Because… their uniforms are called jerseys??

Cidu Bill on Mar 10th 2017

jerseys.PNG

Filed in Bill Bickel, CIDU, Soup to Nutz, comic strips, comics, humor | 55 responses so far

55 Responses to “Because… their uniforms are called jerseys??”

  1. Ted from Ft. Laud Mar 10th 2017 at 06:26 pm 1

    Buy New Jerseyan? (The succession of “devil” pictures may be directly related or may be an incidental joke - I can’t tell.)

  2. Boise Ed Mar 10th 2017 at 07:02 pm 2

    I think the wall pictures are just a side comment. The NHL Devils did recently announce a uniform change, along with a change in supplier. I’m pretty sure the new ones will not be made locally, though, as Adidas has stuff made in 62 different countries.

  3. billytheskink Mar 10th 2017 at 07:30 pm 3

    Stromoski doesn’t know any big hockey fans, it seems. Hockey uniforms are called “sweaters”, as anyone who knows a die hard hockey fan has surely learned after calling a hockey uniform anything other than a “sweater”.

  4. larK Mar 10th 2017 at 07:46 pm 4

    As worn by the gnus from the island neighboring Guernsey… New gnu New Jersey jersey jerseys

  5. Susan T-O Mar 10th 2017 at 10:49 pm 5

    I think quote marks would help. Right now they are wearing their original “New Jersey” jerseys, and are going to switch to new “New Jersey” jerseys. Hilarious. (insert deadpan expression here.)

    Puts me in mind of the not-so-recent name change of the California team, from The Anaheim Angels to The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim (”los angeles” being Spanish for “the angels” and thus turning them into The The Angels Angels of Anaheim).

  6. Heather Mar 11th 2017 at 12:00 am 6

    buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo….

  7. mitch4 Mar 11th 2017 at 01:53 am 7

    What did Della wear, boys, what did Della wear?

  8. Boise Ed Mar 11th 2017 at 01:58 am 8

    Oh, just Street clothes.

  9. James Pollock Mar 11th 2017 at 02:28 am 9

    “buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo…”

    Aren’t some of those supposed to be capitalized?

  10. Kamino Neko Mar 11th 2017 at 03:23 am 10

    Re: the background pictures… All of them are different devils.

  11. DemetriosX Mar 11th 2017 at 07:18 am 11

    @Susan: I think the Angels are just trying to get more fans from the LA market, but it’s a stupid name. Even if they did start out as the Los Angeles Angels. Of course, they then went to California Angels (pretentious when there were FOUR other teams in California) and then Anaheim Angeles.

    The redundancy is nothing in LA, which is, after all, home to The The Tar Tar Pits.

  12. larK Mar 11th 2017 at 10:05 am 12

    And the El Camino Road…

  13. padraig Mar 11th 2017 at 10:41 am 13

    Reminds me of when the Washington Bullets NBA team changed their name to the Wizards. The joke was, “The Washington Bullets no longer wish to have a name so strongly associated with violence and death. Therefore our new name will be the Maryland Bullets.”

  14. James Pollock Mar 11th 2017 at 11:44 am 14

    “The redundancy is nothing in LA, which is, after all, home to The The Tar Tar Pits.”

    Tell that to someone from New York, New York.

  15. zbicyclist Mar 11th 2017 at 02:08 pm 15

    Does no one cotton to that Jersey name?

  16. B.A. Mar 11th 2017 at 02:52 pm 16

    James haven’t you ever heard “so good they named it twice”?

  17. Cidu Bill Mar 11th 2017 at 02:56 pm 17

    Regarding the “buffalo” thing… my son and my nephew once tried to figure out a way to make it work linguistically with even more buffalos. Which would have been fine if I hadn’t been in the car with them at the time.

    I think I still have the headache.

  18. Boise Ed Mar 11th 2017 at 04:06 pm 18

    billytheskink [3]: Historically, hockey players wore sweaters. Today, the term carries on as one name for the shirt-like garments. Speaking as a “die-hard hockey fan” and player, I can tell you that people use both, and some of the younger players look askance at mention of a sweater.

