I found a hyphenated word , “not-technically–in-a-recession” in the sentence of September 28 New York Times’ article titled “Why Obama Is Winning,” written by co-ed columnist, Ross Douthat. It reads:
“Today, just as he predicted, the unemployment rate is 8.1 percent. The year’s second-quarter growth rate was just downgraded to an anemic 1.3 percent, real household income dipped in the month leading up to the two political conventions, and the American Enterprise Institute’s James Pethokoukis suggests that 2012 might turn out to be the worst not-technically-in-a-recession year in modern American history”.
I was interested in the format, “not-technically-in-X” deliberately combining six words into one word with hyphens. Why doesn’t the writer simply say “2012 might turn out to be the worst year, (though) not technically recession, in modern American history” without linking words with repetitive hyphens.
Is it a fashon, or is it a normal way to say or write “not-technically-in-an-X.”?
Do you normally write “The report is arranged with not-technically–in-statistic-accuracy?
Does a doctor inform his patient that their cancer may turn out critical not-technically-in-clinical-database?
I witnessed ubiquity (or abuse) of hyphen-linked-phrasing in the following sentence of Time magazine’s (Oct. 22) article – “The Third Debate: Obama Wins on Style and Substance” written by Joe Klein.
“This may seem petty, but it is part of the other-than-reality-based world of RushFoxland — like the alleged Apology Tour that wasn’t. That world, so far as foreign policy is concerned, came crashing down tonight.”