AFAIK most computer keyboards don't have em dashes. Rather than hit ALT+0151 every time, I've always just strung along two hyphens, like: --
Absolutely proper and correct use of em dashes, en dashes, and hyphens is, to me, the most obvious tell of the LLM writer. In fact, I think that you can use it to date internet writing in general. For it seems to me that real em dashes were uncommon pre-2022.
Alt+hyphen or alt+shift+hyphen is an endash/emdash. You may not have been aware of it because it's so subtle, but many people (including myself) used emdashes long before 2022
Typing <word><hyphenminus><hyphenminus><word><space> yields an em dash.
Typing <word><space><hyphenminus><hyphenminus><space><word><space> yields an en dash.
That this has been true for some 3 or 4 decades makes me doubt all the comments that em dashes are a "tell" of LLM authorship. On the other hand, I guess when we confine this possibility to web content, I can see how people haven't used Office for web authoring lately, and whatever they do use (like web-based content management systems) don't tend to have this feature.
> Typing <word><space><hyphenminus><hyphenminus><space><word><space> yields an en dash.
More importantly, typing just a single hyphen minus in this constellation triggers the autoreplace, too. (Typing the double hyphen is only necessary without spaces in order to distinguish between an intentional hyphen and an em dash.)
Good point. Either way, it's kind of peculiar that getting an en dash in this manner demands flanking the hyphen(s) with spaces, and those spaces persist after replacement, when the typical usage of an en dash specifically doesn't demand spaces.
From TFA:
> August 1–August 31
From a top comment:
> Boston–San Francisco flight, 10–20 years
To achieve this using the replacement feature we're talking about would take something like <word><space><hyphenminus><space><word><space><alt+leftarrow><bksp><leftarrow><bksp><alt+rightarrow> which is ridiculous.
In professional typesetting, like a book, I sometimes see spaces flanking an em dash, however.
I can't get this to work in Powerpoint. It's funny, I clicked on this thread because I was struggling with trying to make an "emdash" in Powerpoint yesterday and couldn't find the correct search term for the "long hyphen" that I was looking for.
Works fine for me on PowerPoint for Mac, oddly enough. Unrelatedly, Mac also allows easy (non-alt-code) keyboard entry: option-hyphen yields an en dash, while option-shift-hyphen yields an em dash.
That's one of my favorite features of macOS keyboard layouts, but it's so close to one of my least favorite ones – option + space inserting a non-breaking space.
I almost never want that, and when typing "space, en dash, space", it happens quite easily and is usually impossible to tell visually.
The default US English Mac keyboard is so extremely good, and has been the way it is for so long, that I remain baffled that other platforms haven't simply copied it. I came to it relatively late in life and it's one of the reasons I wish I'd started using Macs sooner.
This specific key combination is not US keyboard specific.
I like how they managed to group characters that are formally similar by binding them to the same keys.
I appreciate that the designer of the layout clearly attempted to make some kind of mnemonic connection to the degree they could. Makes it easier to discover and remember the key-combos, even without a cheat sheet.
That's c-cedille here, because to write English fluently you need to be able to type French loan words like façade—but not quite so often as someone in Switzerland, probably (especially so in some parts of the country!) so I assume you've got it somewhere even more prominent on your keyboard.
It's pretty decent but the fact that I can't type an arbitrary unicode character has been a huge annoyance of mine since I switched from Windows/WSL to Mac.
They have shortcuts for Í, Î, and Ï but not for many commonly used characters like arrows
Control+Command+Space or Fn+E or Edit > Emoji & Symbols if you know the character’s name. It’s not very convenient for repeated use, but it gets the job done in a pinch.
Yeah it's not great. Edit isn't always there. Fn+E seems to make the most sense. I've heard about ctrl+cmd+space but commonly forget it. Both of those open the same GUI which combines emojis, stickers, and unicode symbols—preferring the first two categories over the last. To type out a unicode symbol it takes at least three clicks on top of me starting to type in the name of my symbol
> Edit isn't always there. Fn+E seems to make the most sense. I've heard about ctrl+cmd+space but commonly forget it.
You can remap Fn/Globe directly to it if you want. It's also accessible from the Input menu bar item if you show that.
> Both of those open the same GUI which combines emojis, stickers, and unicode symbols—preferring the first two categories over the last. To type out a unicode symbol it takes at least three clicks on top of me starting to type in the name of my symbol
Are you using the expanded Character Viewer window[0], or the default collapsed Emoji & Symbols pane[1]? Because the expanded Character Viewer lets you customise and reorder the categories[2] (though that doesn't affect search), including adding a full Unicode view[3]. And they both default to the search bar when opened (though the Character Viewer opens unfocused for some reason).
You can add the "Unicode Hex Input" keyboard layout, which lets you enter BMP characters by holding down Option and entering its code point in hex (similar to the hex entry on Windows). Expanding the Emoji & Symbols pane minitech mentioned also lets you browse by category (e.g. arrows), and you can customise the categories and add a full Unicode character picker (not limited to BMP like the Windows Character Map) there as well.
Aside from the solutions other people have mentioned, if you have often-used symbols, you can set up a text replacement in keyboard settings. For instance, I have :x: for the multiplication sign.
It's very easy¹ on MacOS to make yourself a custom layout with the characters you commonly use. Personally, I put arrows on ⌥⇧HJKL, vi-style.² (Doing so for Linux is a little more work, as xkb is more complicated and less capable.)
On mac it's very easy to get an em-dash, just alt+shift+`-`. Though I do concur that it's more likely to come from an LLM, I don't think it should be considered a tell — I find it more of a predictor of the writer's age.
I always use an em dash when possible when I should, and double en dash when I can't, just because I'm that kind of nerd. But it is the case that a double en dash on iOS autocorrects to an em dash, so I'm suspicious of the claim that em dashes are a tell for LLM writing.
Not in all fonts. In most monospace fonts, two hyphens will show with a small gap between them, for example.
I also personally prefer en dashes, surrounded by whitespace on both sides, over em dashes. Apparently some WYSIWYG software interprets two hyphens as an em dash, while other will interpret that as an en dash, so I'd rather just use the real thing if possible to avoid the ambiguity.
This test feels biased by the fact that, like others have said, macOS provides keyboard shortcuts. For example, I'm only Gen Z and yet have tried for many years to use the proper dash characters in the right places, which is made much easier by virtue of being on a Mac.
Of course, I guess it's entirely possible—even accounting for OS—that this test remains statistically useful. It makes me kinda sad that my (very much human-generated) writing fails the Turing test....
I hate that this feature doesn't have a timeout, so when you want to type "--" you have to "- -" and then go back and delete the space. You can't just wait as with double-space vs space-wait-space. It can be turned off, but that turns off other locale-based punctuation like quotes.
That has nothing to do with being on a Mac. Em-dashes and the compose-key work fine on Linux, and Android has them under the '-' of the on-screen keyboard when long-pressed.
(Windows probably has some way, but those are rarely discoverable.)
I disagree, there is absolutely no easy way to do it on Windows. You can install a third party program that emulates the compose key but on macos it "just works". And I think that makes a difference for 95% of users
I've always (well...for 20 years) done a Google search for "em-dash" then copy/paste the character off whatever result page come up. Word and other fancy editors always provided a popup pane where these characters could be clicked to insert.
It's a bit funny. On macOS en and em dashes can be natively typed with alt+- and alt+shift+-. The responses to your comment are apparently suggesting these methods are just as easy as that:
1. Install and configure this extra tool, which also by default enables a ton of other things you may not want, and may as well be a third-party tool even though it's technically built by Microsoft
2. Do a Google search and copy-paste (!)
3. Use a keyboard shortcut to bring up a symbol picker, then click on the tab containing the en and em dashes, then click to type them in
Windows does too now via Windows+. which opens the "emoji keyboard" but you can switch to the "symbols" tab to see unicode. It does have multiple dashes in the quick access bar at the top or you can search.
I've used WinCompose¹² to add key composition to Windows for many years (after discovering the concept in Unix-land), which I still find more convenient than the other options I've tried (including the Windows Emoji keyboard).
[2] Though having checked just now, the sequences for en-dash and em-dash don't seem to be working. Perhaps one of my custom macros is interfering somehow… (it is behaving overall, ellipsis just worked as did the following diacritic and other symbols: áèîöūñ±⁰¹²∞¡¿‽π⬚). I'll have to poke at it later and see what is ary.
That’s interesting to note. I have usually taken the time to properly use en-dashes when it seems appropriate because I frequently deal with strings that represent academic years. At least where I live, these span two calendar years. I have noticed that a lot of college websites tend to use the en-dash properly (e.g. on their academic calendar webpages).
Automatic conversions have been happening for a long time. In fact, a few years ago there was some combination of settings on my terminal locale settings and man (well, troff/groff most likely) was converting hyphens in param definitions to some sort of dash character, meaning I couldn't copy and paste out of the man page. I think it also affected perldoc for the same reason.
I don't doubt there are publishing platforms that do it automatically as well, so I wouldn't count on seeing them as an indicator of generated output, even if it may be processed in some manner.
It's like we spent twenty years writing (mindlessly copying) web pages with &mdash and only viewing them with lynx, and then somebody makes a graphical browser and the mistake is apparent, but I don't think the browser is in the wrong.
(La)TeX would typeset -- as an en dash. --- gets you an em dash.
I, of course, used proper dashes in typeset documents, at least after I'd learnt about them in Knuth's The TeXbook. I have found myself occasionally use them in ASCII contexts just as ---. But I've never sought out the proper unicode character.
Certain corners of the world have absolutely cared about and employed the proper use of all the “dashes” well before but all the way up to 2022. I’d imagine LLMs have just consumed some of that material.
Pretty much everything professionally edit and typeset does, and those will generally be retained in Unicode text (obviously, not if it gets converted to ASCII). It’s less common in internet fora because not all users either know the use of dashes or have easy access to them on the devices they are using, and if its not both familiar and easy, people are going to skip it in quick messages.
I wrote for a magazine during college days a few decades ago that uses the Chicago manual of style. I still use em dashes, en dashes, and hyphens regularly. They don't show up as such in markdown, but they are effectively: one dash for hyphen, two for em-dash, and one with spaces surrounding it for en dash.
More sophisticated clients require we use dashes correctly. I first encountered it pre-pandemic, so in professional contexts it's not a sure-fire signal of LLM use — Should you see em dashes correctly used in the Hacker News comments or Reddit, for that matter, then it's pretty reliable tell... Usually. ;)
As I mentioned above, I've had them easily accessible with a keyboard layout for >20 years on all the systems I've used — the only caveat that I find it really ugly with no spaces around em-dashes, which is usually recommended for English.
I'd like to have the record show that I've been using them since before LLMs :)
Not sure when I started; my guess is that I got into the habit of using them in LaTeX when writing my thesis, and then at some point realized that they are easily reachable on standard macOS keyboard layouts (via "option" + "-").
`misc:typo` has been in xkb for about 15 years. There's also xkb-birman (matching the current state of the project that inspired all of it). If your national layout does not have level 3 and 4 symbols set, those should work straight away. If it does, it is highly likely that they clash, so you need to create a suitable subset. It is highly advised to find like-minded people, discuss the best options, and then gently push the result to upstream to make it available for everyone. After all, it's Linux, if you won't do it, no one will.
While this is true, this is an amazingly silly omission.
Serbian and Croatian XKB keyboard layouts have had em- and en-dashes since early 2000s even if they were not standardized: AltGr (right Alt) + hyphen (to the left of right Shift) produces an em-dash, and press Shift on top, and you get an en-dash.
This is how long I've had them easily accessible on any keyboard (I even have them converted to MacOS keyboard layouts for use with Karabiner).
Usually I split it into two sentences, but yes. I don’t really see semicolons used in most business communications, so I treat them as a tell that the text was generated by LLM. Maybe I’m over reacting and prejudiced against semicolon usage.
Using spaces is not wrong. Typographically, a hair space or another thinner than usual space is usually used, but in plain text a space is often preferred. Style guides vary of opinion on this, but newspapers often space them. Without a space they end up looking like elongated hyphens joining the words on both sides. That's not their function.
Its not wrong for en-dashes (and en-dash set open—with space on either side—is generally an alternative to an em-dash set closed.) And its not wrong on the trailing side of an em-dash used in dialogue to show an abrupt stop mid-sentence if the stop is followed by a new sentence. And there's a few other particular uses, but, generally, setting an em-dash open is wrong.
> but newspapers often space them.
I've never seen a newspaper set em-dashes open, but I have seen them use en-dashes set open instead of using em-dashes at all. Given the space premium in print newspapers, em-dashes set open, which would consume enormous horizontal space, would, other concerns aside, be an odd choice.
LLMs do use dashes "properly"; it could just as well be argued that you don't: The very article at the start of this discussion mentions that, while thy don't use spaces, using spaces is a valid alternative.
I've tried to use real hyphens and dashes since learning a bit about typography roughly 10–15 years ago. macOS makes it really easy with just alt and hyphen for en-dash, shift+alt and hyphen for em-dash. Definitely not an "obvious tell" of an LLM!
Thanks for the '⇧⌥<dash>' tip— from 2022–2025, I have been using macOS en's thinking they were em's.
(Side note: GTP says apostrophes should be used for pluralizing only for single letters to avoid confusion, but this seems more readable than "ens and ems" IMO.)
The lack of em dash usage in popular culture speaks more about typical people than it does about whether a text's author was an LLM. In fact, the average person has never even noticed—let alone considered—that the em dash exists. If they've read for 20+ years, they've seen at LEAST hundreds of them.
Imagine being an NPC (a human bot), flattering yourself with the thought that people who understand the language are language bots...
21% of adults in the US are illiterate in 2024 and 54% of adults have a literacy below a 6th-grade level[1]. “The average person” isn’t really a high bar, unfortunately.
Is this a legitimate institute? The linked article offers many statistics and even financial figures but cites no sources or studies. There is a “TOLL FREE” (capitalized) phone number in the website footer, and the comments are full of prostitution ads.
Not at all. It's just inconvenient for most of the Windows-using world, as the characters are not accessible. It's ALT+[whatever] or Google-it-and-ctrl+V. Hence an awful lot of internet writing didn't really use any of that stuff properly.
Two chained hypens, as was pretty much the norm back then.
And did you just call me an NPC?!? It's not a matter of "understanding the language" at all. It's a matter of convenience and of a sort of evolved convention.
I recently got accused of using AI for some writing I submitted because I regularly use both en-dashes and em-dashes, and have for years. I said in another thread recently they are second and third, to semi-colons, as my favourite punctuation marks.
I was able to demonstrate my long use of them, prior to LLMs. And since I write in quarto markdown I don't need keyboard shortcuts.
As a diligent user of ALT+0151 for many years on Windoes systems, I can contradict that it is a sign of LLM writing — perhaps in combination with other factors it can be used to increase the likelihood of LLM authorship, but alone, nope.
What i've been using: Install https://github.com/samhocevar/wincompose and you can then press AltGr then three hyphens to insert one. or if you're on Linux just search for "compose key".
Most word processing applications auto-substitute EM dashes as appropriate - some do it for two consecutive hyphens, iirc. I don't know if they substitute EN dashes automatically ... I don't know if there's a logic for that without understanding the text.
Just install a proper keyboard layout with proper typography support once.
It is maddening that the whole world uses typewriter keyboards with some facelift in the era of Unicode and even blasphemous full color emoji font rendering. What has changed in decades? Windows logo key, power keys, media keys, IE and Outlook logo keys — all Microsoft's fancies.
So initially IBM made some ad hoc decisions on what keys would be suitable for a single user office computer (as opposed to data input and admin terminals they had). Then everyone copied that, because sending unexpected scan codes could lead to bad things (random BIOS and program code couldn't care less about your ideas of forward compatibility). Then Windows became the “basic system” installed on most computers. Microsoft really pushed forward the internationalisation at the time, making a lot of national layouts and code pages (sometimes contradicting the national standards, for better or for worse). Then everyone copied what they decided. What's more important, even single byte code pages had the basic typographic symbols, anyone could've been using them for three decades, but they were not added to most physical keyboard layouts.
I wonder if that was because they wanted Word to seem more sophisticated than it was, and to make people think it was a requirement for “proper documents”, or because programmers still treated all non-ASCII symbols as free data markup constants that would “never appear in a regular text”.
A few years back a journal editor maticulously reviewed all dashes in our manuscript and pointed out places where em dashes should have been used. Since then I started noticing different dashes everywhere around the internet.
The option key is IMHO the most underrated feature of the Mac platform. Having another modifier for character input is insanely handy, and I know where to find numerous characters like trademark™, divide (÷), pound (£), degrees (°), pi (π) and so on.
I've been using real em- and en-dashes for decades, in more or less the way M-W describes. MacOS and iOS make it easy to do, and growing up Mac kindled a life of typographical nerdage.
> Absolutely proper and correct use of em dashes, en dashes, and hyphens is, to me, the most obvious tell of the LLM writer.
Or just someone who likes to use the right characters. There was a report a few months back about how writing from autistic kids keeps getting mislabelled as LLM simply because they use the correct specific terms.
Please stop associating being precise with being an LLM.
I'm married to an editor and friends with an editor at work. They both use em dashes appropriately—even with informal writing. I've now learned the keyboard shortcut just to confuse people in the age of AI slop.
It's pretty bonkers (and mildly depressing, really) to imply that correct grammar and usage is a reason to accuse someone of using an LLM.
I mean if it's an obvious break from their normal style, sure. But by itself? Every time I hear this argument, it just seems like sour grapes from poor writers.
For a while, em dashes were really popular among LLM enthusiasts because of the idea that it would encourage the LLM to draw from training data that contained em dashes—which typically were higher quality training data written by a professional writer or somebody with a professional editor. Subjectively, I think it worked. I suspect that the LLMs trained to be used as chatbots were finetuned to use the em dash liberally for that reason. Now, after a few generations of these models, I think that the em dash is starting to have the effect of drawing from "slop" training data that was written by other LLMs rather than well-written human data.
If you're on Windows, install PowerToys, and check out the KeyBoard manager. It lets you set up shortcuts. I overload my keys using right alt for greek letters. (science stuff). Could do it for these dashes as well.
When I was editing an academic book published by a well-known university press, we were all asked to do that for the references. (And my colleagues, all doctors and lawyers, only knew Word and entered the references manually.)
You write pages 1,003–4, instead of typing out 1,003–1,004 which is just unnecessary.
Works the same with two digits, or even three: pp. 1,899–902.
This is standard practice and arguably clearer.
I've only ever seen it done with page ranges, though. I'm not sure if it's done with year ranges? E.g. 1984–5? Or 1989–92? You work with page ranges constantly in academia, I just don't see year ranges much in any form.
Literally never seen this (wish I could grep all comments I've ever replied to) and I do not understand what makes you say that it's clearer when it's dropping information, making it relative rather than a fully qualified number
In speech, it's common, and misunderstandings are usually not a problem (if you're not monologuing on a recording) because someone will just ask; but in writing it looks like the range is the wrong way around. Maybe I expect more care in writing because the feedback loop is longer, or maybe it's just habit and I think it's wrong in writing because I never see it?
MLA-style citations call for abbreviating page ranges in that way. I mostly see it in literary papers, and not many other contexts, so it would be easy to notice them rarely if at all. Outside of that context, I occasionally see it used for year ranges.
Quick, tell me how wide this range is, just as an order of magnitude:
285368737954–285368783645
Would be a lot easier if I only included the range at the end which had actually changed, wouldn't it?
That's why it's clearer. Now obviously that was an extreme example, but it's also easier to see at a glance that 1,387–9 is just three pages, as opposed to 1,387–1,389.
If you format your numbers properly, you get "285,368,737,954–285,368,783,645"
That's a change of about 50K, which isn't really that hard to notice.
"285368737954-83645" is... well I have to assume somewhere in the 10-100K range? Hold on a second while I line up the digits again... uh... let me rewrite that to "37,954 - 83,645", okay now I can read it. No, that wasn't any easier. I kept getting lost tracking where in the first number I was leaving off. Much easier to compare 737 vs 783 - digit groupings are really useful!
(I'll agree that 1387-9 is pretty reasonable, it just breaks down the longer the number is. Also, if the page count is important, you can just say "1387-1389 (3 pages)". This feels like the sort of shorthand you used to get on Twitter)
Actually, if you format your numbers properly, you get "285 368 737 954–285 368 783 645". Or "285.368.737.954–285.368.783.645".
Or, sure, sometimes you get "285,368,737,954–285,368,783,645". But it's not like that's some kind of default. Except if you suffer from defaultism --- typically prefixed by "American".
Taken to an extreme without formatting, sure, but what ranges have that many digits in human-readable situations? And if there are those exception situations, you can word around it for that case ("285368760800±45691" or "45'691 years after 285'368'737'954")
Genuinely trying to think of an examples, since e.g. books aren't ever that long and search results don't have that many pages (that you'd all read and refer back to). A salary range, perhaps, can get into the seven digits in extreme cases (not that you care about any individual digit when you make a lifetime's worth of money in a bit more than a year): "Prospective salary is 2'423'000 to 2'432'000" seems to convey the relevant info as well as "Prospective salary is 2'423'000 to 9'000" does (except that I wouldn't understand the latter and ask what this second number means, but that's plausibly attributable to me as an individual not being used to it)
copy/paste, "print", paste in from page, to to page
Result:
> print pages in range from: 1, 003
> print pages in range to 4
Now have I have two errors to fix: page 1003 to page 1004. Not nice. Who formats like this?!
-------------------
Also, some RPG books or encyclopedias I own have chapter that span like this:
p. 630 to p. 70 (book 2)
To me, now is unclear, is that 70 with a reset page count, or 670 for book 2?
Since I just now learned that a quotation standard somewhere outside Germany exists that omits leading numbers, I now need to manually check where it ends.
TL;DR:
Don't make me think, and allow for automation. So just write on more number.
Is this meaning to grep for a double hyphen from standard in, or to mark the start of positional arguments and then grep for a hyphen? If you want both, it should be:
$ python -m this | grep -- -- -
Which is just beautiful
(Your example causes the last hyphen to be grepped for, which happens to only match doubled-up ones because single ones don't occur in that text. The quotes/apostrophes do nothing because they're parsed by (ba)sh and so only the hyphens are passed to grep, not the quotes. The last hyphen can be omitted because reading from stdin is the default if neither filenames nor recursion options are passed.)
Oh, of course simply quoting it doesn't disable the special meaning of --, because quoting is handled by the shell and argument parsing is handled by the program.
I like em dashes and use “Option Shift -” to summon them on macOS. However, LLMs tend to overuse them and compose absurdly long sentences. While proofreading a draft, I often instruct an LLM to “keep the original tone intact and don’t create overly complex sentences by fusing together simple ones.” That usually gets the job done.
Writers adores their em dashes. While they can sometimes clarify a concept by adding more context, overusing them can hurt readability. I prefer to read Hemingway-esque sentences that just say what they want to say and end sharply. So that’s how I write too—and sometimes the overuse of em dashes directly conflicts with that, making the content sound as if the author is confused about what they wanted to convey.
Robert Bringhurst¹ prefers the en dash in the context of setting off phrases:
"The em dash is the nineteenth-century standard, still prescribed in many editorial style books, but the em dash is too long for use with the best text faces. Like the oversized space between sentences, it belongs to the padded and corseted aesthetic of Victorian typography.
"Used as a phrase marker – thus – the en dash is set with a normal word space either side."
Presently re-reading this book, The Elements of Typographic Style. It’s one of the few books I’ve gone out of my way to get a physical copy of – it’s just beautiful.
And I totally agree, space-set en dashes are vastly superior to em. I dislike the way it connects the word more closely to the word in the next clause than the phrase itself.
E.g.
He left—no explanation. Vs. He left – no explanation.
To me, left—no feels like a weird gluing together than a separator for a different section.
Because I am exactly the kind of person to obsess about this sort of thing, when I was working on my last book, I spent a lot of time deciding how I wanted to style dashed subordinate clauses.
Personally, I think en dashes are too small and look like a mistaken use of a hyphen. I really only use them in their Chicago Manual of Style recommended uses like date ranges.
But I agree that em dashes without spaces around them look wrong. They glue the adjoining words together when the whole point is that the clause is secondary and should be set aside from the surrounding text.
I ended up using em dashes with a little blob of CSS to put a tiny amount of space on either side.
So much this. Two weeks ago I learned that en dashes are used for numbers, but I thought they are what em dashes are for. Em dashes for me are too long and ugly.
"Used as a phrase marker – thus – the en dash is set with a normal word space either side."
"Used as a phrase marker—thus—the em dash is set without normal word spaces."
>the em dash is too long for use
above, the em-dash without spaces is smaller, at least in this typeface
I've taken to using dash offsets—just as an aside—in many places were I formerly used parentheses; I find it "less interrupts" the flow of the sentence.
Somewhat off topic, however, I'm thoroughly convinced that there is a very high probability something is AI generated when I see Em dashes. Anyone else noticing this?
ChatGPT for example almost always uses them. I'm sure they are more common in academic writing, but its now super common on boards like Reddit.