    DemetriosX [11]: I agree with both of your points, the redundancy and the stupidity of naming a team by the state name. See also tonight’s game between the Florida Panthers and the Tampa Bay Lightning. And special mention to the Golden State Warriors.

    Padraig [13]: That made me laugh out loud. Excellent.

    James [14]: The point is that “the La Brea Tar Pits” is needlessly redundant, just like “the El Camino road.”

    zbicyclist [15]: :-)

    Heather [6]: Wikipedia even has a page addressing that.

  19. Mitch4 Mar 11th 2017 at 04:14 pm 19

    In case anyone was unaware the answer to the question at #7 was “She wore her brand new jersey, that’s what she did wear.”

    I spent a year in the Queen City of the Lakes, but it never helped me understand the more extended versions of that repetition puzzle. Above the original four instances, I have trouble not wanting to insert the missing relative pronouns, though I know they’re optional. The other problem is with some constructions that work the same way twice but need to be taken as designating different sets of individuals.

    To be continued if I can get to a keyboard

  20. mitch4 Mar 11th 2017 at 04:22 pm 20

    Okay … using distinguishable substitutions that are not intended to be exact equivalents, and not using the zero plural, and inserting clarifying relative pronouns and distinguishing identifiers we might have:

    Upstate bisons which other Upstate bisons can intimidate, themselves intimidate yet other sets of Upstate bisons.

    (that would be 8)

    P.S. Yes, at some point I saw the Wikipedia page, but still couldn’t parse under their versions, so liked mine better.

  21. mitch4 Mar 11th 2017 at 04:22 pm 21

    I meant, That would be eight

  22. mitch4 Mar 11th 2017 at 04:31 pm 22

    I should not have maligned the wikipedia treatment, which when I look now is only a little inferior to mine. :-)

    I was glad also to find there the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_while_John_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_a_better_effect_on_the_teacher which was a
    favorite among my family. Our explanation made them apprentice typesetters so that both could have had had but put them in different faces; to name one of them Hadley, nicknamed Had ; and to cast the second part of the thought as a hypothetical (”had A had the first form, B would have gotten the job”) to avoid making the second part use the pluperfect, which didn’t really fit the sequence of tenses.

  23. James Pollock Mar 11th 2017 at 06:44 pm 23

    “James [14]: The point is that “the La Brea Tar Pits” is needlessly redundant, just like “the El Camino road.””

    Oh… so there’s a danger of confusing the New York that’s in New York with one of the many New Yorks that AREN’T in New York, making the redundancy necessary? My error, then.

  24. larK Mar 11th 2017 at 06:55 pm 24

    @ 23: uh… exactly?

    There’s New York, Iowa; New York, Kentucky; New York, Missouri; New York, Texas; New York, Florida, to say nothing of New York, Lincolnshire; New York, North Yorkshire; and New York, Tyne and Wear.

    So say I’m in Des Moines, Iowa, and I address a letter to Joe Blow in New York. If I don’t specify the state, then there’s a definite ambiguity as to where the letter should be delivered.

    Or are you arguing that it is not a redundancy, being as one refers to the city, and the other refers to the state?

  25. James Pollock Mar 11th 2017 at 07:01 pm 25

    “So say I’m in Des Moines, Iowa, and I address a letter to Joe Blow in New York. If I don’t specify the state, then there’s a definite ambiguity as to where the letter should be delivered”

    So, um, I know that Iowa is a bit behind the times in some respects, but… have ZIP codes not yet made it there? You write this number of your letter, and both the city AND the state are redundant.

    Heck, there’s even a few cases where street address is irrelevant, too. (IRS processing centers, for example)

  26. larK Mar 11th 2017 at 07:11 pm 26

    Wow, your goalposts are actually permanently mounted in the bed of two pickup trucks, aren’t they?

