11

Which of the following is correct, (a) or (b)?

(a) "a non-polar molecule"; (b) "a nonpolar molecule"

("Nonpolar" is in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as an adjective, so (b) seems correct.)

Similarly, which of the following is correct, (c) or (d)?

(c) "In my non-expert opinion, ..."; (d) "In my nonexpert opinion, ..."

("Nonexpert" is in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as a noun, so (d) seems correct.)

Furthermore, which of the following is correct, (e) or (f)?

(e) "non-immune hemolysis"; (f) "nonimmune hemolysis"

("Nonimmune" is in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as an adjective; however, the authors of this journal article use "non-immune" in the article's title.)

Finally, which of the following is correct, (g) or (h)?

(g) "I plan to purchase a non-red truck."; (h) "I plan to purchase a nonred truck."

(Unsurprisingly, "nonred" isn't in the Merriam-Webster dictionary, so (g) is probably correct, albeit awkwardly phrased.)

Other than consulting a dictionary, how does one know whether to include a hyphen after the prefix non?

Improve this question
11
  • 1
    Does this answer your question? Can "non" be used as a separate word?
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented May 4 at 21:39
  • 4
    Americans are pretty evenly split as regards hyphenating non-expert or not. Brits still much prefer to hyphenate it. Many words are in such a "state of transition" with a variety of prefixes (always changing from hyphenated to single-word, never the other way around).
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented May 4 at 21:48
  • 3
    ...but you'd rarely be criticized for including an "unnecessary" hyphen So if in doubt and there's no dictionary or spell-checker to hand, just include it.
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented May 4 at 21:50
  • 3
    You certainly can't take it upon yourself to invent non-hyphenated forms, unless you've got the credentials to do so on account of being a respected writer. Note that the full OED entry says non- is a prefix. It has no relevant entry for non without a hyphen. The hyphen is an integral part of the prefix, unless and until enough people with literary cedibility have persuaded us (and dictionaries, copy editors, etc.) that we don't need the hyphen in any specific combination. (And apparently, Brits take more persuading than Americans! :)
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented May 4 at 21:56
  • 4
    @FumbleFingers "Un-" is also a prefix, and "-ing" is a suffix. I think you've got the seed of a good point, but all the hyphen in the dictionary entry indicates is that it's not a word on its own.
    – the-baby-is-you
    Commented May 5 at 21:01

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
13

Only speaking in terms of grammar, the prefix "non-" (with a hyphen) can come before any common noun or adjective.

If a proposed word like "nonred" doesn't appear in the dictionary, then it's wrong, and the hyphenated version must be used.

If there's already a word with the same meaning as the negated word, then it's usually poor style to use the "non-" version. For instance, we don't normally say "non-low" because we already have "high". We'd only use "non-low" in a context where "low" has a technical meaning and "high" isn't the logical opposite, like where low, medium and high are three possibilities, and you want a technical term that includes everything other than low.

Improve this answer
4
  • Note that "non-low" includes both medium and high, so this isn't a flawless replacement. For this specific scenario, I'd tend to just switch to other phrasing (e.g., "not low").
    – Brian
    Commented May 6 at 14:53
  • 2
    @Brian: I don't understand what point you're trying to make. What difference do you see between "includes everything other than low" and "includes both medium and high"? And what is the difference you're seeing between "non-low" and "not low", besides spelling?
    – Martha
    Commented May 6 at 16:08
  • 4
    @Martha I think Brian's first sentence was comparing "non-low" to "high", per gotube's "we don't normally say 'non-low' because we already have 'high'." And I think Brian's second sentence was suggesting "not low" over "non-low" for style, not meaning.
    – nanoman
    Commented May 6 at 18:56
  • "non-sense" is another word that came to my mind; maybe there's even a slight shift of meaning between "non-sense" and "nonsense". @Marta In German a construct like "non-low" could be a bit stronger than plain " high" in the sense of "rather high"; I'm not sure for English, but I thing the phrase (about a girl) "she ain't ugly" goes in that direction... Departing from the main question, however.
    – U. Windl
    Commented May 7 at 11:30
9

Hyphenation is a typographical convention that is either a matter of editorial judgment or subject to particular style-guides.

