SOME USES OF THE DASH
It is often said that the dash is the mark of ignorance in punctuation.
When a writer does not know how to punctuate his own language at
any point he uses a dash. When one, in the preparation of another’s
manuscript for the printer, cannot exactly make out the meaning at
any point, and therefore does not know what mark to use, he inserts a
dash. When the printer, who does most of the world’s punctuation, is in
doubt, he uses a dash.
Out of this mass of hit-or-miss punctuation, many writers of text-books
on punctuation have attempted to formulate rules for the use of the
dash. The result is—“all that could be expected.”
The dash is a useful mark. It came late into our language; and it came
to meet a real need, which our illustrative sentences and discussions,
we hope, will reveal.
One of the distinctive uses of the dash is to indicate a rhetorical
pause made by a speaker for a specific and well-understood purpose. Mr.
De Vinne says “the dash should be selected whenever there is an abrupt
change in a statement.” This is the primary use of the mark, and is
the one generally understood by persons with even a slight knowledge
of punctuation. Mr. De Vinne illustrates his definition by a sentence
which possesses special interest for the student of punctuation. This
sentence appears also in the works of Mr. Wilson and Mr. Bigelow,
and in several other text-books on punctuation. As Mr. Wilson’s work
antedates all the others, it is probable that he first used the
sentence.
As Mr. Bigelow and Mr. De Vinne made changes, even though slight, in
the sentence, its study becomes both interesting and informing. We give
the sentence as written by each of these writers:
28. HERE LIES THE GREAT—False marble! where? Nothing but
sordid dust lies here.—Wilson.
28-1. Here lies the great— False marble! where? Nothing but sordid
dust lies here.—Bigelow.
28-2. Here lies the great—false marble! where? Nothing but sordid
dust lies here.—De Vinne.
Let us carefully compare these examples, and ask the meanings of the
different modes of printing them.
In No. 28 the first four words are in small-capital letters, the first
word of the sentence beginning, of course, with a capital. The word
“false” begins with a capital.
In No. 28-1 there are no small-capital letters, and there is a space
after the dash.
In 28-2 “false” begins with a small letter.
We are not particularly concerned with the second part of the example
(nothing but sordid dust lies here).
What is the meaning of the small-capital letters in No. 28?
What is the meaning of the space following the dash in No. 28-1?
What is the meaning of the capital letter beginning “false” in Nos. 28
and 28-1, and of the small letter beginning the same word in No. 28-2?
What punctuation will best reveal the full meaning of this sentence, so
differently treated by these well-known writers?
We venture to assert that few readers would grasp at the first reading
the _real_ relations in this sentence, and, further, that not a few
cultured readers would make bad work of the sense in reading No. 28-2
at sight.
Mr. Wilson makes no explanation of his use of the small-capital
letters; and their absence from Nos. 28-1 and 28-2 imply that Mr.
Bigelow and Mr. De Vinne attached no importance to them. We think they
serve a useful, if not an indispensable, purpose; and it requires
little imagination to picture the scene which this typographical device
suggests. Let us imagine it, and learn one important use of the dash.
On an anniversary day, a crowd stands before the monument of a great
man. Let us assume it to be a monument of Shakespeare. The speaker is
in the midst of his oration, his listeners “hanging” on his words. He
turns to the statue, and, with pointing finger, directs the attention
of his hearers to the inscription on the base of the monument, which
inscription reads as follows:
HERE LIES THE GREAT SHAKESPEARE
The orator begins slowly to read the inscription. When he reaches the
name of the great man, he hesitates, turns his attention from the
inscription to the monument as a whole, and, without uttering the name
“Shakespeare,” passionately addresses the monument thus:
“False marble! Where lies the great Shakespeare? Nothing but sordid
dust lies here.”
Having heard the speech, we come to prepare it for the printed page.
How shall we punctuate the part of it now under consideration so as to
convey the meaning expressed by the speaker in the break made after
the word “great”? Mr. De Vinne’s mode (No. 28-2) of printing the
language fails to show the grammatical end of the first group of words
(the inscription); and, in the absence of such knowledge, the reader
will not readily catch the relation of “great” to “false marble.” Mr.
