# Consolidated list of questions: English, Biology
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [February 20, 2011, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041 "2011-02-20T20:25:53Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@miragesyzygy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/miragesyzygy)
#### Post date: [February 20, 2011, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/1 "2011-02-20T20:25:53Z")
First, 3 questions about English.
1. Is it correct to use a triple possessive? Like so: John’s dog’s tail’s wagging motion.
2. If a phrase is customarily two words but can be unawkwardly hyphenated, is it ungrammatical to do so? Examples: high-school, school-lunch.
3. For the contraction 'd for would, is it acceptable for only pronouns? I’d, he’d, she’d. Or can I also say, the dog’d bark. Word red-lines dog’d.
Biology:
Is a human born the most cognitively advanced animal in the kingdom? Or, phrased differently, are there any animals smarter than a 6-month infant, and if there exists any, at what age does the human infant become the most cognitively advanced animal?
---
### Author:  [@miragesyzygy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/miragesyzygy)
#### Post date: [February 20, 2011, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/2 "2011-02-20T20:38:49Z")
Oh can’t edit any more but same thing for 'll for will
like
school’ll be closed.
I’ve never seen it like that but it’d be convenient if it’s acceptable.
---
### Author:  [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)
#### Post date: [February 20, 2011, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/3 "2011-02-20T20:49:33Z")
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> First, 3 questions about English.
>
> 1. Is it correct to use a triple possessive? Like so: John’s dog’s tail’s wagging motion.
Sure. There’s a bunch of really crazy constructions nobody uses in daily but are there in case they are needed. In this particular case, I would say the writer could have avoided it by simply establishing the dog’s ownership and thereafter referring to it as “the dog.” But, let’s say 2 or more animals, owners and tails are involved. In this case, you would need this to figure out which tail you are talking about.
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> 1. If a phrase is customarily two words but can be unawkwardly hyphenated, is it ungrammatical to do so? Examples: high-school, school-lunch.
This is not a grammar question, but simply spelling. If the dictionary says it should be hyphenated, it is. The exceptions would be “-like” and two colors, e.g. “elephant-like” and “bluish-green” which are hyphenated without being in the dictionary. Adding an unnecessary hyphen or removing a necessary hyphen would be a spelling mistake. Also note that before it is included in the dictionary, both forms may exist, but once it’s “canonized,” there’s only one correct spelling.
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> First, 3 questions about English.
>
> 1. For the contraction 'd for would, is it acceptable for only pronouns? I’d, he’d, she’d. Or can I also say, the dog’d bark. Word red-lines dog’d.
In general, contractions are spoken conventions that sound like saying the words really, really fast. If you say “I would” really fast, it sounds like “I’d” anyway. “Would of” becomes “Woulda.” While “dog’d” does exist simply because people are lazy, it would not be considered grammatic, in much the same way as “woulda.” That we have accepted contractions of have, had, am, were, etc. simply shows how often they occur in speech.
If you really dig into how contractions are used, they are nearly universally used when the contracted word is a helping word that doesn’t affect the meaning of the sentence. For example, in Korean, subjects, once set, are dropped in all following sentences, because they are no longer needed to understand what is being said. In English, contractions is a form of subject dropping as well.
---
### Author:  [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)
#### Post date: [February 20, 2011, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/4 "2011-02-20T20:53:39Z")
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> Biology:
> Is a human born the most cognitively advanced animal in the kingdom? Or, phrased differently, are there any animals smarter than a 6-month infant, and if there exists any, at what age does the human infant become the most cognitively advanced animal?
There was recently a study of dog vocabulary where the estimation of a dog’s intelligence was something like a 5-year old child.
There’s a list at wikipedia:
> **[Dog intelligence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_intelligence)**
>
> Dog intelligence or dog cognition is the process in dogs of acquiring information and conceptual skills, and storing them in memory, retrieving, combining and comparing them, and using them in new situations.
> Studies have shown that dogs display many behaviors associated with intelligence. They have advanced memory skills, and are able to read and react appropriately to human body language such as gesturing and pointing, and to understand human voice commands. Dogs demonstrate a theory of mind ...
---
### Author:  [@Sunspace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunspace)
#### Post date: [February 20, 2011, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/5 "2011-02-20T20:59:51Z")
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> First, 3 questions about English.
