|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 450
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 02, 2003 - 11:10 am: |       |
Hi, Chris:
Yes see below.
All the best
Chris
Restraint harness, GB, 19th century
From: ENGLISH PRISON BIOGRAPHY 1830-1914 |
Sarah Long
Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 198
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 02, 2003 - 11:13 am: | |
Looks more like some sort of S & M get up.
I agree though Chris, it is more likely to mean that.
Sarah |
Erin Sigler
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 116
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 03, 2003 - 11:24 pm: | |
Thanks for the explanations--those terms have been bothering me for some time now but I was too embarrassed to ask before!
That getup in the picture does look strangely like bondage gear! I think the leg irons and the belt that keeps the prisoner's hands cuffed at the waist (for lack of a better term!) are both still in use, at least in the U.S. I've seen prisoners on TV being transported in such a manner.
(Message edited by Rapunzel676 on December 03, 2003) |
Mara
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 03, 2003 - 4:39 pm: | |
Lordy...it must have been a challenge to buckle a struggling patient into that harness. I don't quite see the point of the upper body straps or the chains down the legs. The strap around the waist seems like it would be enough, keeping the hands pinned. |
Sarah Long
Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 233
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 04, 2003 - 7:09 am: | |
Mara,
Actually I don't see the point in the upper body straps either. |
J Lee
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 31, 2003 - 1:30 am: | |
Being an American I can relate to the confusion brought on by the certain words and terms when reading about JTR. I had an iteresting experience that has taught me quite a bit of the 'words' as well as the 'slang' through out the years.
A few years back I moved to Malaysia for work related issues and at the time was not overly familiar with the country or its history. Needless to say after a few days I noticed that the locals I had spoke to had quite a few terms that for lack of a better word, sounded 'British' not to mention the slightly noticeable British accent.
Forgive the spelling - 'Lory' for 'Truck', 'Trolly' for 'Shopping Cart', 'Take away' for 'To go', 'Q Up' for 'Line Up' etc. While I was able to figure most of these on my own I must admit I was a little embarrassed when I first arrived and the cab driver told me to put my bags in the 'boot' as I just stared at him not comprehending.
After a few days I finally felt comfortable enough to bring this up to a coworker and local.
'Just out of curiousity, I couldn't help but notice that people here speak with a 'british' accent?' (not to mention that I had almost been run down for not looking the right direction when crossing the street)
'You do know that we were once a British colony correct?'
'Uhhh, oh yeah of course I knew that...'
Chalk one up for my world history class.
I ended up marrying that same coworker 6 years later and although she has lived in the states for quite a few years it still makes me smile when her 'British' comes out - 'My husband and I just moved to a new 'Flat'.' (Apartment for my fellow unknowing Americans) |
Mark Charles
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, January 25, 2004 - 2:58 am: | |
I was a medic in the army (us) for three years.
At one time I was rotated to the mental ward at the base hospital.
Mental patients have an uncanny knack for getting out of reatraints.
The upper body straps keep the belt from being slid down and off like a pair ot pants.
The chains down the leg keep the belt from being sld up and over like a shirt.
Also the ankel cuff can be connected with a shrt piece of chain to hinder mobility ( read as running)
Mark
|
Mike Park
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, February 06, 2004 - 2:46 pm: | |
Wow, what a great thread.
Just to add to the confusion, we Canadians seem to be halfway between the Yanks and the Brits.
We still like the 'colour' of things and always stay with the 'programme' (unless I write code, which is a program). We 'queue-up' or 'line -up' for the theatre/movie (but we all hate 'queue-jumpers') and you can get an excellent cup of 'tea' (hot water, tea and the optional milk and sugar - none of that iced stuff)at any diner, restaurant or coffee shop. And it is quite acceptable for real he-men to drink tea on a regular basis without getting funny looks (unlike me on my last trip to San Francisco and Chicago).
But then, we drive on the right side of the road, our cars have a 'trunk', we use 'elevators', 'call' either our 'friends' or 'mates' but most often our 'buddies'.
Oddly enough, my children use both a 'pram' (big wheels, cover and bed-like main section) and a 'stroller' (fold-up jobbie with tiny wheels, more like a rolling lawn chair for kids), depending on thier age and disposition.
So I guess we cannuks are only half-as-confused ;-)
Now, I'd be interested in hearing the equivilent Yank/Brit words for 'toque' or 'toboggan'....
Mike |
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 363
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 06, 2004 - 3:21 pm: | |
Hi Mike,
We Yanks use the word "toboggan" to refer to a flat sled (or is that "sledge?") that is sort of rolled up in the front. At least this is Chicago vocabulary.
"Toque" is a new one on me.
Andy S.
|
Kris Law
Detective Sergeant
Username: Kris
Post Number: 123
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 06, 2004 - 3:45 pm: | |
Andrew,
Anyone who knows who Bob and Doug McKenzie are would know what a toque is.
It's a winter hat that can be pulled down over the face, or not depending on the type you buy.
I have no idea what else to call it except a toque, I don't know what you call it in the States.
We have "chesterfields" here instead of "sofas", although I know both of us use plain old "couch". What about "davenports"? Is that American?
And do the British still spell Tire with a 'Y'? |
Donald Souden
Detective Sergeant
Username: Supe
Post Number: 134
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 06, 2004 - 4:31 pm: | |
Kris,
Here in my part of the States a toque is still just a women's brimless hat. The knit cap that rolls down over the face is a "Balaclava helmet," which itself must have been borrowed from Britain after the Crimean War. A Balaclava, Cardigan sweaters, Raglan sleeves -- I sometimes think that war was fought by haberdashers.
Don.
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2049
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 06, 2004 - 7:15 pm: | |
Somebody once said that the British system is more economical than the American. In order to get a politician to be corrupt and vote against his principles, you Americans have to give him money. We just palm him off with a crappy knighthood.
Robert |
Mark Andrew Pardoe
Inspector
Username: Picapica
Post Number: 198
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 07, 2004 - 5:55 am: | |
Whatho all,
Yes, British cars do have tyres and when it snows, we go sledging. We sit on sofas or settees; chesterfields or davenports are particular types of settee. Also Chesterfield is a town in Derbyshire and Davenport's was a brewer in Birmingham.
Cheers, Mark (who's off to the City Darts tonight) |
Mike Park
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, February 07, 2004 - 10:06 am: | |
All,
I see the 'toque' thing got everyone going. Yes a toque is a knit hat worn over the ears in winter. It is brimless and is worn by both men and women. A common hairstyle between late Nonember and mid March here is 'toque head' - everyone's hair is unbelievably messy, so we just ignore it.
He,he, sometimes men get their hair cut shorter in winter than in summer just to avoid 'toque head'.
What the Yanks call a 'ski mask' we call a 'balaclava'. No helmet, since you would wear your balaclava under your helmet whe driving your ski-doo (a snowmobile or snowmachine or sled) ;)
And I am writing this while on my 'couch'...I have to go now as I have to use the 'loo' (ok that's not typically Canadian, my grandmother was a war bride from Swansee)...
Mike, eh? |
Vincent
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, February 06, 2004 - 7:29 pm: | |
That's odd. In my part of the States a "toque" (toke) is what you do to a hookah. I don't know if Bob and Doug Mackenzie ever did that but I suspect they did--prodigiously.
And this is a great thread.
Regards, Vincent |
M.Mc.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, February 06, 2004 - 3:54 pm: | |
The so called "English" we learn in America is a cut up and changed langage. It's not true English. For one thing the American spelled world "COLOR" is "COLOUR" in England. Then there are words that men things in America that mean something else or nothing in England. Then if you go to all the states they all have their own slang. I live in Houston, Texas and many people life here from all over. This also would be the off spring of the English in Australia too.  |
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 881
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 07, 2004 - 2:41 pm: | |
Glad this thread has revived:-)
One thing that interests me is how some American versions of words that differ in UK usage actually go back to an older form than UK English. Probably the best known example of this is the American "fall" for UK "autumn". I remember from college that in Chaucer he uses the word "falle".
A few queries for you US casebookers!
1) Some of the contracted spellings I have seen (the one that comes straight to mind is "thru" for "through") - are these only used informally or they acceptable in formal written US english?
2) There is still in the UK a vague notion that there is a "proper" form of English, variously referred to as the Queen's English, BBC English or SRE - Standard received English. Is there an equivalent in the US?
3) I have noticed that the word "guys" now seems to be used irrespective of gender. It seems common even for a group of girls to be addressed familiarly as "you guys". Any idea when this came into use?
Thanks in advance
Chris
|
Andi Ward
Police Constable
Username: Andi
Post Number: 2
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 07, 2004 - 5:40 pm: | |
1) Some of the contracted spellings I have seen (the one that comes straight to mind is "thru" for "through") - are these only used informally or they acceptable in formal written US english?
"thru" is very informal, to my knowledge. I don't see it written in published books and I know I wouldn't put it in anything I write, either in my professional capacity as an admin assistant or as an aspiring writer.
2) There is still in the UK a vague notion that there is a "proper" form of English, variously referred to as the Queen's English, BBC English or SRE - Standard received English. Is there an equivalent in the US?
Well, there's spoken Am. English, business English and written English--is that what you're talking about?
3) I have noticed that the word "guys" now seems to be used irrespective of gender. It seems common even for a group of girls to be addressed familiarly as "you guys". Any idea when this came into use?
When I was a teen in the 70's, "guys" referred to either a group of males or a group with mixed genders. It's only been in the last 10 years or so that I've noticed it being applied to groups, regardless of genders. Maybe someone's been more observant than I have?
|
Donald Souden
Detective Sergeant
Username: Supe
Post Number: 136
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 07, 2004 - 8:44 pm: | |
Chris,
1) No, "thru" is not yet accepted, but sad to say I'm sure it getting closer. There have been inroads already, since some of our super-hughways are called "thruways."
