A review of ‘new’
July 2nd, 2008 at 06:02am Barry Wood
I’ve noticed a tendency to hyphenate the adjective “newfound,” but no hyphen is needed. The way I remember it is the Canadian province “Newfoundland”: If that doesn’t need a hyphen, why should “newfound”?
Other Webster’s preferences on “new” words (proper names not included):
One word: newborn, newcomer, newlywed and, my favorite, newfangled.
Two words: new blood, new moon, new wave, new year and new math, which isn’t new anymore.
Hyphenated: new-mown (for describing freshly cut hay or grass) and new-fashioned.
The latter is the opposite of “old-fashioned,” which, when capitalized, is a cocktail containing whiskey, bitters, sweetening and a touch of water with a garnish of fruit. I haven’t heard of a drink called a “new-fashioned,” probably because the recipe would have to keep changing.
Cheers!
Entry Filed under: hyphen or no hyphen



2 Comments Add your own
1. Send him to Town | July 2nd, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Can you expound on when to use hyphens when using two-word descriptors in front of nouns, as I just did!
2. Barry Wood | July 4th, 2008 at 12:56 am
This is a biggie. I can’t do it justice here, although I will make some attempts down the road (I haven’t forgotten the request for my thoughts on “how English ought to be,” either). At this point, I’ll just say that there’s more disagreement about hyphens (and apostrophes) than any other topic. More to come, I promise, but I’m ready to start my three-day holiday (there’s a proper use of a hyphen).
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed