See my response to @Enoch (which was in the same post as my comment about adjusting the spelling to which you responded, and which I hope I’ve linked to here).
Gee D is older than I, for my part I would go for "jail" as the spelling without hesitation.
I'm not sure what happens officially. I looked at the couple of jails/prisons most familiar to me, and it seems that NSW calls all of theirs "correctional centres" and the local ACT one is just a "centre".
Gee D is older than I, for my part I would go for "jail" as the spelling without hesitation.
I'm not sure what happens officially. I looked at the couple of jails/prisons most familiar to me, and it seems that NSW calls all of theirs "correctional centres" and the local ACT one is just a "centre".
If "prison" and "jail" are not the same thing, then surely you wouldn't have a prison warden at a jail?
No, we wouldn’t. I was simply adjusting the spelling of Gee D’s sentence.
Adjusting to US usage, that is!
No county or other local authority gaols here, and I can't think there are any federal ones either - perhaps very short-term sentences for those in the armed forces would be the closest. I assume some agreement between the federal and state governments gives funding to states to hold those charged and/or convicted of federal offences.
Part of a major NSW gaol is strictly called a penitentiary, but that term is rarely used in ordinary speech or writing.
There is a military detention centre at Holsworthy in NSW - one of my sons spent a few days there for a disciplinary infraction.
Gee D is older than I, for my part I would go for "jail" as the spelling without hesitation.
I'm not sure what happens officially. I looked at the couple of jails/prisons most familiar to me, and it seems that NSW calls all of theirs "correctional centres" and the local ACT one is just a "centre".
Newspapers etc. seem quite happy with "jail".
What would you use when drafting?
It's never come up, and not likely to in federal law. I'll write about 'imprisonment' but I can't think of a situation where I'd need to mention where a person gets imprisoned.
I suppose I can have a quick look around the database if I remember... given I'm having the next week and a half off... and what with Canberra just making masks compulsory for the very first time since the pandemic began, who the hell knows what's happening when I "return" to work...
It's never come up, and not likely to in federal law. I'll write about 'imprisonment' but I can't think of a situation where I'd need to mention where a person gets imprisoned.
Sensible, but not so long ago there was a distinction between penal servitude and imprisonment. It's more than time that such distinctions disappeared.
It's never come up, and not likely to in federal law. I'll write about 'imprisonment' but I can't think of a situation where I'd need to mention where a person gets imprisoned.
Sensible, but not so long ago there was a distinction between penal servitude and imprisonment. It's more than time that such distinctions disappeared.
"Penal servitude" definitely sounds like the kind of phrase that would have been cleaned up on the grounds it was old-fashioned, possibly long before my career ever started.
To me, it smacks of being chained to the wall, hands above your head to add to the misery - will that show up in a re-write of the penal provisions of the taxation laws?
"gaol" is perhaps the most unlovely word in the British lexicon. I know we Americans have some doozies of our own. But Webster for all his faults never did a kinder thing than inventing the spelling "jail".
It's never come up, and not likely to in federal law. I'll write about 'imprisonment' but I can't think of a situation where I'd need to mention where a person gets imprisoned.
Sensible, but not so long ago there was a distinction between penal servitude and imprisonment. It's more than time that such distinctions disappeared.
"Penal servitude" definitely sounds like the kind of phrase that would have been cleaned up on the grounds it was old-fashioned, possibly long before my career ever started.
To me, it smacks of being chained to the wall, hands above your head to add to the misery - will that show up in a re-write of the penal provisions of the taxation laws?
I was today years old when I first came across the barbarism "jailor".
I only know it as an American spelling from Countdown, a Channel 4 TV numbers and words game, because I saw someone have it disallowed. (Yes, I was playing along.)
I think you can take it that Orfeo and I know the strict meaning of the term.
I didn't. It sounds like a very antiquated concept.
I'm surprised at that. No idea when it dropped from the NSW Crimes Act - or those in other States - but it was there when I did criminal law. Just counted that as 55 years!
Oh well, if it was a thing 55 years ago, I can't imagine why it wasn't a thing by the time I got around to studying. Of course, I had to get born first...
I was today years old when I first came across the barbarism "jailor".
I only know it as an American spelling from Countdown, a Channel 4 TV numbers and words game, because I saw someone have it disallowed. (Yes, I was playing along.)
I looked it up on Google ngrams (highly recommended time sink). Apparently it was the preferred spelling until about 1820 when "jailer" crossed over. The "o" spelling flatlined since then while the "e" spelling has increased.
Yes, having been bombarded by "surname arms" by various spam accounts they don't have any relationship to the actual arms that apply to the line I'm descended from. I'm female, no right to bear arms, ever, but I do know what the arms of my paternal grandfather's family look like.
Are you sure? To me it seems like while as a female you could not pass the arms to your offspring, would it be possible to bear a lozenge with the pattern but no crest if your dad had inherited the arms?
If she, her father or grandfather wasn't born within wedlock, that would nullify any right to use the paternal grandfather's family arms.