I saw a reel the other day where some Young People(tm) were talking about "the ChatGPT hyphen" (an em-dash.) There was much wailing and gnashing of (false) teeth from Old People(tm) in the comments.
I’m not sure the same happened with “delve.” I saw an analysis of paper abstracts showing a clear uptick of “delve” starting with the mass-adoption of ChatGPT. Maybe it suddenly became a trendy word — especially in paper abstracts — or maybe more paper abstracts were edited by ChatGPT.
Combining the various "tells" of an LLM (em dashes, delve, grammatical signs etc) with the context (Reddit comments vs professional setting), you could establish a rough probability it was AI generated. At this point, it's the best we can hope for.
When looking at the context of a given text, use of certain words or punctuation, can very well indicate AI use.
The "original" example was delve. There is no doubt that AI (did, or still does) use this word at a significantly higher frequency than the average person. I would say the same about em dashes.
When browsing a Reddit thread about a video game, if you encounter numerous comments written perfectly, especially those containing indicators like em dashes, the word delve, or similar language, it certainly can raise the question: am I genuinely seeing comments from users who write this way in this specific context, or is this content more likely produced by an LLM?
It depends. Em dashes in news articles and written publications? Definitely expected. Em dashes on social media or reddit? Either someone who works in typesetting, or an LLM. Most likely an LLM, giving the dying nature of printed media.
Only typography nerds and professional printers care about things like these. Popular media, even modern professional media, hasn't been paying all that much attention.
Yes, several of the most popular (and even lesser-popular but newly open-sourced models such as Gemma 3 27b) overuse Em dashes. Even when prompting them to not use dashes, they almost can't help themselves and include them occasionally anyways as it must be part of their learned stylometry. It's just not a common symbol to use at all as most people generally use commas for the same purpose. I can't even remember learning about Em dashes in my college english classes.
I submitted an application which I typeset using LaTeX, and some people thought it was AI-generated because of en and em dashes. I have been using these since forever.
There are regular folk who tend to be pedantic with their writing. I'm not sure this is a good test of whether text is generated by LLM. Consider that some may use LLMs to correct spelling or grammar, and the LLMs may often edit an en dash to em dash.
To be clear, It's essentially impossible to know if a given text is autonomously LLM generated (a bot on social media for example) or is the result of revision of real human effort.
To what extent that distinction matters, I'm not sure.
If it's posted through a publishing platform (not just a commend on one or on a public site), it's very possible they do an automatic conversion of some of the common cases. That could also be filtering down to comment boxes and stuff, I'm not sure.
That's not to say that generated content doesn't use them, just that using them as an indicator might require a bit of nuance based on where you're seeing them.
I've been employing em-dashes extensively since I went on a JD Salinger binge circa 2002. Also, "incidentally", for the same reason. I use "Nb" a lot, from reading a bunch of DFW years ago. Oh, and that very-precise construction he does with "which" all the time, I stole that.
Before LLMs, I think em-dashes mostly signaled that you read books and paid attention to details, to the extent they signaled anything.
To generalize your point: A lot of the "brown m&ms" that we've walked around with for detecting a writers status, education, etc., are less useful in an age of LLMs.[1]
We might even be entering some waves of counter-signaling.
[1] They'll never totally nail all of DFW's mannerisms, though.
Everyone I know that writes a lot, especially for copy or product design, seems to use em dashes more heavily. I've even seen a Drake format meme where he is shaking his head at parantheses, commas, and colons but—finally—nodding in approval at the em dash.
Em and en dash usage is officially part of style guides such as The Chicago Manual of Style [1], so it's often a work requirement for many writers and editors to use them in writing. This is why these kinds of dashes are everywhere in newspaper and magazine articles.
Eventually, people learn to include them out of habit—especially as most people see them as aesthetically nicer than a simple hyphen (-).
Exactly. If I see an Em/En dash in a publication of really any kind, I don't think twice. Because that's the traditional context for them. Professional writing.
I've encountered and used em dashes regularly for the last 20 years. If most of your reading and writing are associated with social media, I could see the trend you're describing appearing real within that limited context. But em dashes are not new and have been a feature of high quality writing for many decades.
The only people still using em-dashes are those who think it's somehow a signal of high intellect rather than being (extremely) behind the times. Case in point: this exact comment section where you see it with ~10000x the frequency of standard human writing, or even the average HN thread.
Just makes me roll my eyes really seeing a human use an em-dash. We've in the age of informality, and at least for me personally I've definitely filed the em-dash away as "a near guarantee the text was written by a machine". No matter how much and perhaps especially because HN commentators are coming out of the woodworks to insist they've been using it daily for years.
There is a special kind of irony in the fact that habits that used to set one apart from the unwashed masses (like the proper use of punctuation) now serve as a signal for being non-human.
Yep, definitely been noticing it, especially on Reddit. It almost always makes me navigate away from the post, unless the author mentions that they’re using AI.
Hold on, I'm coming back to this thread, I think I've cracked it guys. Some real alpha for you right here:
If the em dash has spaces around it -- as seen in AP style -- it was probably written by a real human, because that's how it comes out most conveniently on a word processor.
But if the em dash has no spaces around it--Chicago style--there's a good chance you're looking at LLM slop.
I saw this comment a day ago but it only clicked today. The way we tell it's AI is the use of too formal grammar. I think that means they now pass the Turing test. Or at most a hair's breadth from passing.
The correct minus sign looks a lot clearer than a hyphen-minus when printing out negative numbers, especially at small font sizes. I have in the past written code to convert them.
That's actually kind of funny. Looks like it's the result of HN's Unicode filtering rules, though; the original website has different characters in its <title> tag.
> If you want to be official about things, use the en dash to replace a hyphen in compound adjectives when at least one of the elements is a two-word compound.
How is a literal dictionary making fun of people who "wanna be official about things" lol. That's the entire basis for dictionaries themselves
It's Merriam-Webster - they are descriptivist rather than prescriptivist about language. They don't define correct usage per se, but rather document actual usage, though some usage may be given greater weight than others.
In this case, they are calling out the prescriptivist definition but are implying that it may be overkill and offering the more commonly used alternative.
* Use the minus sign /−/ (U+2212) when formatting numbers, because the default hyphen-minus /-/ (U+2D) just looks wrong: "It is −1 °C vs. -1 °C." Moreover, the correct minus has the same width as plus (− vs. +).
* Rare, but use the figure dash /‒/ (U+2012) or figure space / / (U+2007) if you need a placeholder character that is the same width as a single digit. For example, "Guess the PIN: 1‒34."
I use em-dashes correctly because a reader emailed me, and I was dreadfully embarrassed. You can actually see them become correct in my writing after the "I will pile drive you" AI thing.
It never occurred to me that doing this correctly might make people think I use LLMs in my writing.
Edit: I'm sure the many typos protect me from that, actually.
One point that is very rarely mentioned is how to place em dashes around quotations marks.
If the em dash indicates an interruption (not a planned pause) of the actual speech, the em dashes go inside the quotes (often just one, before the closing quote).
If the em dash is the narrator interjecting with additional information, the em dashes go outside the quotes.
Besides this, the question of where to put spaces when multiple forms of punctuation are combined can be quite a complex topic.
It is usually clear that 2-3 thingies means a range of thingies, but I seem to remember there being situations where it could also have been a minus sign. Perhaps it was with placeholders, where 10-N could be either one. Problem is, iirc, the real minus sign is longer than the hyphen, looking like an en dash (the one meant for ranges) and so it defeats the purpose... hence I totally use hyphens as minus signs, but en dashes for ranges, which makes sense in my head because a range has a certain span/length whereas a minus sign is just a little mark to indicate that something is negative. I see lots of people/software use en dashes for ranges but the existence of a real minus sign is, from my perspective, mostly just noted in typographic resources, so I think this reflects most people's usages (for the people that care for these details)
I do like that the em dash is as long as it feels that broken-off thoughts should be
Not everything has to be functional, sometimes things can also just look nice for the sake of it
Throwing my hat in here. The sub millimeter difference in the length of a dash conveys no additional meaning or clarity. It is impossible to argue me out of this position.
It's not like you can reliably write these consistently by hand either without going over the top in length to make it extremely obvious.
I have read her in the past and can't say there were world's of meaning between -'s. Can you link an example? I looked again and couldn't see any obvious ones. Generally she just completely abused the -. Does she even use a comma once? lol
I'd wager serious money that if you put that on a sign and surveyed people, at least in the US, they'd all still conclude it is a "New York" to "London" flight.