  27. Boise Ed Mar 11th 2017 at 07:13 pm 27

    Dear Snark [23]. In the “NY, NY” example, they are two separate entities, one within the other, as you well know. And for #25, there ARE people who sometimes omit ZIP codes, and the USPS does what it can to cope. I suspect that the Corydon, Iowa, PO would pass it along to New York, Iowa.

    larK [24]: Thanks for the interesting trivia.

  28. James Pollock Mar 11th 2017 at 08:43 pm 28

    “In the “NY, NY” example, they are two separate entities, one within the other, as you well know.”
    Yes, um, I know.

    “And for #25, there ARE people who sometimes omit ZIP codes, and the USPS does what it can to cope.”
    There are people who sometimes omit entire addresses, and the USPS does what it can to cope. What, exactly, makes either one of these relevant? (I’ve seen mail addressed to “Nintendo, Seattle”, which was successfully delivered to Nintendo… which is not in Seattle.)

    “I suspect that the Corydon, Iowa, PO would pass it along to New York, Iowa.”
    Which would, in turn, route it along to New York, New York, unless the street numbers run considerably higher than I’m imagining for New York, Iowa.

  29. Mark in Boston Mar 11th 2017 at 09:21 pm 29

    There is a story that a cartographer doing fieldwork in upstate New York found a creek which apparently had no name on any map. He asked a local person who said “We just call it ‘the crick’”. None of the people he interviewed had any better answer. So he labeled it “Crick Creek” on the map.

    He showed it to his first informer, who looked at the name and said “Seems like it should be the other way around.”

  30. Kamino Neko Mar 11th 2017 at 10:53 pm 30

    Similar to Mark’s story, there’s the apocryphal story of Torpenhow Hill - Tor, penn, and haugh (how) are all archaic terms for hills, which would make that Hillhillhill Hill…

    (But the hill in Torpenhow is not named any such thing, and while ‘Torpenhow’ does likely come from ‘Hillhill Hill’, ‘Torpenn’ is likely better translated as ‘the very top of the hill’, making only ‘how’ redundant.)

  31. John Small Berries Mar 12th 2017 at 02:28 am 31

    *googles “Torpenhow”*

    But of course it’s pronounced /trəˈpɛnə/ by the locals; the English utterly delight in divorcing place-names’ spelling from their pronunciation.

  32. Kilby Mar 12th 2017 at 06:35 am 32

    @ JSB (31) - They probably picked that up from the French: “Let’s invent a random sequence of letters to hang onto the end of this word. It doesn’t matter what we add, because none of us will pronounce it that way, but it will frustrate all the foreigners who come to visit.

  33. DemetriosX Mar 12th 2017 at 07:55 am 33

    It’s not just place names for the British. They do it for family and personal names, too. Consider, for example, the names Featheringay and Cholmondley, which are pronounced Fungy and Chumley. And the name St. John is pronounced Sinjin.

    Also similar to Mark’s story is the reason so many rivers in Britain are called Avon. It’s the word for river in Brythonic Celtic. The Romans came along and asked the locals “What’s that?” and were told “It’s a river.” Terry Pratchett made fun of it with a forest on the Discworld called “Your Finger You Fool” in which there is a mountain called “Who Is This Fool Who Does Not Know What A Mountain Is”.

    @Kilby: The problem with French is that when they established their spelling, they did pronounce all those letters. English isn’t any better, really. English is probably worse even. The orthography was set before the Great Vowel Shift and, to make matters worse, the dialect that was the basis for spelling was not the dialect that became the dominant spoken form. I explain it to Germans by telling them to imagine that High German was as it is spoken, but everything was spelled as if it were Bavarian. There’s a reason students in French and English speaking countries take longer to learn to spell than their counterparts anywhere else (that uses an alphabetic script).

  34. mitch4 Mar 12th 2017 at 09:12 am 34

    Speaking of redundancy, I had trouble at first understanding the terminology (maybe particularly British) of saying someone has been made redundant to mean they’re laid off.

