maybe you don't understand when you use hyphens in adjectives. It's like this:
"sixteen dogs" does not require a hyphen b/c it is one adjective, one noun.
"sixteen-year-old dog" does require hyphens b/c there are three words that act together to modify "dog"
now you know.
Down goes the Dow
Non-Running
Finance/Jobs
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
toro wrote:
Up 322 points, Dow has biggest gain of the year today.
(And wejo and rojo also start their screen names with a lower case letter in this forum.)
The market went way up on the possibility of a deal.
Looks like there wasn't one.
That's why the market makes no sense. Being driven all over the place by insiders and speculators. And, unless you are one of those, you are at their mercy. -
It takes you guys so many words to say nothing of consequence or value.
Who the eff doesn't know the difference between then and than?
"cognizant of what is knowable+ - really?
Better you remain quiet than expose yourself as a fool. -
Agip.
You are so incredibly stupid.
I noted that "over the top" can be spelled with or without hyphens.
You actually said that hyphens ("thingies" I think you called them) are included when the term is used as a modifier. The term is always an adjective and can be spelled either way.
If you actually got into an Ivy league college I can only assume you were a legacy they had to take or are a member of that privileged group and benefitted from their nepotism. The Ivy leagues are the home turf of the Kosher Nostra and are brimming with undeserving students. This would go a long way to explaining your juvenile behavior -
[quote]agip wrote:
maybe you don't understand when you use hyphens in adjectives. It's like this:
"sixteen dogs" does not require a hyphen b/c it is one adjective, one noun.
"sixteen-year-old dog" does require hyphens b/c there are three words that act together to modify "dog"
now you know.
Yes. Now we all know you are completely full of sh^t.
Sixteen dogs does not require one of those thingies? Who would have known.
And sixteen year old dog is just fine without those thingies. -
Klondike5 wrote:
It takes you guys so many words to say nothing of consequence or value.
Who the eff doesn't know the difference between then and than?
"cognizant of what is knowable+ - really?
Better you remain quiet than expose yourself as a fool.
You just made his point for him. -
You do realize that finding an example of over the top spelled with hyphens in the NY Times does not prove your assertion that they are required when the term is used as a modifier (I got to admit I don't know how else it can be used)?
I googled the expression and found nothing to support this claim in any of the online encyclopedias and dictionaries.
With or without hyphens? Seems to make no difference.
Ditto on sixteen year old dog.
Can you point to a source that states when hyphens must be used? -
Farthing wrote:
You do realize that finding an example of over the top spelled with hyphens in the NY Times does not prove your assertion that they are required when the term is used as a modifier (I got to admit I don't know how else it can be used)?
I googled the expression and found nothing to support this claim in any of the online encyclopedias and dictionaries.
With or without hyphens? Seems to make no difference.
Ditto on sixteen year old dog.
Can you point to a source that states when hyphens must be used?
sure - take your pick. It is called a compound adjective.
https://www.google.com/search?q=compound+adjective&oq=compound+adjective&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.3544j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8 -
"The words in a compound adjective are often linked together with hyphens".
I don't believe are often linked has the same meaning as must be linked.
"The words in a compound adjective can be linked together by a hyphen (or hyphens) to show they are part of the same adjective.
"In the UK, your readers will expect you to use hyphens in compound adjectives.
Americans are more lenient. The US ruling is: Use a hyphen if it eliminates ambiguity or helps your reader, else don't bother"
It would appear that unless you and K5 are English, your
statement that he was wrong in not using hyphens is in fact wrong itself.
Don't you agree? -
You just made his point for him.[/quote]
R U the same guy who posts this same comment all the time? -
Klondike5 wrote:
It takes you guys so many words to say nothing of consequence or value.
Who the eff doesn't know the difference between then and than?
"cognizant of what is knowable+ - really?
Better you remain quiet than expose yourself as a fool.
As has been shown on these boards more times than I care to count, there are many, MANY people who do not know when to use then and when to use than. Since you ask the question, 'Who the eft..." it would seem reasonable to assume that you have never noticed this. As someone who is on these boards quite a bit that would suggest that you yourself are one of those who do not understand the difference since you appear to have never noticed.
And regarding, 'cognizant of what is knowable', yes that says precisely what it was meant to say. My apologies if this is above your level.
Which leaves us with only one question - why have you not yet figured out that it would be better if you would simply remain quiet? -
[quote]If Then More Than wrote:
My God you are a pompous windbag with nothing to say -
hmmm....grammar rules are not usually optional.
According to wikipedia the hyphens must appear:
Conventionally, and with the support of modern writing guides, compound modifiers that appear before a noun phrase must include a hyphen between each word, subject to certain exceptions. Hyphens are used in this way prevent confusion; without their use, a reader might interpret the words separately, rather than as a phrase. One or more hyphens join the relevant words into a single idea, a compound adjective.
I'll accept that few Americans know or use the rule, and certainly on an internet message board grammar rules are relaxed.
But I think this is a rule, not an option, and the NYT Style Guide is the best source of American usage.
If Klondike wants to say 'f you, this is an internet message board' then fine. But if we are defining a rule, I am right. -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compound_modifier
there's the wikipedia source -
let's put it this way - if you don't put in the hyphens, a good english teacher will correct you.
If a NYT writer didn't put in the hyphens, the editor would put them in for her.
But in casual use, the hyphens indeed only 'should' be used -
Klondike5 wrote:
R U the same guy who posts this same comment all the time?
So you've done this before?! Slow learner? -
Klondike5 wrote:
My God you are a pompous windbag with nothing to say
Coming from you that would seem to be high praise indeed. -
[quote]agip wrote:
"hmmm....grammar rules are not usually optional".
According to the sources you gave, the use of hyphens is completely optional in this circumstance in American English. I copied and pasted this in my previous post
"According to wikipedia the hyphens must appear:"
Can you give me that cite -- I cannot find wikipedia saying that anywhere
"But I think this is a rule, not an option, and the NYT Style Guide is the best source of American usage."
An example of hyphens being used from a NY Times article is not the NTY Style Guide saying that they must be used.
"I am right."
It would appear you are not. Unless you can point me to where Wikipedia supports you. -
If Then More Than wrote:
Klondike5 wrote:
My God you are a pompous windbag with nothing to say
Coming from you that would seem to be high praise indeed.
Must suck being so limited -
K5 wrote:
If Then More Than wrote:
Klondike5 wrote:
My God you are a pompous windbag with nothing to say
Coming from you that would seem to be high praise indeed.
Must suck being so limited
You would certainly know how bad it is to be so limited. Thankfully this is not something that I will ever experience so I will simply take your word for it.