What's the use of a communication tool, if it doesn't actually communicate anything to real people?
In my region at least, -5 ~ -2°C, or -5°C ~ -2°C.
If the something is making people confuse, we replace it with a suitable substitution. Re-educating people is really just last resort. Is there anything keeping us from changing it other than ego?
This sort of anti-intellectualism is the perfect antidote for those who claim that improper grammar is nothing more than evidence of language "evolving."
I think many grammar rules are not intellectual but just randomly evolved conventions.
E.g. some English language rule says that a comma or ending period of a non-quoted sentence goes inside the quotes if there's something quoted at the end of that sentence. That rule feels anti-intellectual to me, as if there's some misunderstanding of how hierarchical placement in one-dimensional space works (since something that's not being quoted is being put inside quotes)
Spelling used to be more fluid and up to the writer/printer. Printers would also use different spellings as a mechanism to change the line width and otherwise format text to their liking.
Em dashes don’t convey much meaning or clarity for me.
Rather, seeing too short of a dash is like putting two clashing colors together or wearing two pieces of clothes that don’t match. It just looks instantly off.
That's the comment I was looking for to rally behind. I use the same character `-` for all purposes: minus, hyphen, em/en dash. It's easy to type and it makes practically no difference in meaning or legibility. I refuse to waste my time differentiating between multiple variations of a short horizontal line with a few pixels more or less. Ain't nobody got time for that.
I was going to post basically this. There is only one dash, and it's the one for which my keyboard has a key. Minus sign, hyphen, or any other use case. When MS word autocorrects to something else, I always angrily undo it, because I don't know or care what it's doing.
I take this advice like "do not use a preposition to end a sentence with" and "pay close attention to 'much' and 'many'". Personal preferences from the 1800s taken as gospel by grammatical extremists, to the point where they're taken as some kind of solid rule in a vain attempt to forcefully shape language to a personal preference.
There are cases when you want to follow certain guidelines, for sure. If you write for a publication that adheres to Meriam-Webster, you'd better stay consistent and figure out the right AltGr code to type the right dashes. However, for the 99.99% of written media today, none of that matters.
Ending sentences with prepositions is and had always been fine. It has never been a serious rule of grammar that you may not end a sentence with a preposition. It does sometimes make a sentence sound better to rewrite it so that it doesn't end with one though. For example, "do not use a preposition to end a sentence with" sounds awkward to my ears, probably because you deliberately crafted the sentence to end with a preposition even though that is not naturally what you'd end that sentence with. (The previous sentence doesn't sound awkward to me, interestingly.)
Getting "much" and "many" right is completely different. They mean different things. Confusing them makes you sound stupid. Less vs fewer is the same. It often doesn't matter but in some cases it really grates on the ears (eg "there wasnt much people there" just sounds awful).
Dashes are not in the same category. They are orthographical conventions. They aren't really grammar. They are more like spelling. You can spell things wrong and say it doesn't matter because spelling is arbitrary and you can use the wrong dashes too, but it makes you look either uncaring or ignorant. If you want to give a good first impression, learn the basic conventions of written English and follow them.
> Personal preferences from the 1800s taken as gospel by grammatical extremists, to the point where they're taken as some kind of solid rule in a vain attempt to forcefully shape language to a personal preference.
This is also true of "less" and "fewer". I use "less" everywhere.
i refuse to care about this lowercase letters are all i will ever use i see no possible reason to use the other symbols
Suit yourself, but if you refuse to learn basic grammar you will be treated like you are stupid and uneducated. Like it or not, presentation matters. Getting the basics right, including things like spelling, grammar, etc, shows a basic attention to detail without which your services will likely do more harm than good.
You said "look at any dictionary", so I did. I notice you can't provide a link to a single dictionary that supports you, or even name what dialect supposedly doesn't have "etc."
Etc. is an abbreviation for etcetera. Correctly signifying contractions, abbreviations, and acronyms is far more commonplace than using the correct dash. Almost everyone would have learned about shortening words in high school; many people leave university without ever having heard of an em dash.
Etc is also an abbreviation of et cetera. Only Americans put pointless dots everywhere.
This is all stuff you learn in school. Punctuation isn't obscure or niche. You may not have learnt about semicolons or em dashes in school but you should have and I did. As did anyone that has ever read a novel. There are two semicolons on the first page of the first Harry Potter book, a novel read by approximately every child of my generation. There are loads of examples of the proper use of dashes and other "obscure" punctuation marks in any professionally typeset text.
En dashes, I'll grant you, are pointless. Those can go away.
However, em dashes are a different case. The main reason why it's desirable to use em dashes (beside convention) is for clarity of purpose. The hyphen is already a very overloaded character; they're extensively used to denote ranges and link compound words. Importantly, both of those usages do not correspond to pauses in spoken language. If you're voicing a hyphen you're supposed to barrel on through it. An em dash is much closer to a parenthesis, comma, or semicolon. It's a meaningful break in the sentence, in the way that a hyphen isn't.
Now, if it were up to me I'd choose a different character to replace em dashes (maybe underscores), but that's a separate argument.
Yeah, trying to get people to take Em vs En vs Hyphen seriously is a fool's errand. Only typography nerds would take it seriously and there just aren't enough of them to make a difference. I'd guess that the vast majority of people have never even heard of these distinctions.
I don’t care about the length of the mark, but I did find this idea useful. Prone to excessive detail, I often find myself with a parenthetical inside of parenthetical. The developer in me insists on 2 closing parentheses. But it looks weird and nerdy. Although, using an em dash instead is probably just as nerdy.
> Dashes are used inside parentheses, and vice versa, to indicate parenthetical material within parenthetical material. ...
> The bakery’s reputation for scrumptious goods (ambrosial, even—each item was surely fit for gods) spread far and wide.
This is coming from someone who can only speak English: what a stupid language. How is having 3 symbols that are discernible only by their, almost identical, length a good idea? How would one grade a paper for correct usage, especially if handwritten?
We need a blog post documenting the ironic trend of people—themselves NPCs, actual human bots, just now realizing the em dash exists despite seeing it hundreds if not thousands of times before LLMs—flattering themselves by suggesting that anyone who understands the language at above a 5th grade level must be an LLM.
The comment above is not about being special, it is about proper typography that is still everywhere around us: books, serious websites, anything done by real designers. Those people had to try hard to miss all of that.
No, it is not “politically incorrect” to call people lacking curiosity and/or education like you see them.
No, someone's personal preferences or transitory fashions are not automatically promoted to the holy reference for the whole world.
Taking knowledge of the three extra pixels that are "more correct" as some kind of indicator of intelligence is silly. Pretending you're somehow above them is just sad.
I'm just gonna say it: this does not matter. Just use whatever you want. If you're afraid that someone is going to think less of you for it: the people who matter won't.
An excellent example of why dash length matters. Because of the wrong usage of ‘—’ and ‘-’, it took me 10 more seconds of rereading and re-parsing your comment to understand what that first sentence meant.
I see what you did in the second paragraph too. It’s another example of “a millimeter of difference in the length of a line” mattering in that it looks weird, though it’s not much harder to read.
The undotted small "i" character comes from the modern Turkish alphabet. It's perhaps only slightly disorienting for an English reader to slightly shorten some letters that are just lines in a sans-serif font. In Turkish though, a millimeter of line can make an entirely different letter.
Being able to render a variety of line lengths with different meanings is a cool and useful thing.
It is one of those things that doesn’t really matter for readability, but although they can’t necessarily put a finger on why, people may still notice that some documents or pages appear to be set with more care for details than others.
(edit: I guess if you don’t have to search on Google what the hell a ‘Microsoft Word’ is, then you’re officially old)
And the 1 and 8 aren't next to each other anymore, either. (See typewriters from the "18"00s.)
> those smart quotes
Fixing straight quotes is a hard problem[0]. My FOSS text editor, KeenWrite[1], includes my library, KeenQuotes[2], for replacing them at build time. It's not perfect, but can typeset my ~400 page novel without any errors.
> Did you know there is a dedicated ellipsis character?
When typesetting Markdown, KeenWrite first converts the document to XHTML (i.e., XML), then invokes ConTeXt to convert XML into TeX macros. One of those macros handles the ellipses by converting it to \dots{}:
for em dashes and ellipsis at least it's trivial to convert before displaying them... which I do in my own markdown-to-publication toolchain (but not here on HN).
What's so weird about it? It's the appropriate way to do it when writing in those languages.