    My trouble was assuming this application of the term was based in a core meaning like the one you guys are discussing above, involving something being unnecessary BECAUSE of a duplication, repetition, or generally oversupply of some kind. And then being puzzled because the company wasn’t seen as hiring an extra or replacement person for that same role…

    My error was in emphasizing the wrong part of that as the core meaning. It is JUST the “unnecessary” that counts as redundant — one typical reason for this being unneeded (or redundant), is the American sense of duplication or repetition or extra-ness. You can be unneeded for other kinds of reasons as well, and it is the factor of unneeded, not duplication, that is already enough to count as redundant — and enters into the unemployment (or British?) sense.

    Seeing it that way makes it odd to see your discussions of “necessary or unnecessary redundancy” which of course can make sense from what we could call the information-theoretic usage but are odd from a perspective where ‘redundant’ is just ‘unnecessary’.

  35. mitch4 Mar 12th 2017 at 09:19 am 35

    One of my favorite examples of names pronounced more simply than written was Talliaferro, said as Tolliver. Then I was disappointed to hear it also said in full spelling-pronunciation form.

    Another that had me misinformed is Twombly. I thought that was so clever! “Two” like the number, so starts off said Too, and altogether Tomb-ly. But no, it turns out some people with that name choose that pattern, but others pronounce the Tw- just as in a few common nouns or other words, like twist and twin. It didn’t help that the celebrity name I was originally needing to say (this was Cy Twombly) was treated both ways by different sources.

  36. larK Mar 12th 2017 at 12:29 pm 36

    I was watching some British panel show and the subject of David Bowie came up (I think this was before he died, not that that makes any difference), and I was amazed by the variety of pronunciation used for his last name, sometimes by the same speaker. It made me question if for British speakers they just hear the variations as the same “phoneme”, and are unaware that they are using different pronunciations. It varied from “bow-ie” (as in “bow-wow”, or the part of the boat) to “bohe-ie” (as in “bow tie” (assuming the british don’t pronounce that as in “bow wow” tie…) or “Bo Derek”).

  37. John Small Berries Mar 12th 2017 at 02:01 pm 37

    DemetriosX: Oh, I’m well aware of the English idiosyncracies with the pronunciation of nomenclature. Fetherstonhaugh (”Fanshaw”) is my particular favorite.

    And English orthography is a hobby of mine; some friends bought me a lute for a birthday present, so I decided I’d like to learn the repertoire as authentically as possible, which meant exploring the exciting minefield of pronunciation. The local university library’s microfilm stacks turned up three period-appropriate treatises on spelling reform - Sir Thomas Smith’s De recta et emendata linguae Anglicae scriptione (1568), John Hart’s An Orthpgraphie (1569), and William Bullokar’s Bullokar’s Booke at large, for the Amendment of Orthographie for English speech (1580) - which, while they clearly failed to achieve their goal, shed a phenomenal amount of light on “English as she is spoke”*.

    But it now sets my teeth on edge to hear the common claim that “Shakespearean English sounded like modern American accents”, which it very definitely did not.
    __
    * Which later book managed to achieve precisely the opposite, in as hilarious a fashion as possible.

  38. jajizi Mar 12th 2017 at 03:43 pm 38

    larK 36: There’s a town in Maryland called Bowie, usually pronounced BOO-ee.

  39. DemetriosX Mar 12th 2017 at 03:57 pm 39

    @larK: Part of the problem is that there are simply a number of different ways to pronounce Bowie (much like some of Mitch’s examples). On top of the two you mention, there is also “boo-ie” which is how he of the knife and the Alamo pronounced it. I think David Bowie intended the “bow wow” pronunciation, which is why he wanted to name his son Zowie. That wasn’t allowed and said son has gone through life with the prosaic, but now reasonably well-known name Duncan Jones. Unfortunately for his plans, the “bow tie” pronunciation is fairly standard in the US (it’s mostly only Texans who correctly pronounce the name of the knife and its inventor).

    @JSB: And those three authors were all writing after the Great Vowel Shift, while a lot of spelling was set before. There are only 200 years between Chaucer and Shakespeare, but Chaucerian English seems like a different language, while Shakespeare is perfectly understandable.

