Okay, from the title, you've probably guessed the question. I'm hearing conflicting things about this word. Does it need a hyphen or is the compound word gaining acceptance? The hyphen just looks weird to me.
Thanks!
Thanks!
absentminded, absent-minded, absent-mindedly
- Thread starter Meira
- Start date
A quick poke around shows both are in use. The OED hyphenates, but some of their examples do not. Merriam-Webster doesn't hyphenate. The New York Times apparently does.
I would say hyphenate or not as you prefer, but be prepared to swap if you get an editor who likes it the other way.
I would say hyphenate or not as you prefer, but be prepared to swap if you get an editor who likes it the other way.
Which would take about three seconds in your word-processor.
I've generally seen it unhyphenated, I think, but it's not an issue I'd lose any sleep over.
caw
For almost any such word, just check your nearest dictionary. Whatever that dictionary says is right, even if another disagrees.
For that matter, trust spellcheck.
For that matter, trust spellcheck.
In general, the OED hyphenates a lot of things that American dictionaries and current American usage close up: barrel-house, brown-nose, cash-box, finger-breadth, level-headed, take-off, trap-door, water-bed. This includes words that are formed merely by adding a prefix, which American English almost always (unless it creates ambiguity) closes up: co-author, mid-afternoon, non-intuitive.
I assume this reflects a British vs. American English difference. When writing for an American audience, I wouldn't go by what the OED hyphenates.