Wilson (No. 28) shows the change in two ways: by a change in the style
of letters in the first word after the dash, and by beginning this
word with a capital letter. The sense of the language clearly shows
that the first group of words would have ended, in the absence of the
dash, where the dash ends. The change from the style of letters (small
capitals) also shows this. As the practice of using no period after a
dash in sentences like No. 28 is thoroughly established, the reader
learns from the first letter of the next word whether such word begins
a new sentence. As printed in Mr. De Vinne’s work, “false,” beginning
with a small letter, appears to be a part of what precedes, giving the
meaning of “the great, false marble.” As printed in Mr. Wilson’s work,
“False” begins a new sentence, and should have the usual space before
it; but is it correct?
Mr. Bigelow, apparently seeing the difficulty we are discussing, puts
a space after the dash, thus ending the sentence with the dash. This
of course requires that “false” begin with a capital letter, the word
being the first word in a new sentence.
We believe that if “false” is written with a capital letter, thus
making a new sentence, the dash should be followed by the space that is
used to separate sentences.
Our conclusions would require that the sentence be written in the
following way:
28-3. “Here lies the great”— False marble! where?
Let it be remembered that we are attempting in the above sentence to
reproduce on the printed page _what_ a speaker said and _how_ he said
it.
If the first four words are a part of the inscription, the fact must be
shown; and it is shown in No. 28-3 by the quotation-marks. The use of
small capitals in No. 28 is much more suggestive of an inscription than
the use of the quotation-marks in No. 28-3.
In our next illustrative sentence, the grammatical connection within
the sentence is perfect, but the sense changes. Here the dash is used
to suspend the thought in preparation for the surprise to come. It is a
rhetorical mark, for it indicates how the words would be spoken:
29. He never lacked a good word—from those who spoke his praise.
A speaker or a writer often wishes to repeat a part of or all that he
has said, and then continue with his line of thought, using different
words for emphasis, for exactness, or for other reasons. Or he may
wish in this way to summarize what he has already said, completing the
sentence with the summarizing word as the subject. There seems to be no
grammatical relation between the summarizing group of words and what
precedes them. The dash serves to show the break in the sentence, and
is thus merely a rhetorical mark:
30. He has been unkindly—he has been shamefully treated.
31. Persecution, injustice, ruined fortune—all seemed insignificant.
The office of the dash in each of the above sentences might be
performed by a blank space of equal length; but such space might not
always be easily distinguished from the usual spaces between words.
Some English writers use dots or two or more periods where we use
dashes in sentences like the above.
Our next illustrative sentence, with its modifications, shows a very
useful and quite indispensable office of the dash. The sentence
exemplifies one of the commonest errors made by good writers.
32. The expenditure of this vast sum is entrusted to school officers,
trustees, inspectors, and commissioners.
32-1. The expenditure of this vast sum is entrusted to school
officers: trustees, inspectors, and commissioners.
32-2. The expenditure of this vast sum is entrusted to school
officers (trustees, inspectors, and commissioners).
32-3. The expenditure of this vast sum is entrusted to school
officers,—trustees, inspectors, and commissioners.
The punctuation of No. 32 is erroneous, for it does not show the
relation between “school officers” and what follows.
That of No. 32-1 is not bad; but the words following “school officers”
are not formally introduced, and therefore do not require a colon.
That of No. 32-2 is not wholly bad; but the words introduced are not a
pure parenthesis, and to use the marks of parenthesis in this way would
unduly extend their office.
That of No. 32-3 is the best, because the true relation (apposition)
of the words is maintained, and is shown by a mark (the comma) already
seen to be the proper mark for this relation. The failure of the
comma to show the relation of apposition in No. 32 is due to the fact
that the words following “officers” form an _apparent_ series with
“officers.” The comma here needs re-enforcing by a special grouping
mark, which office the dash performs. The comma shows the relation; the
dash does the grouping.
We spoke above of extending the office and limiting the value of a
mark. We mean by this that the more uses and, in consequence, the
more meanings a mark has, the more difficult it is for the reader to
interpret it when he meets it. For this reason the comma and dash seem
to be the best mode of punctuating sentences like the above.
As we saw in Sentence 6, the colon is used to mark the largest
divisions of a sentence; and it is used, as in Sentence 25, for the
formal introduction of particulars. The former use is determined by the
colon’s rank, which is above the semicolon and below the period; the
latter use is conventional, and is without reference to its rank.
If two colons appear in a sentence, one because of its rank and one in
the enumeration of particulars, there may be a seeming inconsistency in
grouping. The same is true when a colon is used within a group made by
a semicolon. For instance, in No. 25-3 we used a colon in each of two
groups, the groups themselves being separated by a semicolon. We think
it much better to use within each group the comma and dash than to use
the colon, thus emphasizing the grouping done by the semicolon, instead
of apparently subordinating the colon in each group to the semicolon
making the two groups. This would give the following punctuation for
No. 25-3:
33. In a bill of exchange there are three original parties,—drawer,
drawee, and payee; in a promissory note, only two,—maker and payee.
We have thus used a comma and a dash to set off particulars formally
introduced, making the punctuation of No. 33 inconsistent with that of
No. 25, and apparently inconsistent with No. 32-2. If this resulted in
misleading a reader, objection might be raised; but, we feel confident,
this exceptional mode of punctuation is justified.
In our next illustrative sentence we get away from details either
formally or almost formally introduced; yet the relation to be shown by
the punctuation is just the same and quite as evident:
34. She had a face altogether of the sunny south,—a pure skin, black
hair, and blue eyes.
Professor Wendell uses this punctuation a great deal and, we think,
very effectively. Other good writers do not use it at all; but they
seem to have no satisfactory substitute for it. Professor Wendell
frequently uses it twice in one sentence, as it is used in No. 33. The
following sentence is from his “Literary History of America” (page 2):
35. These records [of things seen and felt by men] are often set
forth in terms which may be used only by those of rarely special gift
and training,—the terms of architecture and sculpture, of painting
and music; but oftener and more freely they are phrased in the terms
which all men learn somehow to use,—the terms of language.
We may perhaps turn aside from our discussion of the dash to consider a
point in the above sentence which illustrates our general principle of
grouping, especially as exhibited in Sentences 10 to 10-3.
Many punctuators would set off by commas the group “oftener and
more freely” in No. 35 on the ground that it is “an intermediate
parenthetical group.” This would be thoughtless punctuation based upon
a rule of questionable meaning. The _but_ relation in this sentence is
between two groups of words restricted, respectively, in meaning by
“often” and “oftener”; and commas should not be permitted to destroy
a grouping that shows the contrast. Somewhat shortened, the sentence
would read thus, readily exhibiting the point under consideration:
35-1. These records are _often_ set forth in terms of architecture;
but _oftener_ they are phrased in terms of language.
The italicized words here emphasize the restriction of the thoughts
that are in the _but_ relation in this sentence. In No. 10-2 commas
perform this office by holding the proper words in the _but_ relation.
We may not assert that commas in the second clause of No. 35 would
change the meaning to the extent that it is changed by the absence of
commas in No. 10-1; but the point of emphasis would be somewhat changed
by their use in No. 35.
The combination of a comma and a dash to express apposition is most
useful when the thing to be explained by the appositive words is
suggested, as in No. 34, and not indicated, as in No. 33. We find a
good illustration of this point in Gray’s Elegy as punctuated by the
author; and we also find in this illustration what, we believe, is
a late development of the dash. The poet Gray was one of the most
painstaking writers known in literature. There was a comma in the first
line of the manuscript of his Elegy in a Country Churchyard when sent
to the printer:
35A. The curfew tolls, the knell of parting day.
The comma here means just what the comma in No. 34 means. What follows
“tolls” is in apposition with the thing which “the curfew tolls”
suggests, as what follows the comma and dash in No. 34 is in apposition
with a picture suggested by what precedes. The suggestion in No. 35A is
less apparent and more subtle than in No. 34.
The printer who received the manuscript of the Elegy did not see the
picture, and so left out the comma, thus making the intransitive verb
“tolls” a transitive verb. The poet’s musical ear felt the improvement
made thus unconsciously by the printer; and the change was accepted.