    As I understand it, the claim (and I’ve heard linguists make it, too) is that Shakespearean English sounded a lot like accents from way back in the hills and hollers of Appalachia. And the claim probably goes back to before mass media started smoothing out American English. I think what the linguists are trying to say is that Shakespeare sounded more like Jed Clampett than Patrick Stewart.

  40. Boise Ed Mar 12th 2017 at 03:57 pm 40

    Excellent, DemetriosX [33]!

    larK [36]: I once commented to a Boston-area friend about his tagging an “r” onto the end of certain words (like “dogma” becoming “dogmer”), and he vehemently denied it. To his ear, there was no “r” somehow.

  41. James Pollock Mar 12th 2017 at 05:38 pm 41

    “he vehemently denied it. To his ear, there was no “r” somehow.”

    Probably claimed there’s no “R” in “Warshington”, either.

  42. Ted from Ft. Laud Mar 12th 2017 at 07:01 pm 42

    Boise Ed @ 18 - My understanding is that “officially”, the Florida Panthers are named for the “Florida panther” (a specific variety of panther) and are not the Florida “Panthers”.

    The same owner named the expansion baseball team as the Florida Marlins - whether that was to match the hockey team name, because of territorial claims, or other (like that they didn’t play in Miami) isn’t obvious. They originally played at Joe Robbie Stadium (it’s had 7 or 8 names since, but it’ll always be JRS to me) where the Dolphins play - interestingly, they are (still) the Miami Dolphins, even though the stadium (as I implied) isn’t in Miami (the Dolphins started in the - late, somewhat lamented - Orange Bowl, which was in Miami). When the Marlins got their (heavily subsidized) stadium which is in Miami (on the site of the old Orange Bowl, actually), part of the deal providing the funding was that they change their name to the Miami Marlins - I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a similar issue that led to the Angels convoluted naming.

  43. mitch4 Mar 12th 2017 at 07:09 pm 43

    Ted, are you forgetting that in the way-back-when there was a minor leagues baseball team called the Miami Marlins? Sometime prior to 1966 I know I went to one of their games with my dad and uncle. I don’t remember where it was played.

  44. mitch4 Mar 12th 2017 at 07:13 pm 44

    Also we can note that Green Bay is an actual town (as well as a body of water), but Tampa Bay is only a body of water.

  45. James Pollock Mar 12th 2017 at 07:43 pm 45

    “I agree with both of your points, the redundancy and the stupidity of naming a team by the state name. See also tonight’s game between the Florida Panthers and the Tampa Bay Lightning. And special mention to the Golden State Warriors.”

    New England Patriots. And the CFL has it, too since “Saskatchewan” has a team, and so does “B.C.”, although most of the teams have home cities rather than provinces.

    Heck, “Oregon” Trail-Blazers would make MORE sense than “Portland” Trail-Blazers, but that’s not what we have.

    Much more fun to make fun of is the way team mobility made for “interesting” divisional groupings. The NFC West used to be Los Angeles, San Francisco, New Orleans, and Atlanta. Meanwhile, Dallas was in the NFC East. Nowadays, Dallas is STILL “East”, Kansas City is “West” but Indianapolis is “South”. St. Louis is no longer “West”, but only because the music stopped and their team sat down in Los Angeles. Both the Jets and Giants are “New York”, although the only team that actually plays its home games in the state of New York is the Bills.

  46. Mark in Boston Mar 12th 2017 at 09:20 pm 46

    In a Charles Dickens story, an Englishman settles in France and is known by the residents as “Mr. The Englishman”.

    The name on his doorbell is “L’Anglais”.

    Back in England, his name was Langley.

  47. Grawlix Mar 12th 2017 at 11:50 pm 47

    The Patriots changed their name in the early ’70s when they moved from Boston to the suburbs (Foxborough).

    And apparently the hockey uniforms are indeed called jerseys, if you go by web search results including sporting supply stores.

