Sheath or Sheaf?
- Thread starter Jedadiah
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
I believe a sheaf is what one puts over ones' John Thomas (unless you are a catholic!), or depending on the levels of alchohol consumed, over ones' head!
Hey Spam, i think even that is called a prophylactic 'Sheath'. Do you remember the 'Geronimo' advert in the late '80's when safe sex was fashionable? Where better to house your personal 'weapon' or 'tool'! It is protective, made to measure (well, the extra large one's are
) the only difference being, when you are using a knife, you take it OUT of the sheath!
) the only difference being, when you are using a knife, you take it OUT of the sheath!sheaf or sheath...do you also snear at blind or deaf people perhaps?
Th-fronting is in most cases a speech "defect". The speaker has no more conscious choice in the matter than does somebody with a lisp or stutter. If fact he may be worse off in so far as he almost certainly wont hear any appreciable difference in the sounds "f" and "th", a bit like the way Japanese struggle with the "l/r" sound.
I am a th-fronter myself, when somebody says to me its "th" not "f", I hear exactly the same sound, which is rather frustrating. I will have you know that its no easy task trying to reverse years of instinctive speech patterns by consciously forming a sound you can't hear using the correct positioning of tongue and teeth (you have to think ahead of what you are going to say, spot the "th"s coming up and then make good the pronunciation- you end up sounding quite crazy with a ridiculously overstressed "th", which probably sounds worse than the estuary "f" of which you complain. I imagine its rather the same experience a deaf person has trying to learn to speak, only the deaf person doesn't have to re-programme years of ingrained speech pattern. Interestingly this is not just a problem for native speakers, the th sound is I gather one of the hardest aspects of pronunciation for many non-native speakers because the sound is often completely absent from Latin based languages (you will not find it for example in French).
The cure is surely to catch it early before the habit is formed. I suspect that the crux of the problem is that English is missing its 27th and 28th letters (voiced and unvoiced th), in Ye Olde English (like Icelandic still) one's child would learn to pronounce the "th" sound like all the other letters of the alphabet, so from day one he or she would be conscious of the difference and able to form the correct speech pattern. Its just a pity the continental Europeans who built our early printing presses did not see the need to include the now missing "th" letters in the printers' type set. There is surely a strong case to re-introduce our missing letters, think of how much time could be saved by substituting one letter for two when writing or typing, with the added bonus that estuary "th-fronting" would be gone within a generation. I am sure you already know where the "Y" came from in Ye Olde?
Th-fronting is in most cases a speech "defect". The speaker has no more conscious choice in the matter than does somebody with a lisp or stutter. If fact he may be worse off in so far as he almost certainly wont hear any appreciable difference in the sounds "f" and "th", a bit like the way Japanese struggle with the "l/r" sound.
I am a th-fronter myself, when somebody says to me its "th" not "f", I hear exactly the same sound, which is rather frustrating. I will have you know that its no easy task trying to reverse years of instinctive speech patterns by consciously forming a sound you can't hear using the correct positioning of tongue and teeth (you have to think ahead of what you are going to say, spot the "th"s coming up and then make good the pronunciation- you end up sounding quite crazy with a ridiculously overstressed "th", which probably sounds worse than the estuary "f" of which you complain. I imagine its rather the same experience a deaf person has trying to learn to speak, only the deaf person doesn't have to re-programme years of ingrained speech pattern. Interestingly this is not just a problem for native speakers, the th sound is I gather one of the hardest aspects of pronunciation for many non-native speakers because the sound is often completely absent from Latin based languages (you will not find it for example in French).
The cure is surely to catch it early before the habit is formed. I suspect that the crux of the problem is that English is missing its 27th and 28th letters (voiced and unvoiced th), in Ye Olde English (like Icelandic still) one's child would learn to pronounce the "th" sound like all the other letters of the alphabet, so from day one he or she would be conscious of the difference and able to form the correct speech pattern. Its just a pity the continental Europeans who built our early printing presses did not see the need to include the now missing "th" letters in the printers' type set. There is surely a strong case to re-introduce our missing letters, think of how much time could be saved by substituting one letter for two when writing or typing, with the added bonus that estuary "th-fronting" would be gone within a generation. I am sure you already know where the "Y" came from in Ye Olde?
Good point. The topic did get a wee bit tangential though, originally I think it was a
complaint about spelling. Well not spelling per se as both words are correct ones
but mean different things.
Anyway, I see it is your first post - welcome
complaint about spelling. Well not spelling per se as both words are correct ones
but mean different things.
Anyway, I see it is your first post - welcome
In some cases it's a speach defect, in most cases it's a dialectical, learned pattern of speach - especially in sarf-east London.
Either way, it's of little relevance to written English. Even if you are from sarf-east London, I'm sure you dont fink it's spelled like that. If you write sheaf instead of sheath, you are not expressing a speach defect, you are making a grammatical error.
In some cases it's a speach defect, in most cases it's a dialectical, learned pattern of speach - especially in sarf-east London.
Either way, it's of little relevance to written English. Even if you are from sarf-east London, I'm sure you dont fink it's spelled like that. If you write sheaf instead of sheath, you are not expressing a speach defect, you are making a grammatical error.
I take offence to that, look at my location
I voted for sheath, just so you know
In some cases it's a speach defect, in most cases it's a dialectical, learned pattern of speach - especially in sarf-east London.
Either way, it's of little relevance to written English. Even if you are from sarf-east London, I'm sure you dont fink it's spelled like that. If you write sheaf instead of sheath, you are not expressing a speach defect, you are making a grammatical error.
Just so you know I'm still paying attention: grammar concerns the rules of use rather than spelling, I believe. He woz making a spelling error (as we orl do from time to time (hint:speech has two e's (as I'm shure u no
:0)Try this one for size. I have seen many, many people use the word "Brought" instead of "Bought", on this forum and many times on the Biritish Blades forum. This is used by people who seem quite intelligent and with good grammer. Is it simply a typing error or do they genuinely beleive that it is the correct use of the word.
I for one, am glad that you brought this to my attention, I bought a book on grammar, however I ought to read it first.
I guess without seeing the context of the problem quotes, it is near impossible to say.
I am scared to write anything now in case you lot linch me.
But the correct spelling for the protective cover of a knife is sheath.
By the way, are not the abbreviations that everyone on this forum uses a form of laziness when it comes to writing about a certain subject?
There, my pennies worth, now I am going to leave this thread alone.
But the correct spelling for the protective cover of a knife is sheath.
By the way, are not the abbreviations that everyone on this forum uses a form of laziness when it comes to writing about a certain subject?
There, my pennies worth, now I am going to leave this thread alone.
Despite this thread running for quite a while I've only just bothered to read it. Quite funny actually. 'somethink' and 'brought' are 2 that irritate me too. I've heard supposedly educated people people on TV using these pair.
Try working were I work and you'd get an eye opener about English. Half the nurses are foreign African, phillipines, chinese and many of them speak very bad, lazy English and they get stroppy with me when I ask them to repeat something or call me a rascist. Not all the time but it's happened. Quite rude and obnoxious sometimes
It made me think about English language and some funny tee shirts I've seen over the years. I'll start a new thread as I don't want to hi-jack this one.
Try working were I work and you'd get an eye opener about English. Half the nurses are foreign African, phillipines, chinese and many of them speak very bad, lazy English and they get stroppy with me when I ask them to repeat something or call me a rascist. Not all the time but it's happened. Quite rude and obnoxious sometimes
It made me think about English language and some funny tee shirts I've seen over the years. I'll start a new thread as I don't want to hi-jack this one.
I was watching the A-Z of bushcraft series on here:
http://visionontv.net/
If you watch K for Knife he calls a knife sheath a case, I've never heard that term used for one before and it seems really odd.
http://visionontv.net/
If you watch K for Knife he calls a knife sheath a case, I've never heard that term used for one before and it seems really odd.
I'm too old to say anything but - "I agree".
And still, this is how english, or any other language for that matter, has developed and continues to develop.
No-one here speaks like they did in the (say) 17th century, do they?
And the older generation has always complained / been disgruntled about how the younger generation is not using the language "properly".
/ Karl
I was delighted to see this thread still running. For me it is like watching the television programme " grumpy old men" for the first time and realising that I am not alone.
I refuse to believe that the babytalk which some of our yoof use is evolution. Anyone who was lucky to have an education is unlikely to take such a backward step. It may well be copied by people who are learning English. Imagine some of our football exports talking about
"oshpittle or should of"
We can enjoy our bursts of pedantry, but we must not allow it to stifle sharing of ideas and development of themes.Yet we may have a duty to our younger bushcrafters and visitors to the site to use the best English we can.
Just my 2p. Bah, humbug.
G
I refuse to believe that the babytalk which some of our yoof use is evolution. Anyone who was lucky to have an education is unlikely to take such a backward step. It may well be copied by people who are learning English. Imagine some of our football exports talking about
"oshpittle or should of"
We can enjoy our bursts of pedantry, but we must not allow it to stifle sharing of ideas and development of themes.Yet we may have a duty to our younger bushcrafters and visitors to the site to use the best English we can.
Just my 2p. Bah, humbug.
G
Similar threads
