# (Un)Common Knowledge **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [February 23, 2017, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524 "2017-02-23T04:27:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/101 "2017-03-06T04:06:39Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > The rule is pretty simple. An 's is added to a non possessive noun when you’re altering it to make it a possessive. But you don’t add an 's to a word that is inherently possessive. Its follows the same rule as his, hers, yours, and ours. How do we know “its” is inherently possessive, but “one’s” is not? It still boils down to learning by rote what the exceptions are. I mean, I rarely screw up “its” and “it’s” and when I do, it’s just carelessness, but it’s a completely natural error, since it goes against every instinct in me to just put the normal apostrophe-s possessive ending on it. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/102 "2017-03-06T04:14:28Z")
Basically, the rule is: nouns take an apostrophe-s to form the possessive in English\* except if it’s the possessive of a pronoun, in which case it doesn’t. except if that pronoun is “one,” in which case it does. \*and except if your style guide has exceptions for names ending in ess, ess-ending nouns in certain situations, words ending in ess sounds but not literally ending in an ess, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/103 "2017-03-06T05:49:24Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > The rule is pretty simple. An 's is added to a non possessive noun when you’re altering it to make it a possessive. But you don’t add an 's to a word that is inherently possessive. Its follows the same rule as his, hers, yours, and ours. This makes little sense. By your simple rule, since there is nothing “inherently possessive” about the word _it_, the possessive form should presumably be \*_it’s_. In any event, most of the words that you have listed are not possessive determiners like _its_, they are possessive pronouns. The possessive determiners are: me \> my you \> your he \> his she \> her we \> our they \> their it \> its one \> one’s The first 6 pronouns are completely irregular, in forming the possessive they do not follow the simple “add an s” rule that is used to make a noun possessive, so the question of the presence of an apostrophe is not applicable. _It_ and _one_ **do** form the possessive by adding an s. _It_ appears to be the only word in the English language that makes a possessive form by adding an _s_ but omitting the apostrophe. That’s why I find these comments by **wolfpup** to be both ignorant and offensive: > [@wolfpup](#): > > …Even the clueless would get it right about 50% of the time, but these guys totally defy the odds… > [@wolfpup](#): > > …There is no way that anyone with even the most rudimentary understanding of English could possibly write “the dog wagged it’s tail” and not realize, given half a moment’s thought, that she is writing “the dog wagged it is tail”… In fact, the reason that many perfectly literate people make the its/it’s mistake rather frequently when not concentrating carefully is most likely because “its” is simply an arbitrary irregular possessive form that does not conform to any logical pattern found in other possessives. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 8:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/104 "2017-03-06T08:36:54Z")
> [@panache45](#): > > History. People seem to know that WW2 was later than WW1, and that’s it. And no, Jeopardy player from a few years back, the Romans did not fight on 2-wheeled vehicles called “bicycles”. Then what were those vehicles called? It certainly wasn’t “chariots” - the Romans used \*those \*for sports and ceremonies only, never for combat. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/105 "2017-03-06T20:04:38Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > Your claim seems to be that an English speaker of limited literacy who gave the matter a moment’s careful thought could somehow _deduce_ that the possessive form of “its” _must_ lack an apostrophe, based on logic and common sense, apparently because “it’s” already has another meaning. That is complete nonsense. It might be complete nonsense if I had ever said any such thing. In fact, [I said just the opposite](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20045436&postcount=93). Here, let me bold it for you, maybe that will help: You cannot argue and accept that as an evolving human language **English is full of inconsistencies, idioms, and all manner of anomalies that have to be accepted and learned as the norm of standard English because they just are** , but then simultaneously try to justify some conflicting usage completely outside that norm just because it satisfies some arbitrary formality that you just thought of. > [@Riemann](#): > > Your convoluted nonsense about what’s “natural and utilitarian” notwithstanding, … Your interesting perspective on one of the primary drivers of language is duly noted. By the way, since you seem unable to resist throwing out gratuitous insults about being “ignorant and offensive” which you’ve