Is "Scales" a Misnomer?

[Jack Black]

There are a lot of particulars that might be considered. For example, much of the discussion in general is about modern knives.

Yes it is, but not exclusively, and you don't see the word 'covers' used there, or in any of the other BF sub-forums, certainly not when I was reading and posting elsewhere than The Porch.

In present day manufacturing, I said (a few posts up) there seems to be a split in the terms used. I gave Case, GEC, CSC and Schrade as examples of manufacturers that use the word "cover". And I say that "scale" is popular among modern knife manufacturers.

In present day US manufacturing, possibly, but if I went into any factory or cutler's workshop in Sheffield, and asked about 'covers', they wouldn't know what I was talking about.

Hope you enjoy the scans, along with our other members

 

[Jack Black]

I doubt the people in general forum are using the term because they read it in 100 year old catalog or journal. They're using the term they saw from Spyderco etc or from another forum member

And maybe some of them learned it from their fathers or grandfathers. I used to use the word 'scale' exclusively, I didn't get it from a Spyderco catologue, it's the word I'd used since I was a boy, and every body else I knew, and every knife magazine and book I read, used the same. I spend a lot of time reading books about cutlery history, sometimes written by people who have devoted their lives to researching the subject, and those authors, who have probably never even heard of Spyderco, use 'scale'.

 

[Jack Black]

These are over 100 years old:

Does the 1919 patent relate to hollow celluloid covers?

 

[supratentorial]

Yes it is, but not exclusively, and you don't see the word 'covers' used there, or in any of the other BF sub-forums, certainly not when I was reading and posting elsewhere than The Porch.

The traditional forum is the place where discussion of traditional knives is concentrated.

In present day US manufacturing, possibly, but if I went into any factory or cutler's workshop in Sheffield, and asked about 'covers', they wouldn't know what I was talking about.

Hope you enjoy the scans, along with our other members

Yes in the USA. That was a distinction that I made early on. I also quoted it later for emphasis.

The scope has expanded a lot in the discussion... spanning centuries as well as countries. I wonder what the blade was called in ancient Egypt. Cucumber?

 

[supratentorial]

Does the 1919 patent relate to hollow celluloid covers?

I don't recall the text from the 1919 article. I would need to pull it up again. The 1905 directly before it was a patent document. If you search google patents for Schrade and 1905, you should pull it up. You can also pull up the patent from 1884 with "US292002A"

 

[Jack Black]

I count 82 firms and individuals involved in scale cutting and pressing in the 1824 Sheffield directory, and there were undoubtedly many more in the town at that time.

 

[Bartleby]

In present day US manufacturing, possibly, but if I went into any factory or cutler's workshop in Sheffield, and asked about 'covers', they wouldn't know what I was talking about.

Hope you enjoy the scans, along with our other members

Personally, I find all of this information on both ends of the discussion great! One of the things I needed to adjust to when I lived way down south in Bucks UK was the linguistic difference between American and British English, often especially strong with words describing everyday familiar items. This discussion, as applied to cutlery, is especially fascinating to me in light of this experience.

The same thing happens in other languages as well (the Puerto Rican Spanish I heard used by some of my neighbors as a boy in NY was not the Spanish of Spain I learned at school, both of which are quite different than the Mexican Spanish used by my friends here in Texas), at times leading to humorous or frustrating results.

Many thanks to both Jack and Jake for the research and clarity of mind (and good humor as well) in presenting each side. Nice.

 

[Jack Black]

I don't recall the text from the 1919 article. I would need to pull it up again. The 1905 directly before it was a patent document. If you search google patents for Schrade and 1905, you should pull it up. You can also pull up the patent from 1884 with "US292002A"

Thanks, those are interesting and novel patents, tortuous reading, but certainly fascinating to me at least

Here are the links for anyone who wants to take a look:

https://www.google.com/patents/US812601

https://www.google.com/patents/US292002

 

[Jack Black]

Yes in the USA. That was a distinction that I made early on. I also quoted it later for emphasis.