And really easy to do on an Android phone, I've found: Switch the input to French or German, and the on-screen keyboard offers the appropriate quote marks for that language in the same place as usual.
491 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 370 ms ] threadAbsolutely proper and correct use of em dashes, en dashes, and hyphens is, to me, the most obvious tell of the LLM writer. In fact, I think that you can use it to date internet writing in general. For it seems to me that real em dashes were uncommon pre-2022.
(edit: apparently only on Mac, see reply below)
You just type two hyphens (--) and Word will convert it to an em dash.
Typing <word><hyphenminus><hyphenminus><word><space> yields an em dash.
Typing <word><space><hyphenminus><hyphenminus><space><word><space> yields an en dash.
That this has been true for some 3 or 4 decades makes me doubt all the comments that em dashes are a "tell" of LLM authorship. On the other hand, I guess when we confine this possibility to web content, I can see how people haven't used Office for web authoring lately, and whatever they do use (like web-based content management systems) don't tend to have this feature.
More importantly, typing just a single hyphen minus in this constellation triggers the autoreplace, too. (Typing the double hyphen is only necessary without spaces in order to distinguish between an intentional hyphen and an em dash.)
From TFA:
> August 1–August 31
From a top comment:
> Boston–San Francisco flight, 10–20 years
To achieve this using the replacement feature we're talking about would take something like <word><space><hyphenminus><space><word><space><alt+leftarrow><bksp><leftarrow><bksp><alt+rightarrow> which is ridiculous.
In professional typesetting, like a book, I sometimes see spaces flanking an em dash, however.
I almost never want that, and when typing "space, en dash, space", it happens quite easily and is usually impossible to tell visually.
In any case: non-breaking space (or otherwise suppressed linebreak, if you don’t use a space) is the rule.
Hyphen -: -
En Dash –: alt -
Em Dash —: alt shift -
Examples:
en and em are on -
Below are maybe Swiss specific?
~ is on N
@ is on G
| and \ and / are on 7
√ is on V
¥ is on Y and € is on E
∑ on W ( ∑ is a rotated W :)
etc.
I appreciate that the designer of the layout clearly attempted to make some kind of mnemonic connection to the degree they could. Makes it easier to discover and remember the key-combos, even without a cheat sheet.
thank you for teaching me √
modifiers:
opt-e+letter é (acute/aigu)
opt-`+letter è (grave)
opt-i+letter û (circumflex)
opt-u+letter ü (umlaut)
opt-n+letter ñ (for the mañana)
They have shortcuts for Í, Î, and Ï but not for many commonly used characters like arrows
sigh
Thanks for the suggestions
You can remap Fn/Globe directly to it if you want. It's also accessible from the Input menu bar item if you show that.
> Both of those open the same GUI which combines emojis, stickers, and unicode symbols—preferring the first two categories over the last. To type out a unicode symbol it takes at least three clicks on top of me starting to type in the name of my symbol
Are you using the expanded Character Viewer window[0], or the default collapsed Emoji & Symbols pane[1]? Because the expanded Character Viewer lets you customise and reorder the categories[2] (though that doesn't affect search), including adding a full Unicode view[3]. And they both default to the search bar when opened (though the Character Viewer opens unfocused for some reason).
[0]: https://imgur.com/hTtrbcA
[1]: https://imgur.com/3L31DQu
[2]: https://imgur.com/Ch1PI5L
[3]: https://imgur.com/epayzwe
¹ https://software.sil.org/ukelele/
² https://codeberg.org/datatravelandexperiments/kps-keyboard-l...
Or we are both just AIs, as a portion of HN comments are, commenting back and forth about other AIs.
In your support, though, calling the extension “smartypants” really hints at the target audience :)
<Multi_key> <minus> <minus> <period> : "–" U2013 # EN DASH
<Multi_key> <minus> <minus> <minus> : "—" U2014 # EM DASH
More in /usr/share/X11/locale/en_US.UTF-8/Compose
I also personally prefer en dashes, surrounded by whitespace on both sides, over em dashes. Apparently some WYSIWYG software interprets two hyphens as an em dash, while other will interpret that as an en dash, so I'd rather just use the real thing if possible to avoid the ambiguity.
Of course, I guess it's entirely possible—even accounting for OS—that this test remains statistically useful. It makes me kinda sad that my (very much human-generated) writing fails the Turing test....
-- into —
If OP wrote their post on an iPhone, they would have inadvertently appeared as an LLM by their own test.
(Windows probably has some way, but those are rarely discoverable.)
Released back in 2019 for Windows 10.
1. Install and configure this extra tool, which also by default enables a ton of other things you may not want, and may as well be a third-party tool even though it's technically built by Microsoft
2. Do a Google search and copy-paste (!)
3. Use a keyboard shortcut to bring up a symbol picker, then click on the tab containing the en and em dashes, then click to type them in
I mean, come on.
----
[1] https://wincompose.info/
[2] Though having checked just now, the sequences for en-dash and em-dash don't seem to be working. Perhaps one of my custom macros is interfering somehow… (it is behaving overall, ellipsis just worked as did the following diacritic and other symbols: áèîöūñ±⁰¹²∞¡¿‽π⬚). I'll have to poke at it later and see what is ary.
If you use eg. a Japanese IME, you can also get it by typing a normal hyphen and selecting the em dash from the picker.
I don't doubt there are publishing platforms that do it automatically as well, so I wouldn't count on seeing them as an indicator of generated output, even if it may be processed in some manner.
Money quote:
I, of course, used proper dashes in typeset documents, at least after I'd learnt about them in Knuth's The TeXbook. I have found myself occasionally use them in ASCII contexts just as ---. But I've never sought out the proper unicode character.
Not sure when I started; my guess is that I got into the habit of using them in LaTeX when writing my thesis, and then at some point realized that they are easily reachable on standard macOS keyboard layouts (via "option" + "-").
Serbian and Croatian XKB keyboard layouts have had em- and en-dashes since early 2000s even if they were not standardized: AltGr (right Alt) + hyphen (to the left of right Shift) produces an em-dash, and press Shift on top, and you get an en-dash.
This is how long I've had them easily accessible on any keyboard (I even have them converted to MacOS keyboard layouts for use with Karabiner).
http://srpski.org/dunav/raspored-c.html
Its not wrong for en-dashes (and en-dash set open—with space on either side—is generally an alternative to an em-dash set closed.) And its not wrong on the trailing side of an em-dash used in dialogue to show an abrupt stop mid-sentence if the stop is followed by a new sentence. And there's a few other particular uses, but, generally, setting an em-dash open is wrong.
> but newspapers often space them.
I've never seen a newspaper set em-dashes open, but I have seen them use en-dashes set open instead of using em-dashes at all. Given the space premium in print newspapers, em-dashes set open, which would consume enormous horizontal space, would, other concerns aside, be an odd choice.
On my Linux laptop, I confess to manually Googling them every time.
(Side note: GTP says apostrophes should be used for pluralizing only for single letters to avoid confusion, but this seems more readable than "ens and ems" IMO.)
Imagine being an NPC (a human bot), flattering yourself with the thought that people who understand the language are language bots...
1: https://www.thenationalliteracyinstitute.com/post/literacy-s...
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States
See, e.g., Boss Szabo's blog: https://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2018/03/the-many-tradition...
Two chained hypens, as was pretty much the norm back then.
And did you just call me an NPC?!? It's not a matter of "understanding the language" at all. It's a matter of convenience and of a sort of evolved convention.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41833665
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41774199
I was able to demonstrate my long use of them, prior to LLMs. And since I write in quarto markdown I don't need keyboard shortcuts.
I write poems a fair bit and use em dash a lot. (maybe too much and incorrectly)
It is maddening that the whole world uses typewriter keyboards with some facelift in the era of Unicode and even blasphemous full color emoji font rendering. What has changed in decades? Windows logo key, power keys, media keys, IE and Outlook logo keys — all Microsoft's fancies.
So initially IBM made some ad hoc decisions on what keys would be suitable for a single user office computer (as opposed to data input and admin terminals they had). Then everyone copied that, because sending unexpected scan codes could lead to bad things (random BIOS and program code couldn't care less about your ideas of forward compatibility). Then Windows became the “basic system” installed on most computers. Microsoft really pushed forward the internationalisation at the time, making a lot of national layouts and code pages (sometimes contradicting the national standards, for better or for worse). Then everyone copied what they decided. What's more important, even single byte code pages had the basic typographic symbols, anyone could've been using them for three decades, but they were not added to most physical keyboard layouts.