    I don’t particularly care whether a team belongs to a particular city or a more general region.

  48. Ted from Ft. Laud Mar 13th 2017 at 12:08 am 48

    mitch4 @ 43 - actually, I’m not sure if I “forgot” them, as I don’t know if I was ever aware of them. I went to a few Oriole spring training games, and (maybe?) one or two minor league games when I was a mid-teenager, but by that time (1970 or so?), I believe the minor league team had changed its name to Miami Orioles. I don’t think I ever went to a Marlins game when that was the minor league team’s name, and if I ever went to a International League Marlins game (doubtful), I’m pretty sure I would have been too young to remember it. All those teams played at Miami Stadium (renamed Bobby Maduro Stadium sometime after I left Miami, probably around the same time JRS opened - and torn down about 15 years ago).

  49. John Small Berries Mar 13th 2017 at 12:35 am 49

    @DemetriosX: The vowels themselves don’t seem to have noticed that their Great Shift had quite ended yet by the time the treatises were written, at least if Smith, Hart, and Bullokar are to be believed.

    For example, all three authors agreed that the ‘a’ was the only “perfect” vowel, not “abused” by making it stand for more than one sound (when occurring alone), whereas today it represents a plethora of different sounds. (Though it’s clear from some of their examples that, contrary to their claims, it actually represented both /a/ and /ə/.)

    Hart’s book, which (to my mind) came closest to a true phonetic alphabet, even split diphthongs into their component phonemes, which were often substantially and surprisingly different from their modern incarnations (for example, he described the pronoun “I” as being pronounced /eɪ/, rather than today’s /aɪ/; it was also the diphthong which ended most adverbs (e.g. “loudly” would be /ˈloːdleɪ/ rather than /ˈlaʊdli/).

    Now, admittedly, I’m not a professional linguist. And perhaps the pronunciation of Latin vowels (which they used as the basis for describing the English vowel sounds of their day) has changed since the late 1500s, as well. But if their reasonably clear descriptions were accurate, the English of their age certainly didn’t sound much like, say, Joseph Hall’s 1939 recordings of Appalachian dialogue. At least not to my (amateur) ear.

  50. Kilby Mar 13th 2017 at 02:11 am 50

    @ larK (26) - What a nice, perceptive comment.

  51. DemetriosX Mar 13th 2017 at 08:04 am 51

    @JSB: Oh, the pronunciation of Latin vowels is a minefield in itself. Ask any three Classicists about Latin pronunciation and your likely to get five different answers. The British operate from a different base than the Americans and and both offer huge variations within their countries, sometimes to the point that different universities in the same town use different pronunciations.

    Mind you, most of what I know about the Shakespeare/Appalachia thing comes from that documentary Robert MacNeil did about English and reading a few popular linguistics books 25 or 30 years ago.

  52. John Small Berries Mar 13th 2017 at 08:49 am 52

    DemetriosX: it’s a fascinating topic (at least to me), and I’ve watched with great interest as the movement has grown to do Shakespeare’s plays in “authentic” dialects.

    But it does rouse my curiosity about where the dialect coaches are getting some of their pronunciation rules, since every one I’ve seen so far (even example snippets from the linguists themselves) has included multiple “a” sounds (hat/hate/father). I know that puts me into the academic equivalent of “mansplaining”, since they’re credentialed in the field and I’m not, but when all three period authors made a specific point about the singular nature of that vowel, I do have to wonder where it’s coming from.

  53. Powers Mar 13th 2017 at 09:40 am 53

    Hockey players used to wear sweaters. They don’t anymore; they’re as much jerseys as any other sport wears.

  54. Olivier Mar 13th 2017 at 10:57 am 54

    In 1998, I asked for a hockey shirt and after puzzlement and explanation, was offered a hockey jersey.

  55. Meryl A Mar 15th 2017 at 12:44 am 55

    Mitch 4 - Actually it is “What did Delaware, boys, what did Delaware”. Hence the answer being that she wore her brand New Jersey.

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply