cockney
Peter J Lusby
Matthew Huntbach wrote:
>
> Gareth Evans (gev...@benelli.uk.ntc.nokia.com) wrote:
> : >>>>> " " == Anthony Potts <po...@cms.cern.ch> writes:
>
> : > I have been told, however, that it is only strictly true if you were born
> : > within sound of the bells at Bow church.
>
> : Since the church was destroyed in, I believe, WWII, there are no
> : cockneys technically, under the age of 50ish.....
>
> No, it's still there, and the church in question is St.Mary-le-Bow in
> Cheapside, in the City of London (the central business district of London),
> rather than, as is often assumed, a church in the inner east London suburb of
> Bow. I suspect the reason you may have heard "no-one is a true Cockney
> any more" is due to the fact that the City of London itself is almost all
> business with hardly any resident population, and also due to the closure
> of whatever was the last maternity unit in a hospital close by (Barts?).
>
> "Cockney" refers to the working class indigenous inhabitants of central
> London; particularly the eastern inner suburbs (the poorest part of London).
> The phrase "East End" to describe these parts is now often used for East
> London in general (I once heard someone who moved to Ilford describe it as
> "East End"); but many would still argue it is only correct to use it for the
> innermost suburbs, which form the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.
>
> "Cockney" also refers to the accent of the people - a working-class southern
> English accent, though it has traces of East Anglian influence, and to slang
> terms, particularly rhyming slang, they use. Rhyming slang has by no means
> disappeared, though it needs to be recalled that it's something that
> constantly changes (examples you see written in books are bound to be out of
> date), and the golden rule is that the rhyming part of the expression is
> *never* pronounced. Because to many people the Cockney accent is the only
> southern working-class accent they know about, the word is often quite
> wrongly used to refer to *any* southern working class accent - which is wrong:
> people in London for excample make a clear distinction between Cockney
> referring to the ways of speech of east London, and the south London accent
> (police reports will refer to a suspect with a "south London accent").
>
> One thing to note is that the east of London has always been an area of
> settlement for immigrants. It was until a few decades ago the Jewish part of
> London, before that there were many Irish immigrants. Nowadays, inner east
> London is dominated by Bangladeshi immigrants. The typical "Cockney" type
> is more likely to be found in suburbs further out, particularly places like
> Dagenham where large housing estates were built to settle east Londoners
> displacved by slum clearance and wartime bomb damage.
>
> Matthew Huntbach
Very interesting and informative, but are you sure that the church in
question is St Mary-le-bow? My grandparents (east-enders all) always
held that it was Stratford-le-bow church. I'm x-posting to
alt.usage.english, because I'm sure someone there has the definitive
answer.
BTW, some time ago, the Telegraph printed an "isosonal" map showing just
where one would be "within the sound of Bow Bells". To the best of my
recollection, it clearly included my birth-place of East Ham, which is
rather far from Cheapside. Does anyone have access to this map? I
couldn't find it on-line at the ET.
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ Peter J Lusby | "A dust whom England bore, shaped, +
+ plu...@qualcomm.com | made aware" +
+ San Diego, CA, USA | Rupert Brooke - The Soldier +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Geoff Butler
In article <32F8D2...@qualcomm.com>, Peter J Lusby
<plu...@qualcomm.com> writes
>
>Very interesting and informative, but are you sure that the church in
>question is St Mary-le-bow? My grandparents (east-enders all) always
>held that it was Stratford-le-bow church. I'm x-posting to
>alt.usage.english, because I'm sure someone there has the definitive
>answer.
It's absolutely positively definitely certainly St Mary-le-Bow.
-ler
John Davies
[long exposition on "cockney"]
>
>Very interesting and informative, but are you sure that the church in
>question is St Mary-le-bow? My grandparents (east-enders all) always
>held that it was Stratford-le-bow church. I'm x-posting to
>alt.usage.english, because I'm sure someone there has the definitive
>answer.
that Brewer is always to be relied on, but I would guess it probably is
in this instance.
--
John Davies (jo...@redwoods.demon.co.uk)
On that of which one cannot speak, one must remain silent. (Wittgenstein)
Matthew Huntbach
Peter J Lusby (plu...@qualcomm.com) wrote:
: Very interesting and informative, but are you sure that the church in
: question is St Mary-le-bow? My grandparents (east-enders all) always
: held that it was Stratford-le-bow church. I'm x-posting to
: alt.usage.english, because I'm sure someone there has the definitive
: answer.
Most definitely sure about this one. St.Mary-le-Bow even has a plaque on
its wall saying it is the original Bow Bells church. How could anyone
seriously suppose it was a church which in the 19th century was still in a
little village a few miles outside London, and didn't even come under the
old London County Council (it was the Metropolitan Borough of West Ham, Essex,
before 1964). Even those who get it wrong usually get it wrong by thinking it's
the church in Bow E3, which is at least the right side of the River Lee.
