The Confusion Regarding Spaces Around Dashes

For anyone who cares, In another article, I previously recommended placing a space on either side of an m dash. I did that for several reasons, including the visual enhancement of the proper use of the m dash. It is a break, indicating, emphasis or contrast. Spaces around this enhance the effect for which it is intended. However, I failed to note that this was my preference and not a universal recommendation.

The issue of spacing around this mark is about as good an example of the problems created by multiple conventions, multiple purposes, computer programs, the history of typewriters' morphing into word processing programs and the interfaces with printing.

The simplest convention, as now argued by Chicago and Purdue writing labs, is to omit the spaces. However, In various applications, it has been presented in no fewer than four different ways, ranging from the normal (no) space between letters, through two different sizes of 'thin' spaces, to a full space.

Currently, the recommendation depends on who (and where) it is given. Several sources categorically state that in word processing programs, no space should be used. A nearly equal number categorically state the opposite. Now here is the real 'kicker': In word processing programs and the printed page, spacing is not exactly specifiable, anyway, because all programs use proportional spacing. What that means, in practical terms, is that you can simply type with one space, no space, or use the automatic proportional spacing that is built into the program by using the code for your computer (or the html markup). Of course, if you use markup, you can still add a space, if you wish. However, if you use the codes built into the computer, it puts in the space it wants to, if it works. "On a PC, an em dash is made by using ALT + 0151 (hold down the ALT key and type 0151 on the numeric keypad), with no spaces before or after. It looks like this: - On a Mac, an em dash is made by striking Option, Shift, Hyphen." (Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation - current edition). The problem with this strategy is that it doesn't work on any computer I've tried. Actually, the standard recommended codes to produce all of the variations of horizontal punctuation marks often don't work, either. As a small sample of why I didn't want to go into all of the issues, allow me to present a part of a table from the site that provides unicodes for dashes and the like: Unicode Dash Characters
glyph codes name notes on the meaning and usage. Below is how the table, in standard unicode, translates to this site. With a little persistence, it is possible to see the intended table, but some of the problems in doing this illustrate the problems in translating any of the more subtle distinctions in unicode, html, or ascii. On the extreme left, there is supposed to be a representation of the mark. All of these are supposed to be dashes of one sort or another. The word processing program is supposed to render these distinctions.

- U+002D - hyphen-minus the Ascii hyphen, with multiple usage, or "ambiguous semantic value"; the width should be "average"
~ U+007E ~ tilde the Ascii tilde, with multiple usage; "swung dash"
� U+00AD � soft hyphen "discretionary hyphen"
�-�ŠU+058A ֊ armenian hyphen as soft hyphen, but different in shape
á� �" U+1806 á † mongolian todo hyphen as soft hyphen, but displayed at the beginning of the second line
â�â'¬ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ U+2010 " hyphen unambiguously a hyphen character, as in "left-to-right"; narrow width
â�â'¬ï¿½' U+2011 "' non-breaking hyphen as hyphen (U+2011), but not an allowed line break point
â�â'¬ï¿½' U+2012 "' figure dash as hyphen-minus, but has the same width as digits
- U+2013 -- en dash used e.g. to indicate a range of values
- U+2014 -- em dash used e.g. to make a break in the flow of a sentence
â�â'¬ï¿½"¢ U+2015 "• horizontal bar used to introduce quoted text in some typographic styles; "quotation dash"; often (e.g., in the representative glyph in the Unicode standard) longer than em dash
�����" U+2053 â" swung dash like a large tilde; often missing in fonts
â�����» U+207B ⻠superscript minus a compatibility character which is equivalent to minus sign U+2212 in superscript style
â�"šï¿½"¹ U+208B â'‹ subscript minus a compatibility character which is equivalent to minus sign U+2212 in subscript style

OK, I got carried away and included two marks that we would have no reason to ever use, but all of the others can arise, technically, in English articles and all have different purposes -- sort of different, anyway. I, personally, make fine distinctions in my choices of punctuation marks. I would never make them this fine. So I oversimplified. But the other amusing issue, for me is this table, itself. Look carefully at the column on the left. The article was depicting dashes. The codes that the article used to demonstrate these codes DIDN'T WORK. Do all of those "glyphs" look like dashes? Under the table, there was a demurral that stated that these marks might not reproduce on the computer on which you are viewing them. Might not?

The next article I pulled up had the following blanket statements:

"Put one space before and one space after an em dash.
Do not put any spaces before or after an en dash."

As far as I have found, this is apparently universal in Canada, but clearly not in the United States. Recently, both the University of Chicago and the Purdue writing lab sites have redommended against spaces. Others disagree. Therefore, rather than go into all of the tortuous and often conflicting advice, I simply gave my preference, which is standard in Canada and adopted in some places in the United States. Now, I know that I should have at least added a demurral to my blanket statement. I didn't, so this virtually incoherent article is the price. No article trying to explain this issue can be simple and coherent. Incidentally, there is no disagreement regarding en dashes or hyphens. There is never a space before or after these.

My recommendation, if anyone cares? I use spaces; you do whatever your hearts desire.