I wonder if that was because they wanted Word to seem more sophisticated than it was, and to make people think it was a requirement for “proper documents”, or because programmers still treated all non-ASCII symbols as free data markup constants that would “never appear in a regular text”.
Didn't it match ASCII and possibly typewriter keyboards?
For other combos — see /usr/share/X11/locale/en_US.UTF-8/Compose
See also: System Settings > Keyboard > Key Bindings > Position of Compose key
option-[-] for en dash –
shift-option-[-] for em dash —
Compose--- produces —
Compose--. produces –
Lots of other characters like áăǎ°±€ are available through compose: https://whynothugo.nl/journal/2024/07/12/typing-non-english-...
> Absolutely proper and correct use of em dashes, en dashes, and hyphens is, to me, the most obvious tell of the LLM writer.
Or just someone who likes to use the right characters. There was a report a few months back about how writing from autistic kids keeps getting mislabelled as LLM simply because they use the correct specific terms.
Please stop associating being precise with being an LLM.
Or, I mean, it does SOMETHING. I've never checked, and just always assumed I was getting the em dash.
I mean if it's an obvious break from their normal style, sure. But by itself? Every time I hear this argument, it just seems like sour grapes from poor writers.
Who omits the 1 from the second number?! That is aweful!
literally yes
Yes, every time. The clarity for the reader is more important than the time I save by leaving out '12'.
You write pages 1,003–4, instead of typing out 1,003–1,004 which is just unnecessary.
Works the same with two digits, or even three: pp. 1,899–902.
This is standard practice and arguably clearer.
I've only ever seen it done with page ranges, though. I'm not sure if it's done with year ranges? E.g. 1984–5? Or 1989–92? You work with page ranges constantly in academia, I just don't see year ranges much in any form.
In speech, it's common, and misunderstandings are usually not a problem (if you're not monologuing on a recording) because someone will just ask; but in writing it looks like the range is the wrong way around. Maybe I expect more care in writing because the feedback loop is longer, or maybe it's just habit and I think it's wrong in writing because I never see it?
Quick, tell me how wide this range is, just as an order of magnitude:
285368737954–285368783645
Would be a lot easier if I only included the range at the end which had actually changed, wouldn't it?
That's why it's clearer. Now obviously that was an extreme example, but it's also easier to see at a glance that 1,387–9 is just three pages, as opposed to 1,387–1,389.
That's a change of about 50K, which isn't really that hard to notice.
"285368737954-83645" is... well I have to assume somewhere in the 10-100K range? Hold on a second while I line up the digits again... uh... let me rewrite that to "37,954 - 83,645", okay now I can read it. No, that wasn't any easier. I kept getting lost tracking where in the first number I was leaving off. Much easier to compare 737 vs 783 - digit groupings are really useful!
(I'll agree that 1387-9 is pretty reasonable, it just breaks down the longer the number is. Also, if the page count is important, you can just say "1387-1389 (3 pages)". This feels like the sort of shorthand you used to get on Twitter)
83645 is five digits, so certainly in the ~10,000 range.
Or, sure, sometimes you get "285,368,737,954–285,368,783,645". But it's not like that's some kind of default. Except if you suffer from defaultism --- typically prefixed by "American".
Genuinely trying to think of an examples, since e.g. books aren't ever that long and search results don't have that many pages (that you'd all read and refer back to). A salary range, perhaps, can get into the seven digits in extreme cases (not that you care about any individual digit when you make a lifetime's worth of money in a bit more than a year): "Prospective salary is 2'423'000 to 2'432'000" seems to convey the relevant info as well as "Prospective salary is 2'423'000 to 9'000" does (except that I wouldn't understand the latter and ask what this second number means, but that's plausibly attributable to me as an individual not being used to it)
EDIT: I saw your explanation below, and you make a very good point.
Result:
> print pages in range from: 1, 003
> print pages in range to 4
Now have I have two errors to fix: page 1003 to page 1004. Not nice. Who formats like this?!
-------------------
Also, some RPG books or encyclopedias I own have chapter that span like this:
p. 630 to p. 70 (book 2)
To me, now is unclear, is that 70 with a reset page count, or 670 for book 2?
Since I just now learned that a quotation standard somewhere outside Germany exists that omits leading numbers, I now need to manually check where it ends.
TL;DR:
Don't make me think, and allow for automation. So just write on more number.
(Your example causes the last hyphen to be grepped for, which happens to only match doubled-up ones because single ones don't occur in that text. The quotes/apostrophes do nothing because they're parsed by (ba)sh and so only the hyphens are passed to grep, not the quotes. The last hyphen can be omitted because reading from stdin is the default if neither filenames nor recursion options are passed.)
Writers adores their em dashes. While they can sometimes clarify a concept by adding more context, overusing them can hurt readability. I prefer to read Hemingway-esque sentences that just say what they want to say and end sharply. So that’s how I write too—and sometimes the overuse of em dashes directly conflicts with that, making the content sound as if the author is confused about what they wanted to convey.
So do I.
"The em dash is the nineteenth-century standard, still prescribed in many editorial style books, but the em dash is too long for use with the best text faces. Like the oversized space between sentences, it belongs to the padded and corseted aesthetic of Victorian typography.
"Used as a phrase marker – thus – the en dash is set with a normal word space either side."
¹https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780881791327/page/80/mode/...
And I totally agree, space-set en dashes are vastly superior to em. I dislike the way it connects the word more closely to the word in the next clause than the phrase itself.
E.g. He left—no explanation. Vs. He left – no explanation.
To me, left—no feels like a weird gluing together than a separator for a different section.
Personally, I think en dashes are too small and look like a mistaken use of a hyphen. I really only use them in their Chicago Manual of Style recommended uses like date ranges.
But I agree that em dashes without spaces around them look wrong. They glue the adjoining words together when the whole point is that the clause is secondary and should be set aside from the surrounding text.
I ended up using em dashes with a little blob of CSS to put a tiny amount of space on either side.
"Used as a phrase marker—thus—the em dash is set without normal word spaces."
>the em dash is too long for use
above, the em-dash without spaces is smaller, at least in this typeface
I've taken to using dash offsets—just as an aside—in many places were I formerly used parentheses; I find it "less interrupts" the flow of the sentence.
ChatGPT for example almost always uses them. I'm sure they are more common in academic writing, but its now super common on boards like Reddit.
same thing happened with “delve” — these are just words and grammar, people use them
there is no accurate way to tell whether text came out of a neural network or not
Whenever I see that at the start of a paragraph I know that there's an 80% chance it was written by Gemini.
When looking at the context of a given text, use of certain words or punctuation, can very well indicate AI use.
The "original" example was delve. There is no doubt that AI (did, or still does) use this word at a significantly higher frequency than the average person. I would say the same about em dashes.
When browsing a Reddit thread about a video game, if you encounter numerous comments written perfectly, especially those containing indicators like em dashes, the word delve, or similar language, it certainly can raise the question: am I genuinely seeing comments from users who write this way in this specific context, or is this content more likely produced by an LLM?
No, I learned about em dashes in school, I just literally don't know how to type them on my keyboard and I'm too stubborn to learn how to.
Only typography nerds and professional printers care about things like these. Popular media, even modern professional media, hasn't been paying all that much attention.
To what extent that distinction matters, I'm not sure.
That's not to say that generated content doesn't use them, just that using them as an indicator might require a bit of nuance based on where you're seeing them.
Before LLMs, I think em-dashes mostly signaled that you read books and paid attention to details, to the extent they signaled anything.
We might even be entering some waves of counter-signaling.
[1] They'll never totally nail all of DFW's mannerisms, though.
The slight ambiguity if you don’t do that now irks me, having seen a way to eliminate it.
I wonder if it's a more recent phenomenon.
Eventually, people learn to include them out of habit—especially as most people see them as aesthetically nicer than a simple hyphen (-).
[1] https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/H...
:)
Just makes me roll my eyes really seeing a human use an em-dash. We've in the age of informality, and at least for me personally I've definitely filed the em-dash away as "a near guarantee the text was written by a machine". No matter how much and perhaps especially because HN commentators are coming out of the woodworks to insist they've been using it daily for years.
Not all though. Many people on HN use em-dashes and other proper punctuation.
If the em dash has spaces around it -- as seen in AP style -- it was probably written by a real human, because that's how it comes out most conveniently on a word processor.
But if the em dash has no spaces around it--Chicago style--there's a good chance you're looking at LLM slop.