done two or three times now despite my request to kindly stop this unproductive unpleasantness, let me give you an example of what ignorant and offensive actually looks like, so you can tell the difference. Ignorant and offensive would be when there is a lighthearted discussion about the kinds of things that people tend to be clueless about, and someone mentions the difference beween “it’s” and “its” (both [a very common error](https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage/its-or-it-s) and an almost comically trivial one), and then for no discernible reason some self-appointed pontificator descends like a flaming prophet of the Old Testament to inject a stream of insulting invectives into an otherwise cheerful discussion. > [@pulykamell](#): > > How do we know “its” is inherently possessive, but “one’s” is not? It still boils down to learning by rote what the exceptions are. I mean, I rarely screw up “its” and “it’s” and when I do, it’s just carelessness, but it’s a completely natural error, since it goes against every instinct in me to just put the normal apostrophe-s possessive ending on it. Wouldn’t those same instincts lead you to want to throw in an apostrophe when transforming certain possessive determiners (her, their, your, our) into their possessive pronoun forms? If we say “That’s not my car, it’s Frank’s” then why not “That’s not my car, it’s her’s”? After all, “hers” is not the plural of “her”, it’s a possessive pronoun. No argument that these things are learned, not inferred. We don’t do this because there are only a handful of personal pronouns and every native English speaker learns their specific possessive forms at a very early age as part of their elementary vocabulary building. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/106 "2017-03-06T20:58:47Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > It might be complete nonsense if I had ever said any such thing… You claimed exactly what I described, that the correct usage is not an irregular convention but that it can be _deduced_ with “a moment’s thought”. You said it right here: > [@wolfpup](#): > > …There is no way that anyone with even the most rudimentary understanding of English could possibly write “the dog wagged it’s tail” and not realize, given half a moment’s thought, that she is writing “the dog wagged it is tail”… You now claim that you hold _my_ view, that the usage is in fact an irregular one, an arbitrary convention that must simply be learned by rote and remembered. I’m pleased that you now agree with me, but note that in your earlier comment that you quoted just above you did not hold this view. In fact, you were clearly describing _my_ view of the matter, not your own. Note the first word of your quote, with my bold: > [@wolfpup](#): > > … **You** cannot argue and accept that as an evolving human language English is full of inconsistencies, idioms, and all manner of anomalies that have to be accepted and learned as the norm of standard English because they just are, but then simultaneously try to justify… And as for tone, if you don’t like commensurate pushback against your rants, perhaps you should go back and reread the kind of pompous and offensive tone that you habitually take when criticizing other people’s use of language when it does not conform to your misconceived ideals. Light-hearted it ain’t, and it wasn’t me who hijacked this thread to get on their hobby-horse of ill-humored peevery. ---
**Author:** ![furryman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/furryman/32/99_2.png) [@furryman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furryman)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/107 "2017-03-06T21:30:58Z")
> [@ZipperJJ](#): > > I’ve gotten in to 3 different arguments within the past 6 months with people who insist that Slovakia and Slovenia are the same place, who don’t think the Czechs and Slovaks are different people and now they even have different countries, and are shocked that Bohemia is inside the Czech Republic No Not Czechoslovakia I Mean The Czech Republic. > > It’s not like I’m a scholar. I literally was just interested in the region, as I am Slovak, and took time to read the Wikipedia articles and look at maps. Pisses me off that these arguments were with other people of Slavic descent and they were completely clueless. I found out just last week that Bohemia was an actual place and it’s located in the Czech Republic. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/108 "2017-03-06T21:50:33Z")
> [@furryman](#): > > I found out just last week that Bohemia was an actual place and it’s located in the Czech Republic. But it doesn’t have a coastline. ---
**Author:** ![furryman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/furryman/32/99_2.png) [@furryman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furryman)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/109 "2017-03-06T21:54:04Z")
> [@WildBlueYonder](#): > > I told my husband this a few years back. I could not believe he did not know. I learned that when I was a child > > but the calendar says so! > > The amount of “people” who do not know that # means pounds as well as a few other things, BEFORE, it became a hash tag… I used to believe that I was the only person who remembered when # meant “number”. It’s still amazing to me how many people don’t know. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/110 "2017-03-06T22:12:56Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > You claimed exactly what I described, that the correct usage is not an irregular convention but that it can be _deduced_ with “a moment’s thought”. You said it right here: Good job misinterpreting pretty much everything, right from my original post. Giving something “a moment’s thought” doesn’t presume that it can be logically deduced from some algorithm. Sometimes it means – as in this particular case – [remembering the basics](https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage/its-or-it-s) that most of us were taught in the early years of elementary school. And whether you see it or not, my “it’s/its” post was intended to be lighthearted in the same spirit as the Dave Barry column I linked later, or [this definition](https://www.theguardian.com/media/mind-your-language/2013/aug/16/mind-your-language-apostrophe) from _The Guardian_ of an “apostrofly”: “an insect that lands at random on the printed page, depositing an apostrophe wherever it lands”. Yet somehow it inspired your snarky curmudgeonly “confirmation bias” response and it all went downhill from there. I suppose I could have added a smiley, but [you don’t like those either](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20044970&postcount=86), so one is at a loss. I’m done with this. Apologies to all for my part in the digression. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/111 "2017-03-06T22:26:43Z")
Well, thank goodness that all your lightheartedness is over. Since you seem unwilling to reconsider the tone that you habitually adopt in your peeving diatribes, let me give you a few highlights: > [@wolfpup](#): > > …why do some folks have a special talent for always using the wrong one? Even the clueless would get it right about 50% of the time… > [@wolfpup](#): > > …The first is a simple adjective, the second a contraction of “it is”, both known to native English speakers since early childhood. There’s no command of anything required here… > [@wolfpup](#): > > …There is no way that anyone with even the most rudimentary understanding of English could possibly write “the dog wagged it’s tail” and not realize, given half a moment’s thought, that she is writing “the dog wagged it is tail”… > [@wolfpup](#): > > …Someone who does so isn’t necessarily a moron, and it may even be an innocent typo, but someone who does it consistently is at least careless and inconsiderate… As someone who has made this error rather frequently when writing quickly, I’m relieved to discover that I’m not _necessarily_ a moron. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/112 "2017-03-07T16:50:15Z")
> [@rsat3acr](#): > > I’ve lived in Texas cities most of my life, grackles are very common. In the winter more migrate in and they gather by the thousands. The grackles in Texas are not historically native species, they are Great-tailed Grackles, who have recently expanded their range from south of the Rio Grande. A very similar grackle, the Boat-tailed Grackle, occurs in Florida, and similarly, is a recent invader from the Caribbean. Both have characteristic long tails. The native North American grackle is the Common Grackle, still called Purple Grackle by old-timers. Anywhere north of the Gulf Coast states, flocks of grackles are Common (purple) Grackles, and have relatively normal length tails. They are most conspicuous as noisy flocks of spring migrants. Even in Texas, where they are easily overlooked among the much more numerous Great-tailed Grackles, and less urban in their habitat preference. ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/113 "2017-03-07T17:11:05Z")
Based upon the universe of people in my household, I’m the only one that actually knows how the thermostat works, even though I’ve explained it too my wife about 50 times, she just ignores me. ---
**Author:** ![Drummond\_Bays](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/8edcca/32.png) [@Drummond\_Bays](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drummond_Bays)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/114 "2017-03-07T17:32:23Z")
> [@fstbk1968](#): > > Concrete and cement are not synonyms; cement is one component of concrete. Concrete is made up of water, cement, aggregates, and admixtures. _sigh_ Even folks in the construction industry, who should know better, use the wrong nomenclature. ‘Joisteses’ ‘JOISTESES’ It’s always the company owner, to boot. ---