>
> 1. Is it correct to use a triple possessive? Like so: John’s dog’s tail’s wagging motion.
Sure. But it’s colloquial and uncommon.
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> 1. If a phrase is customarily two words but can be unawkwardly hyphenated, is it ungrammatical to do so? Examples: high-school, school-lunch.
Sure. It helps to reduce ambiguity. You wouldn’t write, “I went to high-school”, but you would write, “The high-school lunches were horrible”. The hyphen joins the two adjectives and makes it clear that the last one is not part of a noun phrase. Thus, “high-school lunches” (lunches belonging to a high school) is different from “high school-lunches” (which could be public-school lunches up on a shelf).
This varies, though. Over time, many expressions start out as two-word phrases, then become hyphenated, then become joined into one word.
And there’s the [obligatory XKCD link](http://xkcd.com/37/).
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> 1. For the contraction 'd for would, is it acceptable for only pronouns? I’d, he’d, she’d. Or can I also say, the dog’d bark. Word red-lines dog’d.
Again, this is perfectly okay, but colloquial. If you’re writing formally, your style guide’d probably disallow it.
In my opinion, a lot of these constructions simulate the patterns of speech in writing.
---
### Author:  [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)
#### Post date: [February 20, 2011, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/6 "2011-02-20T21:52:27Z")
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> First, 3 questions about English.
>
> 1. Is it correct to use a triple possessive? Like so: John’s dog’s tail’s wagging motion.
It’s a little awkward and could do with rephrasing, but it’s still fine in either a formal or informal context.
> [@](#):
>
> 1. If a phrase is customarily two words but can be unawkwardly hyphenated, is it ungrammatical to do so? Examples: high-school, school-lunch.
Say the phrase out loud. Is the stress on the first word, the second, or neither? If the stress is on the second syllable or neither syllable, then it’s not a compound noun and hyphenating it would be inappropriate. Compound nouns always stress the first word, often strongly so.
I wouldn’t say that school lunch is a compound noun, but YMMV - it depends on frequency of usage and whether you could separate the words without it being weird.
> [@](#):
>
> 1. For the contraction 'd for would, is it acceptable for only pronouns? I’d, he’d, she’d. Or can I also say, the dog’d bark. Word red-lines dog’d.
Definitely acceptable. You’d avoid it in some formal contexts, but then you’d avoid most contractions in formal contexts. Same for the 'll question.
I’ll pretty much leave the biology question to someone who can explain it better and provide better cites, but basically a human baby at six months is way less cognitively advanced than your average dog or chimp.
---
### Author:  [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)
#### Post date: [February 20, 2011, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/7 "2011-02-20T22:01:49Z")
I have to disagree with the above. Dog’d is extremely informal and would seem out of place in anything but dialect dialog. I can’t see using the 'd ending with anything but pronouns.
Same for 'll. School’ll might be an acceptable way of transcribing someone’s real world speech, but I advise strongly against using it anywhere else. It’s never been used on the Dope before this thread.
---
### Author:  [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)
#### Post date: [February 20, 2011, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/8 "2011-02-20T22:22:46Z")
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> First, 3 questions about English.
>
> 1. Is it correct to use a triple possessive? Like so: John’s dog’s tail’s wagging motion.
It is certainly correct. Grammatically there is not limit as to how many of these you can string together.
John’s sister’s friend’s dog’s tail’s tip’s hair’s split ends were unsightly.
But you risk confusing the reader. Take this grammatically correct but highly nested statement that really should never have been written:
The salesman the woman the shoe didn’t fit hit quit.
---
### Author:  [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)
#### Post date: [February 20, 2011, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/9 "2011-02-20T22:54:20Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#):
>
> I have to disagree with the above. Dog’d is extremely informal and would seem out of place in anything but dialect dialog. I can’t see using the 'd ending with anything but pronouns.
>
> Same for 'll. School’ll might be an acceptable way of transcribing someone’s real world speech, but I advise strongly against using it anywhere else. It’s never been used on the Dope before this thread.
I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree about how formal or informal that usage is, but it certainly is grammatically correct. It’s the kind of thing you’d more often see in printed newspaper articles, where character limit is important (and on twitter, but that is very informal).
---
### Author:  [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2011, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/10 "2011-02-21T01:09:33Z")
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> 1. If a phrase is customarily two words but can be unawkwardly hyphenated, is it ungrammatical to do so? Examples: high-school, school-lunch.
