Language desk
< September 28	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 30 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

September 29

Of gaols, jails and prisons

50 to 60 years ago in Australia, as I was learning many of the technicalities of English, convicted criminals were sent to gaol. Sometimes the word prison was used to mean the same thing. I knew that gaols were jails in America. Sadly, the far more interestingly spelt gaol has now been almost universally replaced by jail in Australia, but prison is still a synonym. I get the impression, however, that jail and prison are different things in the USA, but I haven't been able to properly pin it down from context. Is this the case, and where did the two very distinct spellings of gaol and jail come from? HiLo48 (talk) 01:20, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are held in jail, then sent to prison. The spelling gaol is a Norman French one, the j spelling is from the standard pronunciation. As always, see etymology online: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=gaol. μηδείς (talk) 01:42, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the US, I believe they generally use a different term depending on the level of government: city/county jail or state/federal prison/penitentiary. StuRat (talk) 01:45, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, I had forgotten about penitentiary. It's clearly American, because my Australian spell checker has no idea what it is. Thank you. HiLo48 (talk) 02:06, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised you don't know any felons, Stu. A jail is literally a cage where you are held before conviction; prisons are only for imprisonment to serve time afterward. A penitentiary, where one does penance, is a politically correctly named prison, not a jail. Again, see etymology online. μηδείς (talk) 01:49, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jails are used post-conviction as well. Usually for misdemeanors. The clearer demarcation is probably that jails are run by cities or counties; prisons, by states or the federal government. I don't know where remanded federal defendants are held pending trial; maybe the feds have an arrangement with the counties to use the county jail. (I have never heard of a "federal jail"). --Trovatore (talk) 02:59, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did find this document from uscourts.gov. It states, in part "At an initial appearance, a judge advises the defendant of the charges filed, considers whether the defendant should be held in jail until trial" and later "A sentence may include time in prison," which matches the usage of "jail" being before-trial incarceration and "prison" in after-trial incarceration. I agree with you that jails are often used for short-term incarcerations of people convicted of misdemeanors; though that is likely as an expediency; given the difference in security between the two types of facilities, it makes sense. It would sound like a very odd usage in the U.S. for someone to say "I was arrested and spent the night in prison before posting bail". The word used there is almost invariably "jail". --Jayron32 03:08, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's expediency. The idea is that misdemeanors, even when they attract a custodial sentence, are usually not considered bad enough to put the person in prison. --Trovatore (talk) 03:10, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Here we go. Regarding Trovatore's question about "Where remanded federal defendants are held prior to trial", see this page. It only covers the state of Georgia, but it notes that defendents in Federal trials are under the custody of the United States Marshals Service and are placed in detention in several Georgia facilities. It lists several facilities that are used, all of which look to be either local jails (some are called "pre-trial detention facilities) or the local U.S. Penitentiary (Prison). So, it looks from that small sample size that the Feds don't have a system of pre-trial detention facilities (jails) of their own; they'll either use the local system where the trial is to be held, or the nearest Federal Prison. (post EC response) I didn't mean exactly expediency, but what you said: minor offenses don't demand the rigamorole that a prison does, so they just use the jail system. But they are distinct systems with distinct primary purposes. --Jayron32 03:22, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still working off that last link, United States Penitentiary, Atlanta notes that they have a seperate pre-trial detention facility, implying that pretrial defendents are not held in "general population" with convicted criminals, again noting the preservation of distinct "jail" and "prison" systems with different purposes and facilities, even if they occupy parts of the same "campus". --Jayron32 03:27, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than "A jail is literally a cage where you are held before conviction", I'm assuming that it should read "A jail is literally a cage where you are held before trial." There's a subtle difference ;-) HiLo48 (talk) 02:06, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And in many US counties, prisoners serving time for misdemeanors often serve it in the county jail, rather than in state prison. Indeed, in this era of various levels of government trying to economize by screwing the next level down, many states have tried to get counties to house longer term prisoners. -- Elphion (talk) 02:12, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I'm fairly certain Medeis is mostly correct here in the U.S. usage. I have a close family member in "the industry" (well, I sleep next to her that is). Jail is where you go when you are arrested and where they hold you when you are on trial. Prison is where you go to be punished. That thing in the back of Andy Taylor's office where Otis used to sleep off his hangover? That was a jail. That place where that Andy Dufresne crawled through half a mile of the most foul smelling shit was a prison. Now, sometimes because of overcrowding, one can be pressed into service for the other purpose: convicts can be kept in Jails waiting for a spot in a prison to open up, and when the local jail is full, they will send a recently arrested person to a prison if they don't have the space. But generally, they are different sorts of detention facilities for different purposes. Prison#United_States also notes that jails may be used to house prisoners on shorter-term sentences, usually less than 1 year. BTW, I checked the etymonline link that Medies provided. Seriously, I'm still rofling. It's usually a pretty straight-laced resource. But that shit was funny. --Jayron32 02:13, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The formal name for many of what we sloppily call "prisons" is "correctional facilities". But those inside are still imprisoned; just as people in jails and gaols are imprisoned. None of them are emcorrectionalfacilitied. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 02:24, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The brain is a funny thing, liguistically speaking. When JackofOz used the em- prefix humorously there, meaning "to be put inside of" I'm reminded of my singularly favorite use of the prefix in French, for the verb "enculer". If one doesn't know what that means, find the definition of the word "cul" in French first, and all will become clear. I don't know why I had to share, but whenever someone uses the em- or en- or im- prefix in that way, I always have that little chuckle from the French word. I have no idea why. I guess my brain is broken. Well, that and the fact that I felt the need to share all of this means my brain is broken... --Jayron32 02:51, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're brain might be a bad thing, but my mind's such a sweet thing. --Trovatore (talk) 02:52, 29 September 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Your shore about that, Trov? :) -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 03:31, 29 September 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Don't forget the calaboose and the hoosegow for other American names. Rmhermen (talk) 03:31, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While a prison tends to refer to something larger and more elaborate than a jail, it's not as cut and dried as others seem to imply. For example, a Washington Post headline reads "Madoff Sentenced To Maximum 150 Years In Jail". The Week has "Did Bernie Madoff ... show remorse when he turned up in jail to serve a 150-year term for swindling his victims of $65 billion?" (plus jail in the headline). Clarityfiend (talk) 10:56, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but Headlinese is a distinct variety of English, and has both vocabulary and syntax of its own. (Actually I'm pretty sure that US Headlinese and British Headlinese are different). --ColinFine (talk) 12:58, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In England, there used to be a similar distinction between gaol and prison; each county had a County Gaol for cases that had been heard at the County Assizes. However, those tried in the higher London courts went to prison, like Newgate Prison. I suspect that the US system was originally a transplant of ours. That system was done away with some time ago - the famous Reading Gaol, which was the County Gaol for Berkshire, is now HM Prison Reading. Alansplodge (talk) 14:12, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And I found this about the prevalence of jail over gaol in the non-American Anglosphere. Alansplodge (talk)

Of course you're going to run into all sorts of sloppy, colloquial, and informal usage with these terms. That's no different from colloquial use of terms for things like watercraft, firearms, and so forth, where people will get upset when you say boat instead of ship or gun instead of rifle. There are two relevant things here, that the question "what's the difference between a prison and a jail" is one that has an answer, and, as Jayron brought to my attention, the spelling issue. μηδείς (talk) 18:21, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And I don't even like football... Alansplodge (talk) 22:17, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you try soccer? Maybe you'll like that better. --Trovatore (talk) 04:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Are there unexpected soft consonants in English?

Are there any English words besides "gaol" and "margarine" where "ga" is pronounced like "ja"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:04, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That question was canvassed at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2008 March 11# Margarine, Margaret and soft/hard g. You may also want to check out:

Facade, like garcon is supposed to be spellt with a cedilla, we just don't bother anymores. μηδείς (talk) 21:07, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure of the relevance of that to this thread, but I quote myself from 28 Sep 2010: It's not a question of dropping it. The word has been absorbed into English, in which process the diacritic was kissed goodbye, so it's no longer there to be either used or dropped. Those who spell it with the cedilla are in fact using a French word, not an English word, and should italicise it. But why use a French word in an English text when a perfectly good English word (spelt almost identically except for the foreign diacritic) is available? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:16, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of old publishers who did print these words with cedillas. (Notice I pronounce that suhDEEyuhz, but don't italicize it.) And the cedillas simply represent a subscript z, if anyone cares. (Garczon, anyone?) I am not sure how the diacritic makes these words "not English" any more that naive, cooperate, or reengineeer with a diaresis would be not English. We just don't bother anymore. Anglophones wisely don't have an Academie Anglaise. μηδείς (talk) 21:32, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Publishers used to use professional typesetters to create the text they published. Such people had virtually any characters they liked available for inclusion in published books, including ç. These days, anyone with a keyboard can create text for publication, and those keyboards don't include ç, and most people have no idea where to find it. So we lose it. As a mathematician I deplore the loss of rigour caused by the similar absence of the therefore symbol ( ∴ )from the standard keyboard. HiLo48 (talk) 21:47, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, exalctly. But you aren't saying that old keyboards had the therefor symbol, are you? μηδείς (talk) 22:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No. Never seen ∴ on a keyboard. The old typesetters would have had it available though. HiLo48 (talk) 22:18, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) I haven't seen it much since high school. What is the loss of rigor you attribute to the symbol's non-use? It's certainly available in LaTeX, so mathematics papers could easily use it if the authors thought it was useful. --Trovatore (talk) 23:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why are we even discussing this here? It's not relevant to HiLo's original question or Bugs' sub-question. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 23:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a subhead, Jack. If you want we can start a new thread. μηδείς (talk) 05:13, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you've repeated it, so it doesn't seem to be a typo. You do know that therefor and therefore are different words that mean different things? (Though to be fair, wikt:therefor gives "therefore" as an obsolete sense of the word.) --Trovatore (talk) 05:43, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Beware of Greeks bearing eggs at sunrise?

...or at least, beware of Greek-speakers engaging in what Google Translate renders as 'βανδαλισμό'. I earlier reverted [1] an edit to our Golden Dawn (Greece) article which had mischievously renamed this dubious bunch of neo-you-know-whos, officially known as Χρυσή Αυγή, to Χρυσά Αυγά, complete with translation: 'Golden Eggs'. Apart from the obvious question as to whether I (to whom Greek is well, 'all Greek') should be relying on Google translate to accuse someone of 'βανδαλισμό' (vandalism), there is also the deeper question as to whether there is anything etymologically-speaking that relates 'Αυγά' (eggs) to 'Αυγή' (dawn)? They are both in their way a new beginning, but is there more to it? Or is this just a happy coincidence? AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:16, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's coincidental; "αυγό" 'egg' comes from Ancient Greek "ὠόν" (via contraction and reanalysis with a preceding article: "τα ωά" > "ταουά" > "τ'αυγά"). "Αυγή" is ancient in this form. Apart from that, yes, "βανδαλισμό(ς)" is the correct translation of "vandalism"; the form with the -ς is the nominative; without it it's accusative. Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:40, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And with the sunrise, comes the answer ;-) Thanks. AndyTheGrump (talk)

But "επανέλθει βανδαλισμό" [2] is rather, well, Googlelese. "επανέλθει" would be the non-finite part of a perfect construction meaning "has returned", or a part of a subjunctive construction meaning "(that it may) return". Google tends to offer that grammatical form as the equivalent of a standalone English perfect participle, although it's never used in that standalone way in Greek. So, close but no golden egg for you ;-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:57, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is apparently a well-established joke at the Golden Dawn's expense. Now I'm all for mocking fascists, but yes - definitely vandalism. AlexTiefling (talk) 12:52, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cocoa/cacao

Is the swap of vowels in cocoa/cacao accidental, or is there more to it? bamse (talk) 08:08, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the origin of cocoa is "corruption (by influence of coco) of cacao. The printing of Johnson's dictionary ran together the entries for coco and cocoa, fostering a confusion that never has been undone." Gabbe (talk) 11:29, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Help to improve the phrase

I have added the following sentences, briefing the history section, in the lead of the article "Kerala".

"The Chera Dynasty was the earliest to establish a powerful kingdom in the region, though it faced the conquests of Cholas and Pandyas many a time. Kerala became an international spice trading location during the Chera rule. The lucrative spice trade further attracted the Portuguese traders to Kerala in the 15th century and later it paved the way for the European colonization of entire India."

Please help to improve its phrasing. TIA AshLey ^Msg 10:25, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How about this: "The Chera Dynasty was the first powerful kingdom based in Kerala, though it frequently struggled against attacks by the neighboring Cholas and Pandyas. During the Chera period Kerala became an international spice trading center. Later, in the 15th century, the lucrative spice trade attracted Portuguese traders to Kerala, and eventually paved the way for the European colonization of India.". I'm not sure the first sentence is right -- the meaning of the original is unclear, so I had to make some guesses. Looie496 (talk) 16:18, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, no issues related to your guesses too. Thanks a lot, Looie. user:Ehrenkater has already modified the text in Kerala in line with your kind suggestion. With regards AshLey ^Msg 07:22, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

It is hardly for me to pronounce upon qualities I may or may not possess.

The following is one of the passages in The Remains of the Day by Kazuo Ishiguro. Does the word "hardly" mean "difficult" or "scarcely"? Thanks in advance.118.5.231.89 (talk) 13:27, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    A silence fell around the table and I could sense all the faces turn to me.
  I gave a small cough and said:
    'It is hardly for me to pronounce upon qualities I may or may not possess. 
  However, as far as this particular question is concerned, one would suspect 
  that the quality being referred to might be most usefully termed "dignity".'

"Scarcely" would fit. "Hardly" (as an adverb) can't normally mean "difficult"; only the adjective "hard" can. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:45, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To me, as a reader, it clearly means "scarcely" in this usage. A somewhat awkward translation, perhaps. Looie496 (talk) 16:04, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the awkwardness. He doesn't mean "It's difficult", he means "It's not my place". It's an example of understatement, of sorts. NB: Kazuo Ishiguro isn't translated into English - he writes in English.[3] - Ka renjc 17:23, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, there's nothing awkward about it at all. I'n fact quite the contrary, it is highly literate sophisticated English. It is exactly kind of thing one would expect to hear from a character in The Remains of the Day - the dialect of Eton and Oxbridge of that era. Roger (talk) 18:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As an American, when I read it, the word "hardly" seems to be a shortened form of "hardly appropriate". Otherwise, it would just say "hard" or "difficult", at least in US English. StuRat (talk) 20:31, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. It's just typical British English self-deprecation and circumlocution: a politer way of saying "It's certainly not for me to pronounce ..." See here. - Ka renjc 21:13, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's an intensifier of "not for me", meaning, as you said, "not my place". There are many examples of "not for me" around: here are just two - [4], [5].

Imagine a wedding reception where 3 lady friends of the groom's mother turn up, to the surprise of the bride and groom, who'd never met these women and only vaguely even knew of their existence. The groom corners his mother: "What are those people doing here? They weren't invited and we haven't catered for any extras". The mother says, "I invited them. They're my regular bridge partners and there was no way they were going to miss out on your wedding". The groom ejaculates, "Mum, it was hardly for you to invite them without at least checking with me first. But inviting them and not telling us about it, and letting us get a rude surprise on our wedding day - what were you thinking!!?? You've ruined everything, you stupid cow!!! I've always hated you!!!" And he pulls out a dagger (he'd obviously be carrying one to his wedding) and stabs her 17 times through the heart. That's a realistic example of how "hardly for you/me" is used. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:43, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And how did that make you feel, Jack? μηδείς (talk) 22:03, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to repeat Unlicensed Armchair Counsellor school. One is not "made to feel" anything. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:35, 29 September 2012 (UTC) [reply]

That's alright Jack. At least you are not using this ref desk as a venue to admit you sleep with your close family members. μηδείς (talk) 22:41, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Neither did Leopold Bloom. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:49, 29 September 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Which evidences what I always suspected: people that use a glut of exclamation marks are mentally unstable. Ankh.Morpork 23:03, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Hardly" as a synonym for "scarcely" or "just barely" seems like an oddity of English. Anyway, here's what EO has to say about it:[6] Then there's this well-known example... "Cowardly Lion: Come on, get up and fight, you shivering junkyard! And put your hands up, you lopsided bag of hay! Scarecrow: Now that's getting personal, Lion. Tin Woodsman: Yes. Get up and teach him a lesson. Scarecrow: Well, what's wrong with you teaching him? Tin Woodsman: Well, I hardly know him." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:00, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And - D'oh! - the most obvious one: "Hardly a man is now alive..." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:06, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For those of us who are not American, it's from the opening stanza of Paul Revere's Ride (I had to Google it). It's hardly ever quoted on this side of the pond - I can't think why not. Alansplodge (talk) 17:30, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They might still be a tad annoyed with us. However, they're getting their revenge: They're slowly buying us back. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:32, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doasyouwouldbedoneby old chap... [7], [8] [9] [10] Alansplodge (talk) 01:35, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A technical term for finding words inside other words?

Is there a term for when people find words inside other words (e.g., making "money" from "monkey" or "Monday" or making "hurdle" from "poodle") or phrases (e.g., "gale" from "ginger ale")?174.131.36.91 (talk) 20:04, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kangaroo word is one particular type of this, but the letters need to be in order and the shorter word needs to be more or less synonymous with the longer word (e.g., "see" from "observe"). Monkey/money fails the second criterion.

Re your examples: I can see how you get "money" from "monkey", but "Monday" doesn't have an e, so I'm not sure how you can get "money" from it. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:08, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He's alluding to the Jerry Maguire line "Show me the monay". μηδείς (talk) 21:15, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]