I often edit things in Word — I have a document that I can alt-tab to and type things. It has spellcheck, etc. that my browser window does not, and I’m not at risk of losing if I refresh or something. Then copy-paste back.

Word converts any - into an em dash based on context. Guess who’s always accused of being a bot?

The thing is, AI learned to use these things because it is good typographical style represented in its training set.

all your Word docx are belong to Microsoft

I do the same most of the time, and LibreOffice converts "-" to an em-dash, for one, too.

It's not a suspicion in an also otherwise properly typeset PDF, but it's a suspicion in a YouTube comment or other informal context for sure.

I have used "--" since forever, here, on reddit, in emails, etc (I'm too lazy to type a proper em dash).

Hope AI didn't ruin this for me!

My workaround (well, to be honest, I've always done this: I love a good em dash, they're terrifically satisfying to use, but I'm too lazy to type them), is to use two single dashes--like so.

Depending on your editor, your double dash method may auto-convert to an em dash.

My editor turns two single dashes into an em-dash—like this. (iOS)

Do you also end ambiguously questioning messages with a double dot..

No.

Good. It's a crutch for poorly composed sentences or for prose intending to imitate the affect of poorly composed sentences. There's not a single sentence under the sun that needs an emdash. Commas and parentheses can do it all, and an excess of either is a sign of poorly edited prose.

I don't buy the pro-clanker pro-em dash movement that has come out of nowhere in the past several years.

Hm clankers, squids, and bugs?!?

>pro-em dash movement that has come out of nowhere

Bots that are trying to convince you they’re human..

More like humans that are using bots that are trying to convince you they are not using the bots. :D

> prose intending to imitate the affect of poorly composed sentences

Anyone who makes errors like this should not be talking.

What's the error? I'd hyphenate "poorly-composed" (most wouldn't these days, but they can go to hell) and I think it's a bit too wordy for what it's communicating, but I don't see what I'd call an actual error.

I would personally avoid writing that "poorly composed sentences" have an "affect"—rather than the writer having or presenting an affect, or the sentences' tone being affected—as I find an implied anthropomorphizing of "sentences" in that usage, which anthropomorphizing isn't serving enough useful purpose, to my eye, that I'd want it in my writing, but I'm not sure I'd call that an error either.

What did you mean?

> Commas and parentheses can do it all, and an excess of either is a sign of poorly edited prose.

This attitude, however, is a disease of modern English literacy.

> What's the error?

a) prose doesn't have intentions ... it should be "prose intended to"

b) "effect of", not "affect of"

> I don't see what I'd call an actual error.

That's a serious problem. It's downright weird that you thought he was actually talking about affect (the noun).

This is an old conversation ... I won't revisit it.

I read it as the word aff-ect, not uh-ffect (American pronunciation; both are spelled “affect”). Noun sense of “affect”, not verb.

But it’s possible I was reading too generously and this was a botched attempt to employ “effect”, which would also fit (and better, I think).

It was meant to be "affect," but I'm curious what you think the possible "effect" of poorly written sentences I could have meant?

>b) "effect of", not "affect of"

Oh no, oh lord lmao

I meant "affect" and not "effect." You need to learn what affect means. I'm not asking you to learn about affect theory, but ffs no part of my sentence implied it meant "effect" and not "affect." Ugh. It doesn't even make sense. What would the "effect" of "poorly composed sentences" be? Only affect makes sense there.

You know that affect means to have an effect on something right?

The noun sense does not.

affect

noun

    Psychology.,  feeling or emotion.

    Psychiatry.,  an expressed or observed emotional response.

    Restricted, flat, or blunted affect may be a symptom of mental illness, especially schizophrenia.

    Obsolete.,  affection; passion; sensation; inclination; inward disposition or feeling.

Now let's replace that in my original phrase:

> prose intending to imitate the affect of poorly composed sentences

becomes

> prose intending to imitate the feeling or emotion of poorly composed sentences

My point was that the author is trying to convey a specific feeling by way of poorly composed sentences. Perhaps they want a colloquial feel or a ranting feel or a rambling one. An obvious example would be the massive run-on sentence in Ulysses.

Poorly constructed sentences cannot have an affect.

Written text can absolutely signify an affect, and poorly constructed sentences regularly do.

Misused affect/effect there bub

No "bub" I used it correctly. Review your effect/affect noun distinctions and try again. Google "affect theory" if that makes it easier.

"Poorly constructed sentences" don't have an a-ffect, unless you mean the irritance your poorly constructed sentence brought up in this thread.

Are you telling me the run-on sentence in Ulysses has no affect it is meant to convey?

The sentence might affect the reader, but it has no affect of itself because a sentence can't have feelings.

> There's not a single sentence under the sun that needs an emdash

Sentences "need" very little, but without style and personality, writing becomes very boring. I suppose simplicity without any affectation works for raw communication of plain technical facts, but there's more to writing than that.

Dammit -- I use my dashes all the time (though always double them like here). I hope AI didn't ruin this for me.

(I learned to use dashes like this from Philip Dick's writings, of all places, and it stuck. Bet nobody ever thought of looking for writing style in PKD!).

I encountered the TeXbook at a young and impressionable age, and ever since I've used em- and en-dashes a bit more often than a style guide would suggest. Not to mention diareses, though those haven't been flagged as LLM stigmata yet.