of the forms are right or wrong - it is merely a question of customary usage. If you type 'name-dropping' or 'namedropping' a spell-checker will tell you if, according to that spell-checker's dictionary, it is wrong (Microsoft Word's British English dictionary accepts both), but a spell checker cannot always tell you if 'name dropping' should be 'name-dropping', but does it really matter?

In the 18th and 19th centuries it was usual for expressions which combine a present particple and a noun, such as 'dining-room', or an adjectival noun and a noun, such as 'volume-number', to be hyphenated, but this is no longer done. Road names in the UK were once hyphenated (High-street, Oxford-road) but this, too, has been abandoned.

The next use of the link-hyphen is in compound adjectives, such as 'ill-equipped'. This is where the meaning of the compound word is different to the meaning of the two separate words. An ill-equipped soldier is one who does not have the equipment he needs. An ill equipped soldier has all the necessary equipment but is sick.

Words with prefixes, such as 'non-negotiable' are generally hyphenated, except that in the US the prefixes 'non' and 're' tend not to be hyphenated, giving some rather ugly constructions such as 'nonnegotiable'. Without the hyphen, words such as 're-align' can create problems with pronunciation.

Here endeth the lesson. Hope some of you will find it useful.

 

[sr71plt]

No, I didn't read most of your post. And, no, the one who first brought end-of-line hyphenation up on this thread wasn't saying anything about continuing to do it--and I properly point out that you don't do it in the computer any more--but was referring to something once done.

My responses were based on what you do at Literotica. We both had our say, you've had your opportunity to play king of the mountain and to claim you know more than I do about, and I'm content that the users of Literotica aren't now confused by irrelevancies to writing for Literotica. Having done that, I stopped. You can just buzz off. My concern on Literotica is for people writing for Literotica and there are no end-of-line word hyphens either on Literotica or in computerized programs.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Thanks both of you for such a fascinating discussion. Loved it.

 

[NicoleZ]

Wonderful exposé, Green-Knight! Each era introduces it's own grammatical conventions which leave "irregulars" in the language to annoy, irritate and infuriate pupils and students of later generations. This however is not quite correct in my opinion:

An ill-equipped soldier is one who does not have the equipment he needs. An ill equipped soldier has all the necessary equipment but is sick.

A sick, equipped soldier requires the comma lest the ill be an adverbial reference to equipped; an "ill, equipped soldier" would be sick, but why the need of the sender to inform the receiver that in addition to being ill, the soldier was also equipped?

I would suggest that "ill equipped soldier" and "ill-equipped soldier" both refer to a soldier without the tools required for his job. In the one case, the fault rests with his equipper, in the other the equipee is squarely to blame, but which is which? Then there is the third interpretations possible; that the soldier is physically, mentally and/or educationally unsuitable for his profession, again intrinsic or extrinsic.

In these degenerate days, one would have to undertake a comprehensive survey in order to unravel what influence the introduction or lack of a hyphen has on the receiver's interpretation of the message, one that would be on an academic level sufficient to result in the grant of a PhD. I once studied under a professor/reader who was awarded a 12-month grant in order to conduct a survey on how the words "dare" and "need" were used by school children...

 

[Green_Knight]

You can just buzz off. My concern on Literotica is for people writing for Literotica and there are no end-of-line word hyphens either on Literotica or in computerized programs.

Bearing in mind that some people who write for Lit may also want to produce their work in hard-copy form, I would hate for them to be mislead by your comment that "there are no end-of-line word hyphens...in computerized programs".

So
here is the page that describes the automatic (and manual) hyphenation options in the Adobe Indesign page layout program.
and
here is the page that describes the hyphenation and justification facilities in QuarkXpress, the software used to produce vast numbers of magazines and other publications

(nb: both of these programs handle hyphenation in multiple languages)

and here is a screenshot of the option to turn on automatic hyphenation in Microsoft Word

Oh, and btw, I hate to point out that 'mid-Atlantic' implies that someone lives in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. That would be Ascension Island then.

 

[Green_Knight]

Wonderful exposé, Green-Knight! Each era introduces it's own grammatical conventions which leave "irregulars" in the language to annoy, irritate and infuriate pupils and students of later generations. This however is not quite correct in my opinion:


A sick, equipped soldier requires the comma lest the ill be an adverbial reference to equipped; an "ill, equipped soldier" would be sick, but why the need of the sender to inform the receiver that in addition to being ill, the soldier was also equipped?

I would suggest that "ill equipped soldier" and "ill-equipped soldier" both refer to a soldier without the tools required for his job. In the one case, the fault rests with his equipper, in the other the equipee is squarely to blame, but which is which? Then there is the third interpretations possible; that the soldier is physically, mentally and/or educationally unsuitable for his profession, again intrinsic or extrinsic.

In these degenerate days, one would have to undertake a comprehensive survey in order to unravel what influence the introduction or lack of a hyphen has on the receiver's interpretation of the message, one that would be on an academic level sufficient to result in the grant of a PhD. I once studied under a professor/reader who was awarded a 12-month grant in order to conduct a survey on how the words "dare" and "need" were used by school children...