− + minus sign
- + hyphen
– + en dash
— + em dash
−+-+–+—
How is a literal dictionary making fun of people who "wanna be official about things" lol. That's the entire basis for dictionaries themselves
In this case, they are calling out the prescriptivist definition but are implying that it may be overkill and offering the more commonly used alternative.
* Use the minus sign /−/ (U+2212) when formatting numbers, because the default hyphen-minus /-/ (U+2D) just looks wrong: "It is −1 °C vs. -1 °C." Moreover, the correct minus has the same width as plus (− vs. +).
* Rare, but use the figure dash /‒/ (U+2012) or figure space / / (U+2007) if you need a placeholder character that is the same width as a single digit. For example, "Guess the PIN: 1‒34."
It never occurred to me that doing this correctly might make people think I use LLMs in my writing.
Edit: I'm sure the many typos protect me from that, actually.
If the em dash indicates an interruption (not a planned pause) of the actual speech, the em dashes go inside the quotes (often just one, before the closing quote).
If the em dash is the narrator interjecting with additional information, the em dashes go outside the quotes.
Besides this, the question of where to put spaces when multiple forms of punctuation are combined can be quite a complex topic.
* em dash: ⌥ + ⇧ + - (alt + shift + hyphen)
* en dash: ⌥ + - (alt + hyphen)
I do like that the em dash is as long as it feels that broken-off thoughts should be
Not everything has to be functional, sometimes things can also just look nice for the sake of it
It's not like you can reliably write these consistently by hand either without going over the top in length to make it extremely obvious.
Also, you can just write -s instead of -'s as the apostrophe indicates possession
And your example shows how you can just use multiple dashes instead of having three different ones.
-5--2°C
post-war-pre-digital era
See sections 10-O-15-Q
Try Our New York-London Flight Connection!
post-war - pre-digital era (not a sentence any sane person would use anyway).
See sections 10-O - 15-Q
Try our New York-London flight connection! (no kind of dash clears this one up without fixing capitalisation).
Try Our New York–London Flight Connection.
Or if it was New York:
Try Our New York – London Flight Connection.
Note the additional spaces. Agree on the capitalization though.
I'd wager serious money that if you put that on a sign and surveyed people, at least in the US, they'd all still conclude it is a "New York" to "London" flight.
What's the use of a communication tool, if it doesn't actually communicate anything to real people?
HTH!
-5—2
That looks like dogshit.
It's a mistake in the first place to decide to use only dashes and no spaces to convey all of this lol
-5 - 2 (Everyone knows a sign has no space - if you are building your sign for idiots try some of these:)
-5 > 2 -5->2 -5 <-> 2 -5 to 2 -5...2 Between -5 and 2
blah blah blah
E.g. some English language rule says that a comma or ending period of a non-quoted sentence goes inside the quotes if there's something quoted at the end of that sentence. That rule feels anti-intellectual to me, as if there's some misunderstanding of how hierarchical placement in one-dimensional space works (since something that's not being quoted is being put inside quotes)
https://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kemmer/Histengl/spelling.html
Rather, seeing too short of a dash is like putting two clashing colors together or wearing two pieces of clothes that don’t match. It just looks instantly off.
It’s just not aesthetically pleasing for me.
i really like using em dashes -- for some reason, it feels "better" in my head than using something like a comma or a semi-colon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dash#Approximating_the_em_dash...
-proud dash luddite
There are cases when you want to follow certain guidelines, for sure. If you write for a publication that adheres to Meriam-Webster, you'd better stay consistent and figure out the right AltGr code to type the right dashes. However, for the 99.99% of written media today, none of that matters.
Getting "much" and "many" right is completely different. They mean different things. Confusing them makes you sound stupid. Less vs fewer is the same. It often doesn't matter but in some cases it really grates on the ears (eg "there wasnt much people there" just sounds awful).
Dashes are not in the same category. They are orthographical conventions. They aren't really grammar. They are more like spelling. You can spell things wrong and say it doesn't matter because spelling is arbitrary and you can use the wrong dashes too, but it makes you look either uncaring or ignorant. If you want to give a good first impression, learn the basic conventions of written English and follow them.
"I have too many water in the cup."
"How much people are in attendance?"
These sound obviously incorrect.
This is also true of "less" and "fewer". I use "less" everywhere.
Suit yourself, but if you refuse to learn basic grammar you will be treated like you are stupid and uneducated. Like it or not, presentation matters. Getting the basics right, including things like spelling, grammar, etc, shows a basic attention to detail without which your services will likely do more harm than good.
actually it's "etc."
(I wouldn't usually be a pedant, but if you think the difference between "--" and "—" matters, you should probably try to get the basics right too.)
As opposed to what, exactly?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/etc even redirects to the correct URL with a "."
This is all stuff you learn in school. Punctuation isn't obscure or niche. You may not have learnt about semicolons or em dashes in school but you should have and I did. As did anyone that has ever read a novel. There are two semicolons on the first page of the first Harry Potter book, a novel read by approximately every child of my generation. There are loads of examples of the proper use of dashes and other "obscure" punctuation marks in any professionally typeset text.
I was raised and educated in Africa, specifically the GCSE curriculum. I was taught to use etc.
However, em dashes are a different case. The main reason why it's desirable to use em dashes (beside convention) is for clarity of purpose. The hyphen is already a very overloaded character; they're extensively used to denote ranges and link compound words. Importantly, both of those usages do not correspond to pauses in spoken language. If you're voicing a hyphen you're supposed to barrel on through it. An em dash is much closer to a parenthesis, comma, or semicolon. It's a meaningful break in the sentence, in the way that a hyphen isn't.
Now, if it were up to me I'd choose a different character to replace em dashes (maybe underscores), but that's a separate argument.
> Dashes are used inside parentheses, and vice versa, to indicate parenthetical material within parenthetical material. ...
> The bakery’s reputation for scrumptious goods (ambrosial, even—each item was surely fit for gods) spread far and wide.
I wish it was more popular, it neatly indicates meaning so very well.
I agree with you completely.
No, it is not “politically incorrect” to call people lacking curiosity and/or education like you see them.
No, someone's personal preferences or transitory fashions are not automatically promoted to the holy reference for the whole world.
Must be lonely at the top.
ıt might simpıy not matter though, a miııimeter here and there, ı suppose.
I see what you did in the second paragraph too. It’s another example of “a millimeter of difference in the length of a line” mattering in that it looks weird, though it’s not much harder to read.
Being able to render a variety of line lengths with different meanings is a cool and useful thing.
At least we have dedicated O/0, and l/1 keys now. But we still see a lot of "straight" quotes instead of “those smart quotes Microsoft Word likes to generate”. And dashes. Did you know there is a dedicated ellipsis character? This is often set with slightly more space between dots than ..., and it by definition never wraps across a line between those dots. You still see (C) instead of ©.
It is one of those things that doesn’t really matter for readability, but although they can’t necessarily put a finger on why, people may still notice that some documents or pages appear to be set with more care for details than others.
(edit: I guess if you don’t have to search on Google what the hell a ‘Microsoft Word’ is, then you’re officially old)
And the 1 and 8 aren't next to each other anymore, either. (See typewriters from the "18"00s.)
> those smart quotes
Fixing straight quotes is a hard problem[0]. My FOSS text editor, KeenWrite[1], includes my library, KeenQuotes[2], for replacing them at build time. It's not perfect, but can typeset my ~400 page novel without any errors.
> Did you know there is a dedicated ellipsis character?
Yes! Here's where it gets parsed:
https://gitlab.com/DaveJarvis/KeenQuotes/-/blob/main/src/mai...
Then emitted:
https://gitlab.com/DaveJarvis/KeenQuotes/-/blob/main/src/mai...
Then transformed into an HTML entity:
https://gitlab.com/DaveJarvis/KeenQuotes/-/blob/main/src/mai...
When typesetting Markdown, KeenWrite first converts the document to XHTML (i.e., XML), then invokes ConTeXt to convert XML into TeX macros. One of those macros handles the ellipses by converting it to \dots{}:
https://gitlab.com/DaveJarvis/keenwrite-themes/-/blob/main/x...
This renders as the Unicode character in the final document: …
> set with more care for details
Some of us old folks care about these details. ;-)
[0]: https://stackoverflow.com/a/73466438/59087
[1]: https://keenwrite.com/
[2]: https://whitemagicsoftware.com/keenquotes
I use ellipsis. Which ironically is way too short when viewed in monotype…
And really easy to do on an Android phone, I've found: Switch the input to French or German, and the on-screen keyboard offers the appropriate quote marks for that language in the same place as usual.