• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

antisemitism vs anti-semitism

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
I have a strong preference for the former.

There are some good internet resources addressing the difference, and I encourage you to look into it.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
I typically go with "anti-Semitism" to capitalize "Semitism," although I have seen arguments for "antisemitism" as well. I remain open to changing my mind despite my current preference for ultra-traditional capitalization rules.
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
Following the argument on the link I agree, because English is guaranteed to change over time. It always does. I also think it would be better if news media and other popular references would just say 'Hatred of Jews' instead, because the word 'antisemitism' is not self explanatory and carries the potential to invent a new term 'semitism'.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Following the argument on the link I agree, because English is guaranteed to change over time. It always does. I also think it would be better if news media and other popular references would just say 'Hatred of Jews' instead, because the word 'antisemitism' is not self explanatory and carries the potential to invent a new term 'semitism'.
Good point about change. Once "hacker" referred to golfing. Then it referred to people who experimented with computers. Then criminals. Those who did not want 'hacker' to refer to criminals fought in vain to have it continue to mean "computer geek". And they lost.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
I do not see a meaningful difference.

Which is better: rotor or rotor, or deified or deified.
I think that the difference lies in the presentation of the "anti" as a prefix to a complete word or a negating of a separate idea. If the word has a hyphen, then it is being attached to a separate, pre-existing idea/word construct. This imports all the baggage that that word has. But if it is a prefix as part of a complex and unique construction, it points solely to the new idea that it labels, and not to sub parts. This is a substantial linguistic difference according to some. While some don't see the presence or absence of the Oxford comma as a meaningful difference, others see it as making a huge change in meaning.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
I used to write it as "antisemitism", mostly because that's how it's written in Hebrew (no hyphen). Then, recently, I noticed that spell-check on Word spells it as "anti-Semitism", so I changed to that, but now I see that there may be more of a reason to go back to "antisemitism".
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I hyphenate words when it makes'm easier to read.
It's not about being right or wrong....just better.
So it is with "anti-semitism".
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
I hyphenate words when it makes'm easier to read.
It's not about being right or wrong....just better.
So it is with "anti-semitism".
There are actual rules and policies for it. I think it's Chicago that states to use the hyphen more or less based on the underatandablity, the common usage of the word, and even how long its been used in regards to how well known and understood it is, offering for an example how we went from "e-mail" to "email."
You are going to have to get a style guide to fix us on this one. :p
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
There are actual rules and policies for it. I think it's Chicago that states to use the hyphen more or less based on the underatandablity, the common usage of the word, and even how long its been used in regards to how well known and understood it is, offering for an example how we went from "e-mail" to "email."
You are going to have to get a style guide to fix us on this one. :p
We may each alter style to suit.
"email" is clear because it's short, so it's not "hyphen-worthy".
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
We may each alter style to suit.
"email" is clear because it's short, so it's not "hyphen-worthy".
It was hyphen worthy back in those days of our straw and mud huts and we could have easily confused "email" with a different word altogether that wasnt related to mail or communication. But now we know what it is, with a couple generations not having needed that distinction because they've always had email, and it's common enough that those of us who aren't digital natives easily recognize it. Ergo no more e-mail.
 
Top