The scope has expanded a lot in the discussion... spanning centuries as well as countries. I wonder what the blade was called in ancient Egypt. Cucumber?

So you'd like to limit this discussion merely to the USA, and the last 100 years?! The introduction of Sheffield history and German cutlery phraseology relates directly to this discussion. Where did the first US cutlers come from? There and elsewhere. And they brought their language with them as well as their skills. Perhaps you'd like to limit this discussion to when GEC set up their website, because why would anyone look anywhere else for their information when we have them to tell us?

Let's go back (again) to the point of this post. Is the use of scales a misnomer, and if so, since when? And if it's only a misnomer because GEC don't like it, well they'll have to lump it as far as I'm concerned, because in terms of cutlery history they've been here about 30 seconds.

 

[Bartleby]

And if it's only a misnomer because GEC don't like it, well they'll have to lump it as far as I'm concerned, because in terms of cutlery history they've been here about 30 seconds.

Just to be fair, does GEC have an official position they have expressed somewhere about this? I could not find them in the manufacturers forums.

 

[supratentorial]

So you'd like to limit this discussion merely to the USA, and the last 100 years?! The introduction of Sheffield history and German cutlery phraseology relates directly to this discussion. Where did the first US cutlers come from? There and elsewhere. And they brought their language with them as well as their skills. Perhaps you'd like to limit this discussion to when GEC set up their website, because why would anyone look anywhere else for their information when we have them to tell us?

Let's go back (again) to the point of this post. Is the use of scales a misnomer, and if so, since when? And if it's only a misnomer because GEC don't like it, well they'll have to lump it as far as I'm concerned, because in terms of cutlery history they've been here about 30 seconds.

The OP's alias is "AFAustin" and his location is Austin, TX. If his name was AFSheffield or his post was on Britishblades, I wouldn't have replied at all. I also saw his question as a practical question, not a historical question. From the posts made by Eric, that I mentioned many times and some that I have not dug up to quote but recall, the word "cover" is used in present day US manufacturing of traditional pocket knives and he finds it confusing when scale is used instead. I thought this was a practical response to his question.

As I've said, the scope has increased dramatically across centuries and countries. I find it interesting but I don't think it is a practical response to the OP's question. In present day USA manufacturing, the word "covers" seems to be the norm. And at least one person who worked for two US manufacturers, says the word scale is confusing when used in place of covers for traditional pocket knives. I don't care if you use the word "covers", "hafts", "coverings", "scales, "handles".

 

[Jack Black]

Just to be fair, does GEC have an official position they have expressed somewhere about this? I could not find them in the manufacturers forums.

GEC have never had a sub-forum here Bart My, admittedly rather ill-tempered comment, related to the argument made in this thread yesterday, that because GEC apparently favours the use of 'covers', this forum should adopt their language. A statement which I still find shocking I'm afraid to say. GEC would perhaps be surprised too, I don't know.

As I have said repeatedly throughout this thread, I am not against the use of 'covers', but since the alternative word 'scales' has a much longer pedigree, and is still in very widespread use, I think it is wrong to pull people up for using it

 

[Jack Black]

The OP's alias is "AFAustin" and his location is Austin, TX. If his name was AFSheffield or his post was on Britishblades, I wouldn't have replied at all. I also saw his question as a practical question, not a historical question. From the posts made by Eric, that I mentioned many times and some that I have not dug up to quote but recall, the word "cover" is used in present day US manufacturing of traditional pocket knives and he finds it confusing when scale is used instead. I thought this was a practical response to his question.

As I've said, the scope has increased dramatically across centuries and countries. I find it interesting but I don't think it is a practical response to the OP's question. In present day USA manufacturing, the word "covers" seems to be the norm. And at least one person who worked for two US manufacturers, says the word scale is confusing when used in place of covers for traditional pocket knives. I don't care if you use the word "covers", "hafts", "coverings", "scales, "handles".

Sorry Jake, but I find that response laughable! You don't think history should be introduced into this thread, or Sheffield, because Andrew is in Austin, and you wouldn't have replied to him if he had been outside the US?! Since when has this forum been limited to discussion about the US cutlery industry?! I'm sure Eric is perfectly capable of understanding what is being said if someone uses the word 'scale' rather than 'cover', even if he finds it mildly irritating, as I do much of the inaccurate language used from time to time here myself. I doubt he's as easily confused as you seem to think, and I'm sure he can speak for himself. If you don't care about which of those words posters use, it's something of a surprise, but if that's the case, the answer to Andrew's original question is a simple one: No, Andrew, you are not committing a misnomer by using the word 'scales' rather than 'covers

 

[Bartleby]

GEC have never had a sub-forum here Bart

Sorry, I didn't realize that. I was surprised not to find them. I would have thought they would have done so by now, given their popularity.

 

[supratentorial]

GEC have never had a sub-forum here Bart My, admittedly rather ill-tempered comment, related to the argument made in this thread yesterday, that because GEC apparently favours the use of 'covers', this forum should adopt their language. A statement which I still find shocking I'm afraid to say. GEC would perhaps be surprised too, I don't know.

As I have said repeatedly throughout this thread, I am not against the use of 'covers', but since the alternative word 'scales' has a much longer pedigree, and is still in very widespread use, I think it is wrong to pull people up for using it

Your responses have been a bit strong and I think they stem from miscommunication. For example, in that post I also said that CSC used the same language. My point is that it is the language of most (all?) USA manufacturers in present day. You also missed my 100+ year old references and USA distinction. I certainly don't discount the importance of makers from Sheffield. I truly enjoy the Sheffield history. I'm going to leave this discussion now but thank you for allowing me to share my experiences.

 

[Jack Black]

Your responses have been a bit strong and I think they stem from miscommunication. For example, in that post I also said that CSC used the same language. My point is that it is the language of most (all?) USA manufacturers in present day. I certainly don't discount the importance of makers from Sheffield. I truly enjoy the Sheffield history. I'm going to leave this discussion now but thank you for allowing me to share my experiences.

Sorry Jake, I have tried to add some lighthearted responses to this thread, and I appreciate you responding to me, even if I am not in the US. I genuinely thought that a historical perspective would be appreciated by many forum members, including yourself. The part of your post, which I found disturbing was this:

GEC favors a particular use and since the forum favors GEC, it may make sense to favor their language as well.

I was surprises to see you make that argument.

If its the case that most/all present-day US manufacturers use the word 'covers', I'm surprised. I've certainly not noticed that. Thanks for the discussion, and I hope I haven't offended you

 

[Jack Black]

Sorry, I didn't realize that. I was surprised not to find them. I would have thought they would have done so by now, given their popularity.

The issue has been raised here from time to time

 

[supratentorial]

No worries.

I genuinely thought that a historical perspective would be appreciated by many forum members, including yourself.

I do appreciate it. You and I answered different interpretations of the OPs questions. That doesn't mean that I don't appreciate the history you gave. I do appreciate it.

I was surprises to see you make that argument

That was teasing. I didn't make it clear. I often tease that this the GEC forum.

 

[Jack Black]

I do appreciate it. You and I answered different interpretations of the OPs questions. That doesn't mean that I don't appreciate the history you gave. I do appreciate it.



That was teasing. I didn't make it clear. I often tease that this the GEC forum.

Thank you, and sorry if I misunderstood that your comments about adopting GEC's language choices was actually a joke

 

[Jack Black]

I thought I'd have a quick look at what terminology they use over on the custom forum. Someone definitely needs to go and tell them to stop saying 'scales', because they are using the heck out of that term over there! The same with the BRL forum, there are plenty of posters there who don't seem to know any better! It's the same with the Old Timey section on the Exchange! I don't want to name any names, but there seem to be some very well-respected traditional slipjoint makers, and even some regular Porch members who didn't get the memo yet!