If she is married then she wouldn't be allowed to use those arms (unless she is the eldest daughter and there are no brothers, and even then it's complicated).
Assuming it's English arms.
For the three people who care: in Canada armorial bearings can be used by the grantee's descendents, male, female, or non-binary. The distinction between legitimate and illegitimate not existing in Canada, there is no requirement to be the former to inherit. Most grants, available on the Heraldry Bureau of Canada site, should you really be an insomniac, will normally include differenced arms (often of the bordure or change of tincture type) for the the children of the grantee, and mentioning that the eldest child will in due course inherit the arms. Presumably as grandchildren appear, they will get differencing by grant or amendment to the grant, or maybe (as this is all rather recent) just get the standard Canadian differencing marks.
A comment on another thread about 'supper' in Scotland meaning 'with chips' (in a takeaway) made me realise this wasn't a common usage down south (England).
If we go to a fast food restaurant and order a burger we will be asked if we want it as a 'meal' which is code for a deal including fries and a soft drink. I have a feeling that in the USA there is a different word used for this, not meal (nor supper!)...but I can't recall it. Can anyone enlighten?
A comment on another thread about 'supper' in Scotland meaning 'with chips' (in a takeaway) made me realise this wasn't a common usage down south (England).
If we go to a fast food restaurant and order a burger we will be asked if we want it as a 'meal' which is code for a deal including fries and a soft drink. I have a feeling that in the USA there is a different word used for this, not meal (nor supper!)...but I can't recall it. Can anyone enlighten?
In my part of the US (the South), “with fries and a drink” would either be called a “meal” or a “combo,” depending on the fast food restaurant. But either would be understood, regardless of what the menu board says.
A comment on another thread about 'supper' in Scotland meaning 'with chips' (in a takeaway) made me realise this wasn't a common usage down south (England).
If we go to a fast food restaurant and order a burger we will be asked if we want it as a 'meal' which is code for a deal including fries and a soft drink. I have a feeling that in the USA there is a different word used for this, not meal (nor supper!)...but I can't recall it. Can anyone enlighten?
In my part of the US (the South), “with fries and a drink” would either be called a “meal” or a “combo,” depending on the fast food restaurant. But either would be understood, regardless of what the menu board says.
In one restaurant in this town adding fries and a drink makes it a "basket".
In my part of the US (the South), “with fries and a drink” would either be called a “meal” or a “combo,” depending on the fast food restaurant. But either would be understood, regardless of what the menu board says.
And "meal" (or "combo") could also mean "with chips (crisps) and drink" if you were in a sandwich shop or similar.
The general concept (turn this main-protein into a full meal by adding a starch and a drink) is pretty widespread; the details might differ a bit.
A comment on another thread about 'supper' in Scotland meaning 'with chips' (in a takeaway) made me realise this wasn't a common usage down south (England).
If we go to a fast food restaurant and order a burger we will be asked if we want it as a 'meal' which is code for a deal including fries and a soft drink. I have a feeling that in the USA there is a different word used for this, not meal (nor supper!)...but I can't recall it. Can anyone enlighten?
In my part of the US (the South), “with fries and a drink” would either be called a “meal” or a “combo,” depending on the fast food restaurant. But either would be understood, regardless of what the menu board says.
Combo would work here. As would meal I think, or meal deal.
It's either a meal or a combo at most fast-food restaurants here in Canada, as well. And the default is to add chips although there's often the option to swap out the chips for some other side, like a small salad.
It's either a meal or a combo at most fast-food restaurants here in Canada, as well. And the default is to add chips although there's often the option to swap out the chips for some other side, like a small salad.
So would that be chips as in British chips/US fries, or chips as in British crisps/US chips? Context (fast food restaurant) suggests the former but I (maybe wrongly) thought Canada used US terms for this.
It's either a meal or a combo at most fast-food restaurants here in Canada, as well. And the default is to add chips although there's often the option to swap out the chips for some other side, like a small salad.
Pubs here (Toronto) will often let you do a "half and half", it being half salad, half chips. Separated on the plate, I emphasise.
I've never understood that though. Salad isn't a replacement for chips; if the portion size is such that chips are warranted (and they normally are with a burger, for example), you're going to be bloody hungry if you have a salad instead. That's the point of chips; they fill you up. Salads don't.
It's either a meal or a combo at most fast-food restaurants here in Canada, as well. And the default is to add chips although there's often the option to swap out the chips for some other side, like a small salad.
Pubs here (Toronto) will often let you do a "half and half", it being half salad, half chips. Separated on the plate, I emphasise.
In Cardiff and south Wales, "half and half" (pronounced 'arf an arf') is half rice, half chips (fries) with a curry or similar. Described by our late First Minister as 'Cardiff's contribution to the culinary world'...
I've never understood that though. Salad isn't a replacement for chips; if the portion size is such that chips are warranted (and they normally are with a burger, for example), you're going to be bloody hungry if you have a salad instead. That's the point of chips; they fill you up. Salads don't.
My wife will almost always choose the salad over fries/chips, as would my daughter. It’s a combination of not wanting deep-fried, very salty food and not wanting to fill up on the side dish. Neither wife nor daughter is going to order a burger very often, but when they do, they want to balance it with something healthier than fries/chips.
I'll usually choose the salad too, certainly with a burger in a bun, because I've already got carbohydrate with the bun, so I don't need more starch with added fat. At home, I might skip the bun and make oven chips (and substitute in a bean burger), and eat salad too. And no, I don't use the fast food burger joints, not since I stopped working with teenagers as a tutor and buying them lunch in their preferred places. All I bought then was a black coffee for me.
I love the idea of having half salad half chips; I never finish my chips/fries.
Re: the use of ‘supper’ earlier for chips/fries, I am familiar with the phrase fish supper and am now wondering if it was because my parents were northerners (Lancastrian). Obviously I also knew what ‘pudding’ meant in that thread’s conversation. Despite being a southerner I still use northern phrases and eat tea in the evening.
When I was young, what you hauled away from the chip shop or the off-licence was a 'carry-out' , but when I crossed the Atlantic it became a 'take-away'. Or is this just my scrambled memory confounding me again?
Comments
Even earlier, you referred to a difference between prison and jail - not known here and I'd appreciate your setting out that difference.
I'm not sure what happens officially. I looked at the couple of jails/prisons most familiar to me, and it seems that NSW calls all of theirs "correctional centres" and the local ACT one is just a "centre".
Newspapers etc. seem quite happy with "jail".
What would you use when drafting?
There is a military detention centre at Holsworthy in NSW - one of my sons spent a few days there for a disciplinary infraction.
Naughty boy! Is it for short sentence use only?
It's never come up, and not likely to in federal law. I'll write about 'imprisonment' but I can't think of a situation where I'd need to mention where a person gets imprisoned.
I suppose I can have a quick look around the database if I remember... given I'm having the next week and a half off... and what with Canberra just making masks compulsory for the very first time since the pandemic began, who the hell knows what's happening when I "return" to work...
One can only hope so. The military prison @ Holsworthy is a horrible place
Sensible, but not so long ago there was a distinction between penal servitude and imprisonment. It's more than time that such distinctions disappeared.
"Penal servitude" definitely sounds like the kind of phrase that would have been cleaned up on the grounds it was old-fashioned, possibly long before my career ever started.
Not sure why it is a barbarism, apart from the fact that it should be gaoler.
"Jailer" would be just fine.
Per Collins @ https://www.collinsdictionary.com/amp/english/penal-servitude (and also Oxford)
while I assume without going to look that for imprisonment it's the deprivation of liberty that is the punishment.
I didn't. It sounds like a very antiquated concept.
I'm surprised at that. No idea when it dropped from the NSW Crimes Act - or those in other States - but it was there when I did criminal law. Just counted that as 55 years!
I looked it up on Google ngrams (highly recommended time sink). Apparently it was the preferred spelling until about 1820 when "jailer" crossed over. The "o" spelling flatlined since then while the "e" spelling has increased.
A couple of days ago you were applauding its removal.
For the three people who care: in Canada armorial bearings can be used by the grantee's descendents, male, female, or non-binary. The distinction between legitimate and illegitimate not existing in Canada, there is no requirement to be the former to inherit. Most grants, available on the Heraldry Bureau of Canada site, should you really be an insomniac, will normally include differenced arms (often of the bordure or change of tincture type) for the the children of the grantee, and mentioning that the eldest child will in due course inherit the arms. Presumably as grandchildren appear, they will get differencing by grant or amendment to the grant, or maybe (as this is all rather recent) just get the standard Canadian differencing marks.
If we go to a fast food restaurant and order a burger we will be asked if we want it as a 'meal' which is code for a deal including fries and a soft drink. I have a feeling that in the USA there is a different word used for this, not meal (nor supper!)...but I can't recall it. Can anyone enlighten?
In one restaurant in this town adding fries and a drink makes it a "basket".
And "meal" (or "combo") could also mean "with chips (crisps) and drink" if you were in a sandwich shop or similar.
The general concept (turn this main-protein into a full meal by adding a starch and a drink) is pretty widespread; the details might differ a bit.
So would that be chips as in British chips/US fries, or chips as in British crisps/US chips? Context (fast food restaurant) suggests the former but I (maybe wrongly) thought Canada used US terms for this.
Pubs here (Toronto) will often let you do a "half and half", it being half salad, half chips. Separated on the plate, I emphasise.
In Cardiff and south Wales, "half and half" (pronounced 'arf an arf') is half rice, half chips (fries) with a curry or similar. Described by our late First Minister as 'Cardiff's contribution to the culinary world'...
Re: the use of ‘supper’ earlier for chips/fries, I am familiar with the phrase fish supper and am now wondering if it was because my parents were northerners (Lancastrian). Obviously I also knew what ‘pudding’ meant in that thread’s conversation. Despite being a southerner I still use northern phrases and eat tea in the evening.
In batter? Tell me they're in batter - if it's crispy enough, I'm moving there.