If a word looks as though it could be confusing to some readers if it were not hyphenated (e.g. nonexpert, which begins with what looks to be the word "none") it will certainly do no harm to hyphenate it, and most people do so.

You can also say whatever you want. If you wish to say something like "I will never buy a red truck" you can say "I am going to buy a non-red truck". That is a casual coinage by analogy, a kind of word-play. You should use it only in situations where word-play would be acceptable -- or if you use it in situations where it is inappropriate, be aware that there could be consequences. Your essay on the echidna submitted to Nature may be rejected.

Improve this answer
6
  • 4
    I disagree that using "non-" (hyphenated) with a word where it is not already common is always "casual" or "word-play". It is a generative prefix that can be used even with obscure terms in a formal register (e.g., in technical writing). Granted, because negation can be confusing, one should consider whether "non-" is the clearest way to express the meaning, but it is not word-play.
    – nanoman
    Commented May 6 at 15:44
  • 2
    @nanoman: I agree that it is a generative prefix but would say that if you were to use "non-red" in a formal context instead of using a relative clause (e.g. "a sign that is not red in color" or "a sign that is any color but red") a register-clash is the result. I suppose we have an irreconcilable difference of opinion there. That kind of generative license is a breach of the normal constraints that apply to formal contexts. But if you could give me some non-trivial examples, maybe I would change my opinion when I saw it in action.
    – TimR
    Commented May 6 at 18:29
  • 1
    "I am going to buy a non-red truck" is a very different statement from "I will never buy a red truck". The latter is closer to "Whenever I buy a truck, it will be non-red." The former implies an intent to purchase that was non-present in the original statement.
    – Miral
    Commented May 7 at 4:50
  • @Miral I was referring to one of the specific sub-questions in the body of the original question. See (g) and (h). The distinction about intent to buy is a red herring.
    – TimR
    Commented May 7 at 9:53
  • I found this on the front page: nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07336-w This has non-DNA and non-germline directly and in the citations we have non-DNA in the title of an article in Science and non-antibiotic in the title of an article in Nature. So it seems that Nature does not care. (I would suggest actually technical terminology is often "made up" this way.)
    – user3067860
    Commented May 7 at 16:14
8

Hyphenation is style dependent and not subject to hard-and-fast (or hard and fast) rules

For instance, the Australian Government Style Manual offers a practical approach to hyphen usage. They suggest, "Refer to your organisation’s preferred dictionary when you are uncertain about the need for a hyphen in spelling." They also acknowledge the lack of strict rules about hyphens, stating, "There are few firm rules about using hyphens, and dictionaries do not always agree." This practical guidance is then followed by specific examples.

The primary purpose of hyphenation is to avoid ambiguity, for example:

  • ‘a little used office’, but ‘a little-used office’
  • ‘a unionised workforce’, but ‘an un-ionised particle’

Provided you keep that in mind and remain consistent, you can't go far wrong.

So, my hints for you:

  1. If your organisation uses a specific dictionary, use that. If it doesn’t, pick a dictionary and stick with it,
  2. Ditto for a style guide,
  3. If the non-hyphenated word is in the dictionary, you can safely use the non-hyphenated word.
  4. If you are coining a new word or suspect that the word is little used, err on the side of hyphenation ("non-red", for example).
  5. Use the right word if the unhyphenated word means something different from the hyphenated one. This is pretty rare for "non-", but I did find one: "nonage" means the period before reaching legal age, whereas "non-age" means not related to age, as in "non-age-related degeneration".
  6. If you add "non" to an already hyphenated word, hyphenate it.
  7. If all else fails, use the one you think looks right.
Improve this answer
1
  • 1
    This is the best answer to the question!
    – Quack E. Duck
    Commented May 7 at 5:07
4

Both @gotube and @TimR provide sound guidance. Beyond that, I’m afraid there is no reliable algorithm for partitioning cases between the hyphenate me and the set me closed up (i.e., as a single word).

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .