Hyphens, En Dashes, Em Dashes

A. According to the hyphenation guide at CMOS 7.96 (sec. 2, under “phrases, verbal”), compound verbs like that one are left open unless entered in Merriam-Webster with a hyphen. There’s no entry there for that verb, hyphenated or otherwise, so we’d write password protect.

If you strongly prefer the hyphen, you could cite the OED, which does include an entry for the term, where it’s hyphenated (password-protect). The OED mostly reflects British usage, but many similar verbs are listed in either Merriam-Webster or the OED with a hyphen (e.g., double-click, fact-check, hot-wire, fast-forward). And though the term password-protect isn’t listed in either Microsoft’s or Apple’s style guide, the similar verb write-protect is listed in Microsoft’s guide (and in the OED) and copy-protect is entered in Apple’s guide (all as of February 3, 2026).

In sum, Chicago style would call for password protect (no hyphen), but the hyphen is nonetheless a reasonable choice recorded in at least one major English-language dictionary and reflected in similar terms.

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. We can confirm that Chicago style doesn’t require hyphens in over the top when it’s used as a predicate adjective (as in your example, where it modifies the implied subject “It” from the previous sentence) or when it’s used an adverb (“they went over the top with their demands”). But you won’t necessarily get this answer from the dictionary.

Merriam-Webster’s entry for that term shows two forms: the phrase over the top (without hyphens) and the adjective over-the-top (with hyphens). That hyphenated adjective, however, isn’t the last word.

In Merriam-Webster’s entries for over-the-top and many other hyphenated compound adjectives, the hyphens are generally presented as if they’re a permanent fixture of such terms. But more than a few of these terms—from clear-cut to well-versed—can be left unhyphenated when they follow rather than precede a noun that they modify, a usage long supported by CMOS. For example, you could refer to “an over-the-top solution” (with hyphens) but “a solution that was over the top” (no hyphens).

This nuance may be falling out of fashion (perhaps because it’s so easy to toggle over to the dictionary for any hyphenation question and copy whatever’s entered there), but it still matters in Chicago style. For more on this subject, see “Compound Modifiers After a Noun: A Postpositive Dilemma,” at CMOS Shop Talk. See also the hyphenation guide at CMOS 7.96, under “phrases, adjectival”; for adverbs, see “phrases, adverbial.”

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. Those two paragraphs do seem to contradict each other, but it’s important to note that CMOS would recommend reworking the phrase “time clock–punching employees,” if possible, to avoid the need for an en dash. The problem is that more than a few readers will assume that the en dash is simply a kind of hyphen (if they notice the difference at all), which could result in a misreading, at least initially, of “clock-punching employees” who are somehow modified by “time.”

A phrase like “Civil War–era veterans,” by contrast, is a little easier to parse, thanks to the initial caps, which can help readers to understand that “Civil War” is a single term joined to the word “era.” The lowercase term “time clock,” though it’s common enough, doesn’t stand out in the same way. That’s why “country music–influenced lyrics” (the analogous example in CMOS 6.86) is followed by an alternative: “lyrics influenced by country music.”

We could have offered a second alternative: “country-music-influenced lyrics” (with two hyphens). But the noun phrase “country music” doesn’t seem to need a hyphen even when it’s used attributively before another noun, as in “country music lyrics,” which rarely appears anywhere with a hyphen (even though “country-music lyrics,” with a hyphen, wouldn’t be technically wrong; see CMOS 7.91 for a fuller explanation).

The phrase “time-clock punching,” however, seems to benefit from the hyphen, even though “time clock” is normally unhyphenated as a noun. That’s why “time-clock-punching employees”—where the whole phrase is used attributively—is our preference in CMOS (not only in chapter 5 but also in our hyphenation guide, section 1, under “noun + gerund”).

If you don’t like all those hyphens, try “employees who punch a time clock”—or, yes, use an en dash: “time clock–punching employees.” Some (many?) readers may not notice your en dash, but IYKYK.

Extra credit: What about “time-clock–punching employees,” with a hyphen and an en dash? That’s not a terrible idea (it does signal the hierarchy of relationships in the phrase), but it’s not Chicago style.

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. You’re right: It would make sense to spell post-traumatic stress disorder with an en dash. In fact, we could have used your editorial wisdom back in 2003, when we added posttraumatic to the fifteenth edition of CMOS to show that the prefix post- forms one-word compounds even if the result is two consecutive t’s.

That decision would have reflected the spelling posttraumatic in a list of 125 compounds formed with post- under the entry for that prefix in the then-current tenth edition of Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary.

Still, we must have failed to register the hyphen in Merriam-Webster’s separate entry for post-traumatic stress disorder, which followed entries for posttranscriptional, posttransfusion, and posttranslational—all without hyphens. It’s clear in hindsight that, as you suggest, post-traumatic was hyphenated in that term (and not in the list of words formed with post-) for a reason, one that had nothing to do with consecutive t’s. (The latest iteration of Merriam-Webster, as of November 4, 2025, now hyphenates post-traumatic as a stand-alone term also.)

But the dictionary doesn’t do en dashes,* and in post-traumatic stress disorder, no one else seems to either (not even Wikipedia, which tends to feature a lot of en dashes compared with other publications). Instead, we’d advise saving your en dashes for more established uses (see CMOS 6.82–90—especially 6.86, on en dashes with compound adjectives).

__________

* The hyphenated main entries in printed editions of Merriam-Webster do feature en dashes rather than hyphens, but that’s presumably for the sake of legibility in very small type and therefore doesn’t count (see also this related Q&A).

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. That’s a good question, but the new rule does not extend to a place-name like Winston-Salem. Nor would it extend to a name like Merriam-Webster (the dictionary publisher). Such names are like the hyphenated surname Newton-John in the name Olivia Newton-John. Though each of those three names (of the city, the publisher, and the person) combines two names, they’re each considered to be a single hyphenated unit.

The en dash in a term like “Epstein–Barr virus” or “Ali–Frazier fight,” by contrast, is supposed to help clarify that something (as a virus or a fight) is being attributed to two people rather than just one. A Winston-Salem virus or Winston-Salem fight, on the other hand, would be a virus or a fight named for a single city in North Carolina—one that happens to have a double-barreled (and hyphenated) name.

Note, however, that the names of some places would get an en dash in Chicago style: for example, Minneapolis–Saint Paul, where the dash connects to an open compound (see also CMOS 6.86).

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. Chicago doesn’t have a style for such words. But maybe you’ve noticed that some people write, for example, likeeee or cuteeee. Those texting-era spellings don’t make much sense when spoken: Which part is drawn out, the final consonant or the eeee? Within a text, however, they suggest that the writer is using the last letter as an exclamation point, tapping it repeatedly for emphasis or to show enthusiasm. Hyphens would ruin this effect (cute-e-e-e?).

You could point then to texting as a precedent and repeat the letter u (as in your first version, huuuuge). It’s cleaner on the page (or screen) than the one with all the hyphens, and the intended pronunciation is obvious. Or you could go with hugeeee—but only if your goal is to use (or to mimic) the textspeak repetition of the final letter noted above. Then the e’s at the end might seem normal (That’s hugeeee!!!).

For the use of hyphens to suggest stuttering, see CMOS 12.44.

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. It looks as if you’re trying to extend the logic behind expressions like “pre–Civil War,” where the idea is that an en dash, which is longer than a hyphen, bridges the space in “Civil War” to apply the prefix “pre” to both words in that phrase.

But Chicago style for your example would be to write “a 25-to-30-year-old oak tree,” with four hyphens. Only in the case of two different ages rather than a range would we recommend something like what you’ve written, but with a suspended hyphen instead of an en dash: “a 25- or 30-year-old oak tree”—which is short for “a 25-year-old or 30-year-old oak tree.” (See CMOS 7.96, section 1, under “age terms.”)

In each of those examples, the hyphen in “25-” is like the one in “30-”; an en dash rather than a hyphen after the first number might look like a mistake, and it wouldn’t necessarily make the expression any clearer. For more on suspended hyphens, see CMOS 7.95.

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. When Merriam-Webster and CMOS disagree relative to hyphenation, follow CMOS. Because CMOS says specifically that “up to date” remains open after a noun—an up-to-date solution but his equipment was up to date (see the hyphenation guide at CMOS 7.96, under “phrases, adjectival”)—that’s what you should advise.

Keep in mind that Chicago favors a spare hyphenation style. What this often means in practice is that any compound adjective that follows the noun it modifies (i.e., instead of directly preceding it) can usually be left open. There are only a few adjective phrases that retain hyphens in any position—among them all-consuming and high-spirited—as described in CMOS 7.92.

But those are exceptions. In general, documents that include relatively few hyphens in compound adjectives after a noun will be the ones that are the most up to date as far as Chicago style is concerned (up to and including the 18th edition).

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. We agree with your inclination, which also happens to be supported by Chicago’s recommendation to omit hyphens in compound modifiers consisting of a number plus an abbreviation, as in the 33 m distance (see CMOS 7.96, sec. 1, under “number + abbreviation”). That example isn’t perfectly analogous to a first-century CE graffito, but it’s close enough.

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]

A. You’re right that a semicolon or a period might be better than a dash in that example. But we wanted our examples to show that a dash really can be used in place of just about any mark of punctuation. And don’t worry about creating a comma splice—only commas can do that.

It might help to show the same sentence but with parentheses:

The number of new cases has been declining (last week’s daily average was the lowest since January).

If you agree that those parentheses work, then consider that dashes and parentheses are usually interchangeable (though parentheses are not as abrupt as dashes, and they always come in pairs; see also CMOS 6.101).

But that doesn’t mean anything goes. Because dashes are so flexible, they tend to be overused. When in doubt, edit them out.

[This answer relies on the 18th edition of CMOS (2024) unless otherwise noted.]