It depends: are you using the phrase as a noun, or as an adjective? If it’s an adjective, I might hyphenate it, to make it clearer that the two words go together.
Examples: “John goes to high school, because he’s a high-school student.”
“I’m making a round trip, so I want a round-trip ticket.”
“The high-speed train travels at a high speed.”
> [@](#):
>
> Word red-lines dog’d.
“The dog’d tree is covered in dog’d bark.” 😛
I’d avoid saying “dog’d” because it sounds too much like the word “dogged.”
---
### Author:  [@DHMO](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DHMO)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2011, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/11 "2011-02-21T02:13:50Z")
> [@Superhal](#):
>
> In general, contractions are spoken conventions that sound like saying the words really, really fast. If you say “I would” really fast, it sounds like “I’d” anyway. _ **“Would of” becomes “Woulda.”** _ While “dog’d” does exist simply because people are lazy, it would not be considered grammatic, in much the same way as “woulda.” That we have accepted contractions of have, had, am, were, etc. simply shows how often they occur in speech.
[emphasis added—DHMO]
The phrase is, “would have.” The traditional contraction is “would’ve.” The bastard back-formation is “would of,” which kinda sorta sounds like “would’ve.”
The lazy speech practice has become the accepted spelling practice.
---
### Author:  [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2011, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/12 "2011-02-21T02:22:44Z")
> [@SciFiSam](#):
>
> Say the phrase out loud. Is the stress on the first word, the second, or neither? If the stress is on the second syllable or neither syllable, then it’s not a compound noun and hyphenating it would be inappropriate. Compound nouns always stress the first word, often strongly so.
I think **Thudlow** ’s criterion is better than this: the hyphenation depends on the function of the phrase in the sentence, not on the stress of its pronunciation.
That is, when a two-word phrase is used as a single adjective modifying another noun, it tends to get hyphenated.
Thus you would write, for example,
_“All types of environmentalists are welcome in the sustainability movement’s big tent”_
without a hyphen, but
_“The sustainability movement’s big-tent approach exacerbated tensions between some environmentalist groups”_
would require a hyphen.
The pronunciation of “big tent” in those two cases doesn’t really change AFAICT, but the function of the phrase in the sentence and the consequent appropriateness of a hyphen does change.
---
### Author:  [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2011, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/13 "2011-02-21T02:54:36Z")
> [@SciFiSam](#):
>
> I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree about how formal or informal that usage is, but it certainly is grammatically correct. It’s the kind of thing you’d more often see in printed newspaper articles, where character limit is important (and on twitter, but that is very informal).
More often see? I don’t believe it. In fact, I’ll offer a challenge. Find me even one single use of a construction like dog’d or school’ll from a newspaper (outside of quoted dialectual dialog or the equivalent).
---
### Author:  [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2011, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/14 "2011-02-21T03:22:47Z")
> [@Kimstu](#):
>
> I think **Thudlow** ’s criterion is better than this: the hyphenation depends on the function of the phrase in the sentence, not on the stress of its pronunciation.
>
> That is, when a two-word phrase is used as a single adjective modifying another noun, it tends to get hyphenated.
>
> Thus you would write, for example,
> _“All types of environmentalists are welcome in the sustainability movement’s big tent”_
> without a hyphen, but
> _“The sustainability movement’s big-tent approach exacerbated tensions between some environmentalist groups”_
> would require a hyphen.
>
> The pronunciation of “big tent” in those two cases doesn’t really change AFAICT, but the function of the phrase in the sentence and the consequent appropriateness of a hyphen does change.
It’s the same criterion - except that I’d change ‘adjective’ to ‘modifier.’ I’m just suggesting one way of detecting the function that phrase has in that sentence.
I’d hear a change in ‘big tent’ in those two examples, though I’ve never come across it as a phrase.
I probably should have provided a cite to show that I’m not making this up out of head: [compound nouns stress the first word.](http://www.soundsofenglish.org/pronunciation/suprasegmentals/index.html#compound) That’s just an English language learning site, but it’s one of hundreds.
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#):
>
> More often see? I don’t believe it. In fact, I’ll offer a challenge. Find me even one single use of a construction like dog’d or school’ll from a newspaper (outside of quoted dialectual dialog or the equivalent).
