The Rubik's Cube Can Be Solved But Is It Grammatical?
In my previous post I mentioned Joyner's paper Mathematics of the Rubik's Cube.
The phrase "The Rubik's Cube" sounds odd because you can't normally use an article with a pre-nominal genitive if the pre-nominal itself wouldn't normally take an article.
You can say "the paper", "the professor" and "the professor's paper". You can say "David's paper" but not "*the David's paper". (Although note that if talking about the sculpture "the David", you can say things like "the David's left hand". And, because of Donald Trump, you could say "the Donald's hair".)
You can't say "the Rubik" and so "the Rubik's cube" seems ungrammatical if you think about its component parts.
What's happening is, of course, that "Rubik's" isn't acting as a genitive anymore but rather "Rubik's Cube" has been reanalyzed as an opaque compound noun. It's just still written in terms of its components.
Comments (3)
James Tauber on March 27, 2008:
But if you knew initially that the inventor was Ernő Rubik and hence the name "Rubik's Cube" then calling it "the Rubik's Cube" might seem odd.
James Tauber on March 27, 2008:
Add a Comment
Last Modified: March 27, 2008
Author: jtauber
Nat on March 27, 2008:
Of course, it might just be that I thought it was spelt "Rubix Cube" until like five years ago.