I suspect your grandparents only *thought* they were East-enders, like many
other from the Essex marshes.
Matthew Huntbach
Philip Eden
m...@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) wrote:
>Most definitely sure about this one. St.Mary-le-Bow even has a plaque on
>its wall saying it is the original Bow Bells church. How could anyone
>seriously suppose it was a church which in the 19th century was still in a
>little village a few miles outside London, and didn't even come under the
>old London County Council (it was the Metropolitan Borough of West Ham, Essex,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>before 1964). Even those who get it wrong usually get it wrong by thinking it's
>the church in Bow E3, which is at least the right side of the River Lee.
>
>I suspect your grandparents only *thought* they were East-enders, like many
>other from the Essex marshes.
>
>Matthew Huntbach
Matthew, in the spirit of accuracy for accuracy's sake, it was the
County Borough of West Ham, since Metropolitan Boroughs were only found
within the LCC area. And (I'm not 100% certain here) did not the GLC
first see the light of day in 1965?
Philip Eden
Susan Carroll-Clark
Hi all...
>Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable supports St Mary-le-Bow.
At least two separate histories of the city of London I have read have
mentioned this; the one on my shelf is Mary Cathcart Borer's _The City
of London_.
I've mislaid my map of London. I know where St.Mary-le-Bow is; where's
Stratford-le-Bow? (And it's a lovely map, too, dating about, oh, 1666
or so, with all those nasty buildings gone so you can see where the
churches are....)
Cheers--
Susan Carroll-Clark
scl...@chass.utoronto.ca
Matthew Huntbach
Philip Eden (phi...@weather.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: m...@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) wrote:
:>Most definitely sure about this one. St.Mary-le-Bow even has a plaque on
:>its wall saying it is the original Bow Bells church. How could anyone
:>seriously suppose it was a church which in the 19th century was still in a
:>little village a few miles outside London, and didn't even come under the
:>old London County Council (it was the Metropolitan Borough of West Ham, Essex,
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >before 1964).
: Matthew, in the spirit of accuracy for accuracy's sake, it was the
: County Borough of West Ham, since Metropolitan Boroughs were only found
: within the LCC area. And (I'm not 100% certain here) did not the GLC
: first see the light of day in 1965?
Yes, you are right. "County Borough" it was; they were independent of county
authorities, whereas "Metropolitan Boroughs" came under county authorities.
How could I have forgotten, I should have remembered "County Borough of
Brighton" (didn't come under East Sussex County Council) and "Metropolitan
Brough of Hove" (did).
I suspect the 1964/65 thing means that the GLC was set up as a shadow authority
in 1964, and began running things in 1965.
Matthew Huntbach
Matthew Huntbach
Susan Carroll-Clark (scl...@chass.utoronto.ca) wrote:
: I've mislaid my map of London. I know where St.Mary-le-Bow is; where's
: Stratford-le-Bow? (And it's a lovely map, too, dating about, oh, 1666
: or so, with all those nasty buildings gone so you can see where the
: churches are....)
I think it was "Stratford-atte-Bow" actually. It would have appeared like that
on the old maps, but now its universally (unless yiou are making a little joke)
just "Stratford" or occasionally "Stratford East" (when you are referring to
the theatre there, and don't want to confuse it with Shakespeare's birthplace).
Stratford, London E.15, part of the London Borough of Newham, would have been
a village a few miles away from London towards the north-east in 1666, now a
suburb, rather a crummy area, on the Central Line, and also a terminus for the
new Jubilee Line extension and the Docklands Light Railway. Very inner city
now, but not formally "inner London" as it didn't come under the old LCC.
Matthew Huntbach
Philip Eden
m...@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) wrote:
>Philip Eden (phi...@weather.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>: Matthew, in the spirit of accuracy for accuracy's sake, it was the
>: County Borough of West Ham, since Metropolitan Boroughs were only found
>: within the LCC area. And (I'm not 100% certain here) did not the GLC
>: first see the light of day in 1965?
>
>Yes, you are right. "County Borough" it was; they were independent of county
>authorities, whereas "Metropolitan Boroughs" came under county authorities.
>How could I have forgotten, I should have remembered "County Borough of
>Brighton" (didn't come under East Sussex County Council) and "Metropolitan
>Brough of Hove" (did).
>
>Matthew Huntbach
Not quite ...
The LCC area (or the Administrative County of London) comprised only
Metropolitan Boroughs. They were not found elsewhere.
Outside London, the top tier of authorities were the County Councils and
the County Boroughs. Under the County Councils were Municipal Boroughs,
Urban Districts and Rural Districts.Hove was a Municipal Borough.
Sorry to sound picky.