What? You think it’s that unlikely that character-restricted media will use these contractions more than the Straight Dope? I don’t think it’s very common, especially not in the newspapers I read (which tend to have a more formal style and avoid contractions except for possessives and ‘it’s’), but it certainly happens.
And I’m not sure how I’d provide a cite from a printed newspaper even if I had one to hand.
---
### Author:  [@wheresmymind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wheresmymind)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2011, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/15 "2011-02-21T04:00:16Z")
My guess is that many of the larger adult mammals (dogs/cats and other carnivores, marine mammals, elephants, primates) and some of the more intelligent birds (some parrots, crows, ravens, etc) are “smarter” than a helpless 6-month old infant.
I don’t think it’s disputed that the great apes and dolphins are closest to humans in intelligence. I’d say the great apes probably possess an intellect closer to ours by virtue of our common evolutionary past, somewhat similar social structures, and the fact that we inhabit and interact with the same world. I don’t doubt dolphins are smart, it’s just that their “smartness” is likely very different from ours, given the unique challenges of our respective environments. Humans and great apes are apples, dolphins are oranges.
That said, IIRC there is some consensus that an adult bonobo or chimpanzee is at least as intelligent as a human toddler (1-3 yo), and possibly on the order of a preschooler (3-5 yo).
---
### Author:  [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2011, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/16 "2011-02-21T05:17:29Z")
> [@SciFiSam](#):
>
> I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree about how formal or informal that usage is, but it certainly is grammatically correct. It’s the kind of thing you’d more often see in printed newspaper articles, where character limit is important (and on twitter, but that is very informal).
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#):
>
> More often see? I don’t believe it. In fact, I’ll offer a challenge. Find me even one single use of a construction like dog’d or school’ll from a newspaper (outside of quoted dialectual dialog or the equivalent).
No need to fight. There’s two types of grammar: rules of use and rules of form. A rule of use involves how it’s used in “real” speech, in which case contractions like school’ll can be found all the time. Rules of form are those that are written down in grammar books in an (mostly vain) attempt to preserve the grammar. In these books, you’ll never, ever find school’ll as a rule (although I could probably find them listed as errors in a typical grammar book.)
---
### Author:  [@Candyman74](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Candyman74)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2011, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/17 "2011-02-21T12:57:09Z")
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> Or, phrased differently, are there any animals smarter than a 6-month infant,
Loads of them. 6-month children are not very bright. Dogs, for example, have been equate to anything from 3-5 year old children (I find the latter unlikely, but I can easily see the 3 year old kid in a bright dog).
---
### Author:  [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2011, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/18 "2011-02-21T14:21:25Z")
> [@Superhal](#):
>
> No need to fight. There’s two types of grammar: rules of use and rules of form. A rule of use involves how it’s used in “real” speech, in which case contractions like school’ll can be found all the time. Rules of form are those that are written down in grammar books in an (mostly vain) attempt to preserve the grammar. In these books, you’ll never, ever find school’ll as a rule (although I could probably find them listed as errors in a typical grammar book.)
Oh, I’m not fighting - I’m always happy to agree to disagree, while of course secretly believing that I’m absolutely right, like we all do. 😃
You do see those contractions in some English language teaching books. School’ll and dog’d are particularly bad examples, though, since they sound awkward with those final consonants. The time’ll come when even the biggest grammar maven’d be surprised at people decrying contractions.
---
### Author:  [@miragesyzygy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/miragesyzygy)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2011, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/19 "2011-02-21T23:11:35Z")
Also, when prove is used as a linking verb, is it always “proved to be,” or “will prove to be”
Or can I say, “the steering wheel proved too difficult for me to handle…”
---
### Author:  [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)
#### Post date: [February 21, 2011, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041/20 "2011-02-21T23:28:59Z")
> [@miragesyzygy](#):
>
> Also, when prove is used as a linking verb, is it always “proved to be,” or “will prove to be”
>
> Or can I say, “the steering wheel proved too difficult for me to handle…”
This looks like a case of dropping. As stated earlier, it’s human nature to drop non-meaning bearing parts of a sentence to make them shorter and easier to say, e.g. “The man (that is) wearing the hat came late.”
Or, this could be a case of overgeneralization. We want to use “prove+to”, but in this case, we have “prove + too,” and therefore we accept it as “close enough.”
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consolidated-list-of-questions-english-biology/572041.md?page=2)