In order more clearly to show the meaning of the manuscript line, we
should punctuate it with the comma and dash:
35A-1. The curfew tolls,—the knell of parting day.
Thus the dash is an aid to the comma in grouping the appositive words,
especially when following a thought only implied.
There is a very common use of the dash that is commended by all writers
on punctuation; but not one of these writers has formulated a rule that
differentiates the dash so used from marks of parenthesis.
A writer frequently uses a group of words that are _purely_
parenthetical in nature; and yet he desires to give them grammatical
connection with the sentence. Such connection clearly takes them out
of the class of groups of words requiring marks of parenthesis; but,
because of their purely parenthetical nature, it does not put them into
the class requiring commas or semicolons alone. As the group retains a
twofold nature, such nature may well be shown by two marks. If it be
said this is not good reasoning, we may well resort to a rule which,
with the explanation of the conditions above given, together with a
very general practice, will quite distinctly differentiate the class of
sentences to be thus punctuated. Such a rule will have, at least, the
merit of producing a certain degree of uniformity in punctuation. The
rule may be about as follows:
RULE.—Matter that is purely parenthetical in nature, and
yet is given grammatical connection, slight or otherwise, with what
precedes it, may be set off by a dash or dashes together with the
mark that would be required by the language with the parenthetical
matter omitted.
One or two sentences will illustrate the points under discussion:
36. He cannot understand—nor can any of his leisurely countrymen—why
tomorrow will not answer as well as today.
The matter here set off by dashes is a side-remark, purely
parenthetical in nature, but given grammatical connection by the use of
the conjunction “nor.” If the matter were not purely parenthetical, it
would, of course, not take the dashes. A sentence similar in form will
illustrate this point:
36-1. He cannot understand, nor does he want to understand, why
tomorrow will not answer as well as today.
In the next sentence the grammatical relation is in the nature
of apposition; and yet what follows “heroines” is not purely an
appositive, for all “female characters” are not “heroines.” The added
thought goes beyond the office of parenthetical matter, and becomes an
integral part of the sentence, which cannot be omitted without changing
the sense:
37. George Eliot’s heroines—her female characters, from first to
last—are drawn with the serene firmness of omniscience.
The group of words here set off by dashes expresses too much to be
either an appositive of “heroines” or a parenthesis explaining the
meaning of “heroines”; in short, it is neither wholly one nor the
other, and cannot be properly punctuated as belonging to one or the
other class of words.
It may be well to note here the difference between Sentences 36 and
37 and Sentence 32-3, the latter being a type of sentences often
improperly punctuated when the sentence is continued beyond the
appositive group of words. We have just read such a sentence in the
morning newspaper:
38. There is literature in our newspapers—a lively, colloquial, vivid
literature, reflective of the life we lead—and we are grateful for
his [Augustine Birrell’s] admonition that in the making of it we have
regard first for truth and afterward for beauty, if we find it.
The error in the punctuation of the above sentence was probably due
to the lack of a clear definition, in the mind of the writer, of the
meanings of the dash. The relation of the matter between the dashes
to what precedes is clearly that of apposition; and the dash alone is
quite generally used to express it. We prefer, however, the comma and
dash, as was shown in our discussion of No. 32.
This relation makes the appositive group of words a part of what
has gone before, thus ending the first clause with the end of the
appositive group of words. This puts the _and_ relation between the two
_larger_ groups of the sentence, thus making the use of the second dash
erroneous, and requiring a new grouping. A semicolon will best perform
this office.
Punctuated in accordance with the above reasoning, and with some commas
added, the sentence will read as follows:
38-1. There is literature in our newspapers,—a lively, colloquial,
vivid literature, reflective of the life we lead; and we are grateful
for his [Augustine Birrell’s] admonition that, in the making of it,
we have regard first for truth, and afterward for beauty, if we find
it.
THE DASH AS A PARAGRAPH-MARK
In order to save space, the dash is used, purely conventionally,
between paragraphs not put in paragraph form,—that is, between
paragraphs run together, as are sentences. Such usage may be seen
in the definitions of any dictionary. It is permissible especially
on postal and correspondence cards, or wherever economy of space is
important.