Philip Eden
Peter J Lusby
m...@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) wrote:
>Most definitely sure about this one. St.Mary-le-Bow even has a plaque on
>its wall saying it is the original Bow Bells church. How could anyone
>seriously suppose it was a church which in the 19th century was still in a
>little village a few miles outside London, and didn't even come under the
>old London County Council (it was the Metropolitan Borough of West Ham, Essex,
>before 1964). Even those who get it wrong usually get it wrong by thinking it's
>the church in Bow E3, which is at least the right side of the River Lee.
>
>I suspect your grandparents only *thought* they were East-enders, like many
>other from the Essex marshes.
>
>Matthew Huntbach
Point taken. I did preface my remarks with an expression of a modicum
of doubt, and at least part of that comes from the fact that I when I
was born there, East Ham was still part of Essex, and Stratford was in
(GASP!) Middlesex (Technically, Essex didn't even count as a "Home
County" until the formation of the GLC, which absorbed large parts of
Middlesex into itself). However, even though we came under Essex County
Council for certain things, the postal addresses in East Ham were either
London E6, south of the District Line, or London E12 on the Manor Park
side. Not that this has any relevance to the subject under discussion,
I just like to flaunt my knowledge occasionally, is all.
I'd still like to hear, though, from anyone who has a copy of that
"isosonal" map of East London to which I referred.
John Cowan
[much interesting and valuable stuff (no :-))
about English subdivisions deleted]
"It is an Inkling's duty to be bored; it is his
privilege to bore, on occasion."
So I will now bore you all with an account of the
governmental structure of New York State, U.S.A.,
where I have the honor to reside.
New York State, a sovereign member of the United
States, is fully partitioned into counties.
There is no land area within New York State that
is not part of a county.
Each county is fully partitioned into various towns, cities,
and Indian reservations. State law does not apply
on Indian reservations (only U.S. and Indian law), so
I will not discuss them further. There is no land area
which is not part of some city, some town, or some
Indian reservation.
Cities are created by an act of the New York State
Legislature, and need not have any particular size or
population density. One city (New York City) contains
five counties, which from an internal perspective
are referred to as "boroughs". Their names as boroughs
differ from the corresponding county names, thus:
Manhattan New York Co.
Bronx Bronx Co.
Brooklyn Kings Co.
Queens Queens Co.
Staten Island Richmond Co.
Villages are legally recognized districts which may
be contained within a town or may cross town boundaries,
containing parts of different towns. They are normally
created to expedite a common educational structure,
provision of utilities such as water or sewer, or for
some similar reason. No village may be contained in
or contain a city.
Cities may annex towns or parts of towns adjacent to
them, if the Legislature agrees. Cities may not annex
other cities except by mutual consent of their municipal
governments. (New York and Brooklyn merged in 1898
by mutual consent: the various municipalities adjacent
to New York City are without exception cities, preventing
New York City from annexing them.)
Hamlets are names for areas that have no legal standing.
Typically they are the names of post offices, railway
stations, or other such focal points. For example,
my family's country house is in the town of Austerlitz, which
contains two hamlets: Spencertown (the more important one),
and Austerlitz. The town of Austerlitz is in Columbia
County, which contains two dozen other towns and one city.
--
John Cowan co...@ccil.org
e'osai ko sarji la lojban
Brian J Goggin
On Mon, 10 Feb 1997 09:11:02 -0800, Peter J Lusby
<plu...@alt.dev.null> wrote:
[...]
>Not that this has any relevance to the subject under discussion,
>I just like to flaunt my knowledge occasionally, is all.
And very nice knowledge it is too.
bjg
Philip Eden
Peter J Lusby <plu...@alt.dev.null> wrote:
>
>of doubt, and at least part of that comes from the fact that I when I
>was born there, East Ham was still part of Essex, and Stratford was in
>(GASP!) Middlesex (Technically, Essex didn't even count as a "Home
>County" until the formation of the GLC, which absorbed large parts of
>Middlesex into itself). However, even though we came under Essex County
>Council for certain things, the postal addresses in East Ham were either
>London E6, south of the District Line, or London E12 on the Manor Park
>I just like to flaunt my knowledge occasionally, is all.
>
>"isosonal" map of East London to which I referred.
>
Prior to the 1965 reorganisation, Stratford was always in Essex, and
was part of West Ham County Borough since the 1880s. Stratford-le-Bow,
now usually simply called Bow, was in the Administrative County
of London (LCC area) between 1912 (I think) and 1965.
Essex has been a Home County since the term entered general usage.
OED2 has examples dating back to 1898. And as 'the Home Counties'
has never been an official title, I doubt that you can describe
any particular use of it as 'technical'. East Ham, like West Ham,
was a County Borough until absorption into the GLC in 1965, and
was therefore a unitary authority, so there would have been no
administrative functions carried out by Essex County Council.(Some
ceremonial functions of the county may have survived.)
I did not see the post which referred to an isosonal map (lines
of equal audibility?) Could you elucidate? Thanks.
Philip Eden