Some grammar help please?

[TheHouseOnTheLane]

Should the phrase below have hyphens? If yes or no, could you please explain why in idiot speak?

"In this book,Tara factors in the realities of life as a nurse with practical and easy-to-implement advice."

witchway that would explain why my dad keeps writing to-morrow !!

I agree with everyone saying yes to hyphens in first post, but I would also be rid of the comma after 'book'.

Iguana - yes, "to-morrow", absolutely!

Perhaps I will make a slightly different comment. Is easy-to-implement redundant after practical?

I am glad I read to the end redstrawberry because yes, that would be my edit too. Also 'factors in the realities' doesn't make sense - one writes a book, not factors it.

'In this book Tara writes about the realities of life as a nurse, offering practical advice.'

redstrawberry - if you are suggesting that practical and easy-to-implement are synonyms, then I'm sure not that's the case. I could imagine something being practical (ie shows you all the steps to complete a task in real-life) but not easy-to-implement (because the steps involved are complicated or require the use of something which is hard to obtain).

If something is hard to do, then it's not practical advice, surely?

that depends on what's being called practical. If only the leaflet is practical (as in your example), I wouldn't use the word practical (maybe "informative" is better). If, however, the advice is practical, I would assume that means practical to implement.

'doable' is listed as a synonym for 'practical' which is too close to 'easy to implement' for my liking.

But as an editor, even if they aren't synonyms, they are too close together to both add weight to the sentence. And the first rule of my editing is 'if you aren't sure about the grammar, re-cast the sentence.'

one writes a book, not factors it.

"writes" to me suggests that's mainly what the book is about. I think the original sentence says the book says various things, but accounts for the realities of life etc etc. Perhaps "accounts for"?

one writes a book, not factors it.

I don't think they are synonyms. But, like you, I don't think the easy to do part adds anything.

I think you are right in this context that using practical and easy-to-implement is overkill. I suppose I was thinking more of the distinction between theoretical and practical (I know the theory of the internal combustion engine, but I'd need a practical guide to build one, and I wouldn't expect it to be easy, even if it was doable).

Given the range of meanings of practical, I would ditch it and just use easy-to-implement as that would presumably be the selling point.

In the context of nursing, I'd contrast "practical" with "theoretical". So a practical guide would give information about cleanliness, wound dressings, recording information properly and the like without giving the theory behind it. In which case "practical" is not the same as "easy to implement" or particularly close to it.

Whilst I prefer taking out words which are just so much padding, I think sometimes they can be useful. In this case you could argue that they are reinforcing each other or that they make the text a bit friendlier and easier to read. Very dense text can be a bit difficult to take in. (Though if an editor gives you 500 words to describe complex issues, that's what they'll get).

It sounds to me like this is for the blurb, so it's usually not more than 100 - 120 words? (ish) So I'd be editing hard, although I take your point about practical vs theoretical Gabilan.

Wobblystraddle you need to go and edit the whole of the dailymail.

I'd just burn the Daily Mail. Waste of time trying to edit it.