I'm going by the Oxford Guide to Style which incorporates Hart's Rules. Curiously, despite the fame of the 'Oxford comma', OGS does not suggest a comma in a situation such as 'ill equipped soldier'. It suffices from the fact that 'ill equipped' is not hyphenated that the words are to be read independently. However, I agree that a comma makes this clear. At one time, the distinction would have been clarified by using the form 'ill equipped-soldier' but this is now seen as archaic.

As to the rest of your post, it appears that a complaint had been received that soldiers were being sent out to the front line without the regulation supply of condoms on their persons. Upon investigation, it was discovered that condoms were not being issued to soldiers who had reported sick. Senior officers then insisted that all soldiers, sick or not, were to be equipped with condoms so that they were ready to go into battle as soon as they recovered. Thus the 'ill equipped soldier' was one who'd been issued his condoms even though he was unwell.



Just to round off this discussion (I'd better buzz off soon before I upset the pilot too much), do we know the difference between hyphens, en rules, and em rules (also known as en-dashes and em-dashes)?

 

[NicoleZ]

I'm going by the Oxford Guide to Style which incorporates Hart's Rules. Curiously, despite the fame of the 'Oxford comma', OGS does not suggest a comma in a situation such as 'ill equipped soldier'. It suffices from the fact that 'ill equipped' is not hyphenated that the words are to be read independently. However, I agree that a comma makes this clear. At one time, the distinction would have been clarified by using the form 'ill equipped-soldier' but this is now seen as archaic.

As to the rest of your post, it appears that a complaint had been received that soldiers were being sent out to the front line without the regulation supply of condoms on their persons. Upon investigation, it was discovered that condoms were not being issued to soldiers who had reported sick. Senior officers then insisted that all soldiers, sick or not, were to be equipped with condoms so that they were ready to go into battle as soon as they recovered. Thus the 'ill equipped soldier' was one who'd been issued his condoms even though he was unwell.

Marvellous story and also a perfect illustration of how language is adapted to cover a linguistic need, in this case an administrative distinction between soldiers who had been sent into combat without condoms and those who had not been issued due to hospitalisation. One is left to wonder why a lack of a condom in combat would result in a diminished return on soldiers expended enough to warrant the distinction.

By-the-bye, I guess that the reason they had been issued was, at least partially, due to one that will no doubt please Pilot.

Just to round off this discussion (I'd better buzz off soon before I upset the pilot too much), do we know the difference between hyphens, en rules, and em rules (also known as en-dashes and em-dashes)?

Erm...,

To do so, we would have to make distinctions between hyphens, hyphens and hyphens and exhaust that subject first. That is, establish the differences and "rules" (i.e. conventions favoured over others by grammarians; sticklers for grammar, prescriptivists as against descriptivists) of hyphens as used in creating compounds, hyphens used to denote relations (i.e. ill-equipped against ill equipped) and printing conventions as to the division of words when there is not sufficient space on the printed matter.

No matter. The bottom line as always is this: does the receiver (reader) understand what the sender (writer) intended the receiver to understand?

 

[OmnislashXX]

Another helpful bit of advice some folks gave me and it has helped immensely.

Download Grammarly. It's a helpful Browser tool that helps to pick up misspellings, punctuation errors, spacing errors and the like. It can help you detect misused prepositions too. I suggest downloading it and giving it a try.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Another helpful bit of advice some folks gave me and it has helped immensely.

Download Grammarly. It's a helpful Browser tool that helps to pick up misspellings, punctuation errors, spacing errors and the like. It can help you detect misused prepositions too. I suggest downloading it and giving it a try.

I did that this weekend after I saw that suggestion and added it in to Word (which is what I use). It was really helpful. So thanks for that.

 

[Green_Knight]

...By-the-bye, I guess that the reason they had been issued was, at least partially, due to one that will no doubt please Pilot.

Condoms in battle? To keep the crud out of your rifle barrel, of course. As well as for off duty moments; a certain profession of women have always followed armies.

Erm...,

To do so, we would have to make distinctions between hyphens, hyphens and hyphens and exhaust that subject first. That is, establish the differences and "rules" (i.e. conventions favoured over others by grammarians; sticklers for grammar, prescriptivists as against descriptivists) of hyphens as used in creating compounds, hyphens used to denote relations (i.e. ill-equipped against ill equipped) and printing conventions as to the division of words when there is not sufficient space on the printed matter.

There are only two sorts of hyphens – break hyphens, used when words are divided at the end of the line for typographic reasons, and link hyphens, used when words are joined together for a variety of reasons.

Your mention of 'rules', in the sense of conventions, is one reason why the US terms 'en dash' and 'em dash' are better than the British terms 'en rules' and 'em rules'.

To show the difference:

• This is a hyphen -
• This is an en dash or en rule –
• This is an em dash or em rule —