EXAMPLES
1. Men, of your own family and out of it, sometimes put you on trains,
and take care of you—sometimes.
2. To have courage without pugnacity, conviction without bigotry,
charity without condescension, faith without credulity, love of
humanity without mere sentimentality, meekness with power, and emotion
with sanity—that is Christianity.
3. The weather was perfect,—the days warm, the nights cool.
4. Royalty bred in Saul what it bred in most kings of the East,—an
imperious temper, a despotic will.
5. Nurses who cherish the professional spirit will be minor players in
the drama,—faithful attendants in the day, silent watchers in the night.
6. Stevenson never lacks precision, clearness, proportion,—the classic
qualities; but, outside of them, the variety of his masters helped him
to be various.
7. This spider springs for his mark, and is remarkably sure of his
aim,—a fact which proves that for distances of several inches the
vision of hunting spiders is perfectly distinct and clear.
8. Serenity of soul is a divine gift,—prop, shield, and unfailing
cordial in one.
9. Now, if it were possible that you, Sir,—and the keen eyes surveyed
the young man closely,—could command the confidence of these dealers,
you might make your visit profitable.
10. Mr. Newman’s syntax presents Homer’s thought in a way which is
something more than unconstrained,—over-familiar; something more than
easy,—free and easy.
11. Jackson’s conquests had been those of war,—always more dazzling
than those of peace; his temperament was of fire,—always more
attractive than one of marble.
12. The subject divides itself naturally into two main topics,—the
political and the social and economic.
13. The work of his administration is represented by the City
Hospital,—its buildings and equipment and its domestic administration.
14. Walt Whitman is the globe itself,—all seas, lands, forests,
climates, storms, snows, sunshines, rains, of universal earth.
15. A few northern warblers were chirping in the evergreens along the
edge of the summit, between the inn and the Point,—black-polls and
bay-breasts, with black-throated greens and Carolina wrens; and near
there I saw with pleasure my first Tennessee phoebes.
16. The patient has the symptoms resulting from dilatation,—dyspnea and
serous effusion.
Without knowing the meaning of the three technical terms in the above
sentence, the reader is informed by the comma and dash that “the
symptoms” are “dyspnea and serous effusion.”
17. Her economies were frantic child’s play,—methodless, inexperienced,
fitful; and they were apt to be followed by remorse.
In this sentence “child’s play” is not sufficiently specific to
define “economies”; and therefore the characteristics of “child’s
play” are added in the form of a group of adjectives looking back to
“economies” and descriptive of child’s play.
18. A young man or a young woman may go, unaided and unfriended, to
a large city,—may go with nothing and to nothing,—and yet build up a
beautiful and successful life.
In this example the comma is required because it would be required
after “city” if the _dash_ group (may go with nothing and to nothing)
were omitted. The dashes set off the group, and thus connect what
follows the second dash with what precedes the first one.
19. We made a brave effort to smoke the rats out with the vilest
imaginable compound of vapors,—brimstone, burnt leather, and
arsenic,—and spent a cold night in a deck-bivouac to give the
experiment fair play.
This sentence is from an English classic, Dr. Kane’s “Arctic
Explorations.” The first comma and dash perform a double office: they
indicate and set off the appositive group that follows, and also act
as the dash and comma in the preceding example.
20. The same note of character—the craftsman’s keen delight in work—is
struck in “Adam Bede” and in the little poem on Stradivarius.
Here is a fairly well-established conventional punctuation which we
do not like. The relation of the group of words following the first
dash to what precedes it, is that of apposition, and is best shown
by the comma, with the dash for grouping. This use would require the
repetition of the comma and dash after the group. The comma and dash
would conform to the punctuation of the examples considered above.
21. We went into the trenches a full regiment. We came out to retreat
again with four hundred men—and I left my younger brother there.
22. In spite of his harsh, stern exterior, the man had wonderful depths
of emotion and nervous sensibility. I think you can see it in his
face—when you have discovered it otherwise.
Much of the beauty of language is lost to one who cannot read into
the dash in No. 21 a scene of tender emotion, and into the dash in
No. 22 a bit of philosophy, as well as a bit of humor.