Is it acceptable to write "mini-steps" or should it be "mini steps? Can it be "mini-mangoes" or must it be "mini mangoes"? [duplicate]

Solution 1:

Both e-mail and email are in standard use at this point, although e-mail retains a vast majority of usage in edited, published writing according to my research using the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA).

Here are the current results counts in COCA for various categories of English:

e-mail email
spoken 3535 711
fiction 789 285
magazine 5421 471
newspaper 6046 192
academic 3675 897
total 21696 2831
total(excluding spoken) 15931 1845

Obviously the “spoken” totals don’t represent any kind of actual usage but rather the policies of the organizations that transcribed the spoken data, so I also included a total that excludes the spoken examples. So, in (edited, published) fiction, magazines, newspapers, and academic writing we find that the traditional e-mail outnumbers incidences of email by more than 8.5 to 1. COCA includes data starting from 1990.

Now that we have established that e-mail retains the position of preferred usage by a very large margin, let’s look at trends over time. These numbers are in incidences per million words (rather than total incidences):

e-mail email
1990 0.15 0.00
1991 2.46 0.05
1992 1.67 0.00
1993 5.49 0.05
1994 10.40 0.24
1995 16.11 1.71
1996 22.41 2.14
1997 51.71 2.09
1998 38.15 1.62
1999 50.33 4.67
2000 85.98 6.37
2001 83.75 7.03
2002 95.29 3.38
2003 94.35 5.23
2004 79.68 4.51
2005 72.53 5.58
2006 72.38 10.09
2007 85.20 14.18
2008 68.26 26.56
2009 97.37 33.23
2010 87.93 26.66

This is a graphical representation showing the data over time:

graph comparing e-mail vs email between 1990 and 2010

The blue and red lines show the frequency of incidence for e-mail and email per million words. The orange line shows the ratio of incidence between e-mail and email over the same period. From these results, we see that e-mail was on a meteoric rise in the 1990s and by 2000 it has locked in at between 70 and 100 incidences per million words. Email, on the other hand, saw very little usage until 2005, when its use soared up to about 30 incidences per million words over the last few years.

What does all this tell us? We see a word whose spelling is in transition. It is not clear whether email will eventually reach and surpass e-mail. For the time being, e-mail has retained its position as the preferred usage by a factor of three to one over the past few years. The numbers can change very quickly and email may win out in five years, or it may stay a minority usage for a long time. Only time will tell. In the meantime, you are in good company if you use e-mail. That’s what I use.


Edit March 8, 2012:

I created a Google N-gram which compares instances of e-mail with email in the Google Books corpus between 1988 and 2008, and it does seem that e-mail hit a peak around 2004, and has been in decline since, though it remains significantly more common than email.

ngram comparing e-mail and email in English

Curiously, when you look in the country-specific corpora, you find that the gap is wider in American English and narrower in British English:

American English

ngram comparing e-mail and email in American English

British English

ngram comparing e-mail and email in British English

Solution 2:

Both are correct and common. I'd recommend the shorter and simpler email.

There seems to be a tendency to drop hyphen as a newly coined word becomes more and more commonplace:

electronic mail → e-mail → email

That is what I've read earlier somewhere, and looking around I now found at least this quote by Donald Knuth to support the claim:

Newly coined nonce words of English are often spelled with a hyphen, but the hyphen disappears when the words become widely used. For example, people used to write "non-zero" and "soft-ware" instead of "nonzero" and "software"; the same trend has occurred for hundreds of other words. Thus it's high time for everybody to stop using the archaic spelling "e-mail". Think of how many keystrokes you will save in your lifetime if you stop now! The form "email" has been well established in England for several years, so I am amazed to see Americans being overly conservative in this regard.

Even if you ignore that, overwhelming evidence seems to suggest that "email" is the form that everyone is likely to eventually settle upon (so you might just as well go with that now):

  • Most dictionaries use "email"; see the "Spelling" section in Wikipedia's Email article
    • Do also note the title of that article...
  • This note on the Wikipedia talk page points out that "email" is used almost unanimously by both email web service providers and client software authors, Microsoft being a lone proponent of "e-mail".
    • More recently even Microsoft seems to have given in (partially)! Although Outlook is still called an "e-mail" management tool, Hotmail now claims to be The efficient way to do email.

That said, if you deliberately want to sound ultra-formal or ceremonial, go with "electronic mail". :-)