Which of the two statements is correct?

He was an English-born businessman.

He was an England-born businessman.

The same confusion arises in India-born and Indian-born as well. Moreover, is a hyphen necessary in these examples?


"England-born" is perfectly understandable, but I don't think a native English speaker would say it. "English-born" is a conventional expression.

The question about hyphens has no single answer: it depends whose style guide you are following.

|improve this answer|||||
  • Thanks @Colin. Reg. the style-guide, is there any other question on this forum that talks about that? – Bravo Mar 17 '12 at 20:33
  • 1
    This question discusses that and provides a link to what I consider to be some good advice in that regard. – Jim Mar 17 '12 at 21:00
  • 1
    @Shyam: In this specific case I think it would be an unusual style guide that suggested writing "English born" as two separate words. It's nearly always hyphenated. Sometimes just written as a single word with no hyphen - but that's even less common than the two-word form. – FumbleFingers Mar 17 '12 at 21:45

They mean two different things. "English-born" means born with English nationality. "England-born" means born in England. Neither implies the other.

And "England-born" would probably be more commonly phrased "Born in England".

|improve this answer|||||

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.