2) No, regional accents are still strong in the States and often a source of pride. Even as homogenizing an influence as national television has not yet created a standard American English. Indeed, those moving from one region to another will often try to pick up that area's accent, often with strange results. Like the New Yorker who moves to the Carolinas and starts saying "youse all" in imitation of "y'all."
3) You are right, and to be honest I never thought about the shift to unisex usage. But, it is happening.
Don.
|
RoseyO'Ryan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, February 08, 2004 - 9:26 am: | |
Hi All,
Having worked for that wonderful British institution the BBC for a period of time, I am appalled to see words like "Britishism" being used on a premier website. Absolutely awful :-)
A small correction. A certain Sir Davenport, of Upper Alderley Edge, near Macclesfield, in Cheshire, requested a suitable writing desk for both his wife and himself, hence the distinct sloped writing-desk called a "Davenport". One other interesting fact about Sir Davenport, a most ruthless judge, his coat of arms is that of a felon with a noose about his neck. Indeed, so proud of this heraldic device was he, he had two
sculptured heads of these poor creatures placed on the gate-posts of his estate.
Footnote: During the 1980's, a certain notorious criminal burgled this said property of a gentleman and made off with his priceless collection of Red Attica pottery. His comment to the local press was short but succinct, "If I get my hands on this thief I will strangle them!"
But, he did'nt.
Rosey :-) |
Mike Park
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, February 07, 2004 - 7:51 pm: | |
Vincent,
Actually 'toque' is pronounced 'two-k', but I'm not disagreeing about Bob and Doug...especially if you've been to British Columbia. Now, to continue typing so as to avoid the 25 word thing....
Mike |
Dan Norder
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, February 07, 2004 - 6:25 pm: | |
Chris,
"Thru" and the like are informal and sloppy, but then unfortunately a lot of people are openly disdainful of taking the time to do things correctly. I've seen "thru" and much worse make it through to corporate business writing, more out of not knowing any better than because there's a movement to allow it. (Though "Ebonics" was pushed as a valid language at one point, so nothing should surprise me any more when it comes to bad English beng acceptable.)
Proper English is a notion that exists but without any official term I can think of, except perhaps as "school English." Those who train to write for certain kinds of purposes may learn AP Style (Associated Press - journalism) or MLA Style (forget offhand what that stands for). Of course even there you can end up with some striking disagreements, such as whether a noun used in place of an official proper noun should also be capitalized or not. I cringe when people write something along the lines of: "The University closed for break." Some places actually teach that as correct, though.
"Guys" seemed to evolve as the gender neutral plural for informal speaking while I was growing up. Occasionally females will object to its usage, but that was more likely a decade or two ago. The only alternatives that come to mind are "y'all" (which is so not something anyone says north of the Mason-Dixon line), "you" as a plural (which is awkward as a group and not specific enough to show plural) and "people" (which just sounds like you are going to chew them out). Guys just sounds better than all of those. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2069
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 09, 2004 - 4:37 am: | |
Hi Dan
Instead of "guys" what's wrong with "folks"? I know that this was once used in the US, because some of the cartoons end with "That's all, folks".
Robert |
Alan Sharp
Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 428
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 09, 2004 - 5:59 am: | |
Donald
"Youse All" is an expression in common use in Ireland. New York has a large Irish community so this could actually be the explanation for this expression rather than an imitation of the local accent. |
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 373
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 12:24 pm: | |
Some abbreviated spellings commonly used in American English include: thru, tho, nite, lite (but interestingly not fite or flite). None of these are formally acceptable.
The trend now is to spell -er words with an -re, as do the British (actually, it looks more French to me). So we often have a "Grand Theatre" or a "Civic Centre" especially when trying to appear chic. Colour or favour or are rarely used in America (we still use color and favor). But I have found that Americans seem to think that the American spelling of the word is "judgement." While this is an acceptable alternate American spelling, the standard American spelling is "judgment" (without the middle e).
"Guys" came into vogue in the 1960's and 1970's. It is still very informal, but can be used in a mixed gender or exclusively female crowd usually without giving offense. If I were to be a little more formal (for example addressing people older than I), I might say "folks." If I were to be absolutely formal I would say "Ladies and Gentlemen" (or just "Ladies" or "Gentlemen" as the case may be). On the floor of Congress the silly-sounding "Gentlewoman" is used -- as in "The Gentlewoman from Missouri" in referring to a Missouri Congresswoman. Sometimes Congress even uses the term "Gentlelady."
Regional accents are still in place, though considerably weaker since the proliferation of TV. Nevertheless, I can usually identify a fellow native of Chicago by ear. True regional dialects dying out faster.
The British collective plural has always been fascinating to me. To say "The United States are involved in the fight against Terror" sounds peculiarly strange to us. We would always say "The United States is..."
BTW -- in Midwest American English, a davenport is a sort of sofa or couch.
The closest thing we Americans have to an official spoken dialect is what I call "network" English. This is what you hear Dan Rather and Peter Jennings speak on the evening news. Interestingly, Rather had to lose his Texas drawl and Jennings his Canadian "aboot"'s in order to succeed at this level.
Andy S.
(Message edited by aspallek on February 12, 2004) |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
