|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Diana
Chief Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 662
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - 2:18 pm: | 
|
People who probably know more than me have said that East Enders tend to use the double negative. We have all assumed that its presence in the graffito points to Jack as an East Ender.
What of the officers who were told to write it down? Could one of them have been an East Ender? We know that at least one of them got it wrong because there are two versions.
From the A to Z:
Metropolitan Police Version: The Juwes are the men That Will not be Blamed for nothing
City Police Version: The Juwes are not The men That Will be Blamed for nothing
If I habitually use the double negative, then if I am stressed and rushed as I copy I will tend to put it in where I expect it to be whether it is there or not. Of course both versions have "not" and "nothing". Which one would an East Ender be more likely to say? I wonder if we can possibly infer that that is the one that is wrong.
There has been a lot of debate about whether the GSG displays characteristics of one who uses English as their second language or whether it is typical of East End speech. The confusion may stem from the fact that the writer was the former and the transcriber was the latter. |
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 708
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - 5:10 pm: |
|
As both versions contain the double negative, though in different ways, that suggests to me that the original also contained a double-negative buyt it was incorrectly copied (probably due to haste and difficulty).
But it might be that the writing was scuffed and hard to read.
Phil |
Diana
Chief Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 663
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - 5:35 pm: |
|
Both have the double negative, true. I need somebody from London to tell me how an East Ender would be likely to say it. |
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 161
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - 6:09 pm: |
|
I agree with Phil here,
Besides, Longs version of the graffito was actually amended by an inspector, so IMO it must be considered accurate after this error was corrected.
Long stated:
"I wrote down into my book and the Inspector noticed that Jews was spelt Juews, there was a difference between the spelling..."
Longs amended version was:
The Juews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing
This version was thus not only Long's, but had actually been proofread by an inspector.
Helge
"Please, Spock, do me a favor ... don't say it's `fascinating'..." Dr. McCoy
"No... but it is...interesting..." Spock (The Ultimate Computer)
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1093
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 3:50 am: |
|
For what it's worth, I think the Metropolitan version sounds like a typical cockney double negative, and the City version doesn't sound like a double negative at all.
It's an interesting idea, but it still seems likely to me that the person who wrote the thing was a cockney, and used a double negative, and that the policeman who recorded the other version was flustered and got the words in the wrong order.
Chris Phillips
|
Helge Samuelsen
Inspector
Username: Helge
Post Number: 164
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 4:19 am: |
|
Chris,
I agree. (if by metropolitan, you mean Longs final version) Besides..lets all think about this..in East End London we have a message that sounds like cockney.. I almost said walks like cockney, and talks like cockney..
Odds are that it was cockney.
Helge
"Please, Spock, do me a favor ... don't say it's `fascinating'..." Dr. McCoy
"No... but it is...interesting..." Spock (The Ultimate Computer)
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1881
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 4:57 am: |
|
Hi All,
I tend to agree with Chris and Helge here.
If it was a cockney double negative, the more correct version would be:
'The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for anything.'
But there is also a possibility that the writer meant:
'The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed without good reason.'
And the 'good reason' for blaming the Jews on this occasion would have been the apron piece left by the entrance to their Dwellings; a stitch-up.
Just an idea.
Love,
Caz
X |
Gareth W
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - 3:47 pm: |
|
Diana,
The Metropolitan transcript apparently copied the layout which indicates that the words were spread across several lines, thus (ignore the dots - don't know how to get tab spaces working!):
The Juwes are
The men that
............ Will not
be Blamed
............ for nothing
Perhaps the City police transcriber fell foul of the "expectation effect", which is another example of "seeing what you want to see". This is familiar from:
"I love Paris in the
the Spring"
Many people miss out the first "the" because they're conditioned to expect only one article connecting a preposition and a noun.
The "foreigner" theory of the double-negative has been overplayed. As you say, double negatives are common in the East End patois, but also in the dialects of English natively spoken in the Westcountry (of England), Liverpool, Wales and America - to name but a few.
Of the two variants, the Met version sounds the most authentic usage to me, insofar as the use of double-negatives tends to emphasise the negativity of the sentence.
Compare a similar example:
"He gave me nothing" - Standard "proper" English
"He didn't give me nothing" - typical double-negative
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1885
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2005 - 4:39 am: |
|
Hi Gareth,
As you say, double negatives are common in the East End patois, but also in the dialects of English natively spoken in the Westcountry (of England), Liverpool, Wales and America - to name but a few.
I was thinking the same thing, but didn't want to get a slap for using the L word. 
Love,
Caz
X |
Gareth W
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2005 - 6:24 pm: |
|
Caz,
The Liverpool slap is justly reserved for Boris Johnson. I don't think that Liverpudlians would compain about pointing out their love of the double negative. I can assure you that yer average Scouser wouldn't take no offence nor nothing ;o)
I'll be in Liverpool in a couple of weeks, so if there are any repercussions I'll be in a good position to rescue the situation.
Cheers! |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1898
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 5:26 am: |
|
Hi Gareth,
Ooh I do envy you your trip to the L place - I don't love it there for nothing.
Could you find out exactly where no.20 Church St would have been in the late 19th century and report back, pretty please?
Love,
Caz
X |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