**Author:** ![DesertDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/desertdog/32/11503_2.png) [@DesertDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DesertDog)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2017, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/115 "2017-03-11T19:44:22Z")
> [@Isamu](#): > > When an old sailor friend I used to sail with explained that wind particles wanted to stay together so those on the leward side of the sail travel faster than those on the windward side of the sail, and that is what drives the boat through the airstream, I just looked into space and said “huh!”. Then I thought about it later at night and concluded that it was either witchcraft or bullshit. :o When I was a kid this was earnestly explained to me and I wondered _why_ the air molecules needed to rejoin after passing over/under an airfoil; were they having an interrupted conversation? Unfortunately being a kid, I bowed to authority and kept my mouth shut. Finding out that the F-104 (I think it was) has a wing with equal distances top and bottom was the final nail in that coffin. ---
**Author:** ![minor7flat5](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/minor7flat5/32/258_2.png) [@minor7flat5](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minor7flat5)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2017, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/116 "2017-03-11T23:35:41Z")
I was never very satisfied with the traditional explanation of lift based on equal transit time, but always assumed it was just one of those scientific things, of which there are many, that textbooks explain but I can’t get my head around. (Stuff like how transistors work fits in this category) But I never imagined that those textbooks were wrong. And one has a desire to smirk and say, “silly scientists…of course that theory was wrong, it’s so obvious” Then I tried to get a straight answer as to how lift works, and realized that the problem is that it is a complex interaction that defies simplification and understanding by the layman, similarly to how quantum mechanics can’t be understood at a gut level but the math works out. There isn’t a simple intuitive explanation available. Here are the [gory details](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift_(force)) from Wikipedia. Here is an MIT student’s [award-winning report](http://web.mit.edu/2.972/www/reports/airfoil/airfoil.html) on the topic. Neither source is very satisfying, and the both give a hint as to why we were told the wrong thing for so long: it’s complicated stuff. ---
**Author:** ![rjk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ed655f/32.png) [@rjk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjk)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2017, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/117 "2017-03-13T04:33:10Z")
Leap years. I was talking to a co-worker today, and the conversation turned to leap years. He knew they were there, but had no idea why. He’s not stupid, just had never heard an explanation. I told him the calendar was 365 days, but the year is really 365 and a quarter, so we put in the extra day every four years. He caught on instantly: “Oh, and the four quarters make the extra day! And it lines up again!” I don’t know how he missed this way back in primary school. In any case, I spared him the 100/400 rules. ---
**Author:** ![antechinus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/fbc32d/32.png) [@antechinus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/antechinus)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2017, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/118 "2017-03-22T18:38:47Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > It’s only a little annoying that people think the vernal equinox is the first day of spring. It is tremendously annoying when they say it’s the _official_ first day of spring. > > The US NWS says spring is March thru May. So _officially_, in the US, it’s actually March 1st. > > Now, don’t start me on “blue moon”. In the Southern Hemisphere 1 March is first day of Autumn. So that makes sense. Each season goes for 3 months, so you can work out the rest. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![minor7flat5](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/minor7flat5/32/258_2.png) [@minor7flat5](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minor7flat5)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2017, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/119 "2017-04-20T12:52:10Z")
Waking this thread up for a few minutes… I have been working on putting my basement machine shop together, and the machines arrived on Tuesday. My nephew sent a photo of the metal cutting lathe to his friend. This morning he came up to me and said “I don’t know how to answer his question, maybe you can help?” I looked at his phone: “what is it?” “a lathe” “what does it do?” They are both in their mid 20s. I don’t expect many people to recognize it as a screw cutting engine lathe or even that it is a metal cutting lathe (as opposed to a wood lathe), but to not know what a lathe does? ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2017, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524/120 "2017-04-20T14:02:40Z")
I knew what a lathe did when I was a kid, because my best friend’s father operated one. But I can easily see someone in his 20s (or older) not knowing what one was. It’s something that’s not relevant to a lot of people’s lives. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-common-knowledge/780524.md?page=7)