2

I need to write the following sentence in a description of a book's binding:

"Printer's wrappers, housed in a cloth-backed and cloth-edged card slipcase."

This seems clunky to me, and I would rather write "cloth-backed and -edged card slipcase." Is the hyphen necessary before "edged?" I know that in the opposite situation (in which the second component is shared between two compound words) one can simply list the first components and follow each with a hyphen. An example I saw in another question was "ground- and sea-based forces." Can the same concept be applied to this situation? Thank you!

Benjamin Harman
  • 10,508
Matt
  • 29
  • Since it's OK to say it aloud that way (i.e., "...housed in a cloth backed and edged car slipcase..."), a common convention, we can definitely write it. How we'd write it is how you showed (i.e., "...housed in a cloth-backed and -edged card slipcase."). Since I don't know what you mean by "card" in that sentence, I don't know if it's a coordinate or non-coordinate adjective or if it's part of a compound noun with "slipcase" or what, so I can't speak to whether you've shown it appropriately, thus leaving it as shown since it's not actually to do with your question. – Benjamin Harman May 07 '21 at 20:01

1 Answers1

-1

According to this reference (Govinfo) it is not possible to do that for first elements; it is standard practice for the second element, however.

6.23. Where two or more hyphenated compounds have a common basic element but this element is omitted in all but the last term, the hy phens are retained.
♦ 2- to 3- and 4- to 5-ton trucks
♦ 2- by 4-inch boards, but boards 2 to 6 inches wide 8-, 10-, and 16-foot boards 6.4-, 3.1-, and 2-percent pay raises
♦ moss- and ivy-covered walls, not moss and ivy-covered walls long- and short-term money rates, not long and short-term money rates
but twofold or threefold, not two or threefold
♦ goat, sheep, and calf skins, not goat, sheep, and calfskins
♦ intrastate and intracity, not intra-state and -city
♦ American owned and managed companies preoperative and postoperative examination

(Wikipedia) The following possibilities is all that Wikipedia has to offer; there is no mention of any other term than the head.

Using a group of compound nouns containing the same "head"

Special rules apply when multiple compound nouns with the same "head" are used together, often with a conjunction (and with hyphens and commas if they are needed).
♦ The third- and fourth-grade teachers met with the parents.
♦ Both full- and part-time employees will get raises this year.
♦ We don't see many 3-, 4-, and 5-year-old children around here.

LPH
  • 20,841
  • That's a government style guide, not a grammar book. Also, it doesn't address the question at hand. 6.23 is just one of numerous conventions in the government's style guide, conventions that neither include nor preclude what the asker is asking, 6.23 merely touching on the government's accepted convention when the last element in a compound that is carried forward in a list, not the first element. – Benjamin Harman May 07 '21 at 19:50
  • @BenjaminHarman Does "cloth-backed and -edged card slipcase" seem to be a likely construction to you? It seems to me it isn't used at all. Would government directives go against basic grammatical principles? I doubt that very much, they are probably, to the contrary, in harmony with them. – LPH May 07 '21 at 20:00
  • Yes, it does. Not specifically those words because they themselves are unique, but conceptually, yes, it does. It'd be no different than someone saying "gravel-road and -driveway maintenance" or "kitchen-floor and -cabinet installation." – Benjamin Harman May 07 '21 at 20:05
  • @BenjaminHarman I wouldn't mind having the reassurance of some grammatical reference. I'll see what further research might yield. – LPH May 07 '21 at 20:07
  • Just remember that writing only exists as a method for conveying speech, so writing always reflects speech, meaning anything that can be said can be written. Since people commonly carry a modifier forward through a list (e.g., the red hat, scarf, and gloves), including doing so in situations where the adjective is a noun adjunct, like "garage" is in "garage door," and since the such is hyphenated when used jointly as a modifier (e.g., garage-door repair), people therefore say things like "garage-door and -window repair," so if not written as such, how then would it be written? – Benjamin Harman May 07 '21 at 20:16
  • @BenjaminHarman Well, I admit , the possibility is not an inconceivable one; the problem is rather whether it is used at all. I did find a small clue towards a verification of the fact that it hasn't been used at all so far. I'll add that to my answer (for now, until the time comes when it becomes clearly a good idea to remove it) – LPH May 07 '21 at 20:33
  • Not finding verification or mention of the fact it has been used is not the same thing as finding verification of the fact it hasn't been used. You claim the latter, but you only demonstrate the former. Just because one's failed to find something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. – Benjamin Harman May 07 '21 at 21:46
  • People will say "team uniform and equipment" to mean "team uniform and team equipment," "team" being a modifying header of the nouns "uniform" and "equipment." If you use either of those as a noun adjunct, it becomes a compound that requires hyphenation, such as "team-uniform storage" and "team-equipment storage." So when someone aptly speaks the words "team uniform and equipment storage" aloud, those noun adjuncts as compounds still require hyphenation in writing, so it would be written "team-uniform and -equipment storage," the modifier "team" being left implied in "team-equipment storage." – Benjamin Harman May 07 '21 at 21:53
  • @BenjaminHarman I do not consider that the addition I made is the final word on the question, far from it. What I'd say is that it is a first clue towards a realization that for example this construction is only found in the spoken language (which would surprise me as it seems very useful). It is so new to me that I have to reread the phrase before taking in the idea properly, but I do understand the process. Nevertheless I can't help asking myself whether there couldn't be some drawback in it, which would be the reason for its being rejected by the administration. – LPH May 07 '21 at 22:21