# 'The Smith's theorem'---is this correct usage? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 15, 2013, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028 "2013-03-15T18:49:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2013, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/21 "2013-03-16T01:21:17Z")
Irked, are we? ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2013, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/22 "2013-03-16T02:45:56Z")
> [@Pasta](#): > > I haven’t noticed the trend myself. Any examples? I agree it’s irky usage. I see what you did there. left out an article ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2013, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/23 "2013-03-16T04:55:40Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > 😕 I’m sorry. because it sounds like good wit over my head, a not unusual case… Cow-irker is a lesser-known variant of the dreaded message board spelling “Cow-orker” variant of Co-worker. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2013, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/24 "2013-03-16T15:48:37Z")
Whenever I see this thread title, I think “The Smith’s theorem” looks like something out of Chaucer (like “The Miller’s Tale”). ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2013, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/25 "2013-03-16T15:52:21Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > Cow-irker is a lesser-known variant of the dreaded message board spelling “Cow-orker” variant of Co-worker. Got it. ---
**Author:** ![Sunspace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sunspace/32/1250_2.png) [@Sunspace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunspace)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2013, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/26 "2013-03-16T16:17:17Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > Whenever I see this thread title, I think “The Smith’s theorem” looks like something out of Chaucer (like “The Miller’s Tale”). Or an album from the eighties. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2013, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/27 "2013-03-16T16:27:43Z")
> [@Sunspace](#): > > Or an album from the eighties. The apostrophe’s in the wrong place for that. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2013, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/28 "2013-03-16T19:10:46Z")
The stupid Flanderses house. ---
**Author:** ![biqu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7feea3/32.png) [@biqu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/biqu)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 11:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/29 "2013-03-18T11:41:15Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > While we’re at it: Green’s function, or Green function? Most functions or other mathematical objects named after someone seem to take the nominative form (Dirlichet function, Poynting vector, Schwarzschild radius), but in the case of Green, for some reason the genitive seems more common. Could it be as simple as the fact that “green” the noun has the same form as “green” the adjective, so the genitive form is used in order to diminish the parsing difficulty that native English speakers might have? Also, although a recent thread lumped Green in an elite group of mostly self-educated mathematicians, the genitive form is not commonly associated with the theorems or results of other members in that group (Ramanujan, for example), so a simpler explanation for Green’s singular naming scheme is probably at work. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/30 "2013-03-18T11:48:31Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > If he truly were possessive about (heh) the boson, it would be Higgs’ boson, not Higgs’s boson, which is how it often is written with possessives regardless of their final sound. > > I am struck with irkness when I see that. > [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Either is correct and is preferred by different style guides. > > Unless you’re writing to a particular style guide there should never be a reason to care whether the 's is added. Very true. It’s a simple matter of style. > [@](#): > > And they are pronounced identically. Not true. Higgs’ and Higgs’s aren’t pronounced the same. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/31 "2013-03-18T15:20:40Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Not true. Higgs’ and Higgs’s aren’t pronounced the same. I pronounce them the same. How do you differentiate them? ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/32 "2013-03-18T16:18:23Z")
According to Strunk & White, “Higgs’s” would be more correct, and would be pronounced “Higgses”. However, S&W allow the other usage for (archaic?) exceptions like “For Jesus’ sake”. I didn’t see the logic. Most newspapers don’t follow S&W, preferring the form that uses less ink, I’d guess. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/33 "2013-03-18T16:50:49Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > I pronounce them the same. How do you differentiate them? Higgs and Higgs’ == [hɪgz] Higgs’s and Higgses and Higgses’ == [hɪgzɪz] or [hɪgzəz] ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/34 "2013-03-18T17:29:12Z")
In any ordinary sentence - "That’s Higgs’ uncle, Ascenray Exapno Higgs - the expected pronunciation would be “That’s hɪgzɪz uncle” not “That’s hɪgz uncle” because the possessive is being emphasized. Even more so for two-syllable words. “That’s Jesus’ foreskin on display”\* would be almost impossible without saying Jesuses. This may be regional or cultural or dialectal, I suppose, but it’s the way I’ve always heard it. \*Actually saw this claimed on a reliquary in Paris. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028/35 "2013-03-18T17:31:25Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > In any ordinary sentence - "That’s Higgs’ uncle, Ascenray Exapno Higgs - the expected pronunciation would be “That’s hɪgzɪz uncle” not “That’s hɪgz uncle” because the possessive is being emphasized. Even more so for two-syllable words. “That’s Jesus’ foreskin on display”\* would be almost impossible without saying Jesuses. > > This may be regional or cultural or dialectal, I suppose, but it’s the way I’ve always heard it. I hear it the other way fairly routinely in mainstream media, like TV and radio, including NPR. The public TV program _Rick Steves’ Europe_, for example. And on the few occasions I’ve listened to a preacher, he pronounced _Jesus’_ without the additional iz. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-smiths-theorem-is-this-correct-usage/653028.md?page=1)