Why doesn't TeX hyphenate a really long word for which I've indicated some permissible hyphenation points?
Based on Automatic long word breaking in whole document I constructed an example of hyphenating a long word:
documentclass{report}
usepackage[english]{babel}
begin{document}
selectlanguage{english}
hyphenation{temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo-remagna-aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut}
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
end{document}
However, it doesn't work. Can you help?
hyphenation
add a comment |
Based on Automatic long word breaking in whole document I constructed an example of hyphenating a long word:
documentclass{report}
usepackage[english]{babel}
begin{document}
selectlanguage{english}
hyphenation{temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo-remagna-aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut}
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
end{document}
However, it doesn't work. Can you help?
hyphenation
Actually, TeX is working exactly as it is supposed to. See my answer for an analysis of what's problematic about your paragraph that contains a 105-character word with only 2 permissible hyphenation points.
– Mico
51 mins ago
Another good way to improve the line-breaking is to loadmicrotype
with font expansion. It does not currently work in XeTeX, but can dramatically reduce the amount of hyphenation needed.
– Davislor
37 mins ago
add a comment |
Based on Automatic long word breaking in whole document I constructed an example of hyphenating a long word:
documentclass{report}
usepackage[english]{babel}
begin{document}
selectlanguage{english}
hyphenation{temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo-remagna-aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut}
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
end{document}
However, it doesn't work. Can you help?
hyphenation
Based on Automatic long word breaking in whole document I constructed an example of hyphenating a long word:
documentclass{report}
usepackage[english]{babel}
begin{document}
selectlanguage{english}
hyphenation{temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo-remagna-aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut}
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
end{document}
However, it doesn't work. Can you help?
hyphenation
hyphenation
edited 29 mins ago
Mico
277k30378766
277k30378766
asked 2 hours ago
ViestursViesturs
1,67531123
1,67531123
Actually, TeX is working exactly as it is supposed to. See my answer for an analysis of what's problematic about your paragraph that contains a 105-character word with only 2 permissible hyphenation points.
– Mico
51 mins ago
Another good way to improve the line-breaking is to loadmicrotype
with font expansion. It does not currently work in XeTeX, but can dramatically reduce the amount of hyphenation needed.
– Davislor
37 mins ago
add a comment |
Actually, TeX is working exactly as it is supposed to. See my answer for an analysis of what's problematic about your paragraph that contains a 105-character word with only 2 permissible hyphenation points.
– Mico
51 mins ago
Another good way to improve the line-breaking is to loadmicrotype
with font expansion. It does not currently work in XeTeX, but can dramatically reduce the amount of hyphenation needed.
– Davislor
37 mins ago
Actually, TeX is working exactly as it is supposed to. See my answer for an analysis of what's problematic about your paragraph that contains a 105-character word with only 2 permissible hyphenation points.
– Mico
51 mins ago
Actually, TeX is working exactly as it is supposed to. See my answer for an analysis of what's problematic about your paragraph that contains a 105-character word with only 2 permissible hyphenation points.
– Mico
51 mins ago
Another good way to improve the line-breaking is to load
microtype
with font expansion. It does not currently work in XeTeX, but can dramatically reduce the amount of hyphenation needed.– Davislor
37 mins ago
Another good way to improve the line-breaking is to load
microtype
with font expansion. It does not currently work in XeTeX, but can dramatically reduce the amount of hyphenation needed.– Davislor
37 mins ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
The hyphenation
directive doesn't just let you indicate some possible hyphenation points for a given "word" in the directive's argument. Instead, the hyphenation points you indicate are the only possible hyphenation points.
By construction, you are not allowing TeX to hyphenate the three substrings
temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo
remagna
aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut
if they occur inside the 105-character [!!] string
temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut
Don't be surprised, then, that TeX does not insert hyphenation points in any of the three substrings.
If full justification of paragraphs is active, which is the case by default, TeX must also obey some fairly stringent rules regarding (a) how much inter-word whitespace is allowed to stretch and (b) the tolerance for under-full lines. For all practical purposes, it suffices to know that overstretched inter-word whitespace is penalized very heavily and that under-full lines are also penalized. To get a sense of just how badly whitespace would have to be stretched in order to line-break your superlong word at one of the two permissible hyphenation points, consider the first paragraph below. It is typeset under the sloppy
directive, which suspends most of TeX's penalties related to (a) the stretchiness of inter-word whitespace and (b) under-full lines. Observe the huge interword spaces in the first two lines and a seriously under-full third line. Not just "sloppy", but an outright assault on one's eyes!!
To restore a semblance of decent typography, it's necessary to issue the directive raggedright
; see the second paragraph. Note that the huge amounts of inter-word whitespace in the first two lines of the paragraph are gone -- at the non-negligible cost of having two additional grossly under-full lines. Observe that the 105-character word does get hyphenated if raggedright
is in effect. This is because raggedright
imposes a penalty for (seriously) over-full lines. By default, the raggedright
setting disables most hyphenation operations, since each "act" of hyphenation carries a sizable TeX penalty. But, for the paragraph at hand, the over-full line carries a larger penalty than does the act of hyphenation.
Incidentally, if one omits the hyphenation
instruction, TeX is able (somewhat surprisingly, to me at least) to find reasonably "decent" hyphenation points.
documentclass{report}
usepackage[english]{babel}
%%selectlanguage{english} % not needed
hyphenation{temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo-remagna-aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut}
usepackage{showframe} % to indicate edges of text block
begin{document}
sloppy
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
medskip
fussy % opposite of "sloppy"
raggedright % suspend full justification
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
end{document}
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "85"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f472339%2fwhy-doesnt-tex-hyphenate-a-really-long-word-for-which-ive-indicated-some-permi%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The hyphenation
directive doesn't just let you indicate some possible hyphenation points for a given "word" in the directive's argument. Instead, the hyphenation points you indicate are the only possible hyphenation points.
By construction, you are not allowing TeX to hyphenate the three substrings
temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo
remagna
aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut
if they occur inside the 105-character [!!] string
temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut
Don't be surprised, then, that TeX does not insert hyphenation points in any of the three substrings.
If full justification of paragraphs is active, which is the case by default, TeX must also obey some fairly stringent rules regarding (a) how much inter-word whitespace is allowed to stretch and (b) the tolerance for under-full lines. For all practical purposes, it suffices to know that overstretched inter-word whitespace is penalized very heavily and that under-full lines are also penalized. To get a sense of just how badly whitespace would have to be stretched in order to line-break your superlong word at one of the two permissible hyphenation points, consider the first paragraph below. It is typeset under the sloppy
directive, which suspends most of TeX's penalties related to (a) the stretchiness of inter-word whitespace and (b) under-full lines. Observe the huge interword spaces in the first two lines and a seriously under-full third line. Not just "sloppy", but an outright assault on one's eyes!!
To restore a semblance of decent typography, it's necessary to issue the directive raggedright
; see the second paragraph. Note that the huge amounts of inter-word whitespace in the first two lines of the paragraph are gone -- at the non-negligible cost of having two additional grossly under-full lines. Observe that the 105-character word does get hyphenated if raggedright
is in effect. This is because raggedright
imposes a penalty for (seriously) over-full lines. By default, the raggedright
setting disables most hyphenation operations, since each "act" of hyphenation carries a sizable TeX penalty. But, for the paragraph at hand, the over-full line carries a larger penalty than does the act of hyphenation.
Incidentally, if one omits the hyphenation
instruction, TeX is able (somewhat surprisingly, to me at least) to find reasonably "decent" hyphenation points.
documentclass{report}
usepackage[english]{babel}
%%selectlanguage{english} % not needed
hyphenation{temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo-remagna-aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut}
usepackage{showframe} % to indicate edges of text block
begin{document}
sloppy
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
medskip
fussy % opposite of "sloppy"
raggedright % suspend full justification
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
end{document}
add a comment |
The hyphenation
directive doesn't just let you indicate some possible hyphenation points for a given "word" in the directive's argument. Instead, the hyphenation points you indicate are the only possible hyphenation points.
By construction, you are not allowing TeX to hyphenate the three substrings
temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo
remagna
aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut
if they occur inside the 105-character [!!] string
temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut
Don't be surprised, then, that TeX does not insert hyphenation points in any of the three substrings.
If full justification of paragraphs is active, which is the case by default, TeX must also obey some fairly stringent rules regarding (a) how much inter-word whitespace is allowed to stretch and (b) the tolerance for under-full lines. For all practical purposes, it suffices to know that overstretched inter-word whitespace is penalized very heavily and that under-full lines are also penalized. To get a sense of just how badly whitespace would have to be stretched in order to line-break your superlong word at one of the two permissible hyphenation points, consider the first paragraph below. It is typeset under the sloppy
directive, which suspends most of TeX's penalties related to (a) the stretchiness of inter-word whitespace and (b) under-full lines. Observe the huge interword spaces in the first two lines and a seriously under-full third line. Not just "sloppy", but an outright assault on one's eyes!!
To restore a semblance of decent typography, it's necessary to issue the directive raggedright
; see the second paragraph. Note that the huge amounts of inter-word whitespace in the first two lines of the paragraph are gone -- at the non-negligible cost of having two additional grossly under-full lines. Observe that the 105-character word does get hyphenated if raggedright
is in effect. This is because raggedright
imposes a penalty for (seriously) over-full lines. By default, the raggedright
setting disables most hyphenation operations, since each "act" of hyphenation carries a sizable TeX penalty. But, for the paragraph at hand, the over-full line carries a larger penalty than does the act of hyphenation.
Incidentally, if one omits the hyphenation
instruction, TeX is able (somewhat surprisingly, to me at least) to find reasonably "decent" hyphenation points.
documentclass{report}
usepackage[english]{babel}
%%selectlanguage{english} % not needed
hyphenation{temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo-remagna-aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut}
usepackage{showframe} % to indicate edges of text block
begin{document}
sloppy
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
medskip
fussy % opposite of "sloppy"
raggedright % suspend full justification
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
end{document}
add a comment |
The hyphenation
directive doesn't just let you indicate some possible hyphenation points for a given "word" in the directive's argument. Instead, the hyphenation points you indicate are the only possible hyphenation points.
By construction, you are not allowing TeX to hyphenate the three substrings
temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo
remagna
aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut
if they occur inside the 105-character [!!] string
temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut
Don't be surprised, then, that TeX does not insert hyphenation points in any of the three substrings.
If full justification of paragraphs is active, which is the case by default, TeX must also obey some fairly stringent rules regarding (a) how much inter-word whitespace is allowed to stretch and (b) the tolerance for under-full lines. For all practical purposes, it suffices to know that overstretched inter-word whitespace is penalized very heavily and that under-full lines are also penalized. To get a sense of just how badly whitespace would have to be stretched in order to line-break your superlong word at one of the two permissible hyphenation points, consider the first paragraph below. It is typeset under the sloppy
directive, which suspends most of TeX's penalties related to (a) the stretchiness of inter-word whitespace and (b) under-full lines. Observe the huge interword spaces in the first two lines and a seriously under-full third line. Not just "sloppy", but an outright assault on one's eyes!!
To restore a semblance of decent typography, it's necessary to issue the directive raggedright
; see the second paragraph. Note that the huge amounts of inter-word whitespace in the first two lines of the paragraph are gone -- at the non-negligible cost of having two additional grossly under-full lines. Observe that the 105-character word does get hyphenated if raggedright
is in effect. This is because raggedright
imposes a penalty for (seriously) over-full lines. By default, the raggedright
setting disables most hyphenation operations, since each "act" of hyphenation carries a sizable TeX penalty. But, for the paragraph at hand, the over-full line carries a larger penalty than does the act of hyphenation.
Incidentally, if one omits the hyphenation
instruction, TeX is able (somewhat surprisingly, to me at least) to find reasonably "decent" hyphenation points.
documentclass{report}
usepackage[english]{babel}
%%selectlanguage{english} % not needed
hyphenation{temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo-remagna-aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut}
usepackage{showframe} % to indicate edges of text block
begin{document}
sloppy
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
medskip
fussy % opposite of "sloppy"
raggedright % suspend full justification
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
end{document}
The hyphenation
directive doesn't just let you indicate some possible hyphenation points for a given "word" in the directive's argument. Instead, the hyphenation points you indicate are the only possible hyphenation points.
By construction, you are not allowing TeX to hyphenate the three substrings
temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo
remagna
aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut
if they occur inside the 105-character [!!] string
temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut
Don't be surprised, then, that TeX does not insert hyphenation points in any of the three substrings.
If full justification of paragraphs is active, which is the case by default, TeX must also obey some fairly stringent rules regarding (a) how much inter-word whitespace is allowed to stretch and (b) the tolerance for under-full lines. For all practical purposes, it suffices to know that overstretched inter-word whitespace is penalized very heavily and that under-full lines are also penalized. To get a sense of just how badly whitespace would have to be stretched in order to line-break your superlong word at one of the two permissible hyphenation points, consider the first paragraph below. It is typeset under the sloppy
directive, which suspends most of TeX's penalties related to (a) the stretchiness of inter-word whitespace and (b) under-full lines. Observe the huge interword spaces in the first two lines and a seriously under-full third line. Not just "sloppy", but an outright assault on one's eyes!!
To restore a semblance of decent typography, it's necessary to issue the directive raggedright
; see the second paragraph. Note that the huge amounts of inter-word whitespace in the first two lines of the paragraph are gone -- at the non-negligible cost of having two additional grossly under-full lines. Observe that the 105-character word does get hyphenated if raggedright
is in effect. This is because raggedright
imposes a penalty for (seriously) over-full lines. By default, the raggedright
setting disables most hyphenation operations, since each "act" of hyphenation carries a sizable TeX penalty. But, for the paragraph at hand, the over-full line carries a larger penalty than does the act of hyphenation.
Incidentally, if one omits the hyphenation
instruction, TeX is able (somewhat surprisingly, to me at least) to find reasonably "decent" hyphenation points.
documentclass{report}
usepackage[english]{babel}
%%selectlanguage{english} % not needed
hyphenation{temporincididuntutlaboreetdolo-remagna-aliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut}
usepackage{showframe} % to indicate edges of text block
begin{document}
sloppy
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
medskip
fussy % opposite of "sloppy"
raggedright % suspend full justification
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temporincididuntutlaboreetdoloremagnaaliquaUtenimadminimveniamquisnostrudexercitationullamcolaborisnisiut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
end{document}
edited 36 mins ago
answered 1 hour ago
MicoMico
277k30378766
277k30378766
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f472339%2fwhy-doesnt-tex-hyphenate-a-really-long-word-for-which-ive-indicated-some-permi%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Actually, TeX is working exactly as it is supposed to. See my answer for an analysis of what's problematic about your paragraph that contains a 105-character word with only 2 permissible hyphenation points.
– Mico
51 mins ago
Another good way to improve the line-breaking is to load
microtype
with font expansion. It does not currently work in XeTeX, but can dramatically reduce the amount of hyphenation needed.– Davislor
37 mins ago