Not for nothing

[DJA]

Brilliant.

you ..... is also ..... jusme

Can you link juwes to Frisian?

[Callmebill]

Nope. But I could link jester to fool. Not that I think JTR is stupid!

[Callmebill]

Jews, Juwes, Jewes, Jeuwes, Juews, or Juives.

Home Office minute sheet, 30th Oct 1888, stated the word Jews was spelt Jewes as opposed to Juwes. (HO 144/221/A49301C).
So it’s either:
Jews, a religious group.
Juive, specifically a female member of a religious group. Also, a well-known grand opera - Fromental Halévy. La Juive. First performed at Covent Garden in 1835 and revived throughout the century.
Juives, French for Jews.
Jewes, Judge, judgement and/or law.
So it’s either Jew, (whether French, female or an opera about a Jewess) or it’s judgement. It’s also slang. Jewes – akin to job’s worth; he’s a right job’s worth. Negative – a stickler for rules.
The judges/law are not the men who will be blamed for nothing.
So, as I favour judgement . . . he’s saying – OK. I don’t know, but something like:
The judges are the men to blame? It’s their fault. Whose fault? The men of the laws’ fault. Nuance: The police aren’t innocent?

[Callmebill]

Here's the reference. Doom ...

Jewes. Judgement.Variant, juise, obsolete,.
Forms iuise, iewes. L Judicium – judgement and a later and further form, judgement, doom; a judicial sentence, or its execution: penalty. The compact edition of The Oxford English Dictionary. Text Produced Micrographically, Vol 1.

[DJA]

Semetic dyslexia?

[Sam Flynn]

Jewes. Judgement.Variant, juise, obsolete,.
Forms iuise, iewes. L Judicium – judgement and a later and further form, judgement, doom; a judicial sentence, or its execution: penalty. The compact edition of The Oxford English Dictionary. Text Produced Micrographically, Vol 1.

Intriguing idea, but "judgment" is an abstract (singular) noun. Even as a metaphor, I can't see how it could be equated to a concrete (plural) noun like "men". For what it's worth, "Judgment is a man who will not be blamed..." might work at a pinch, but "The judgment are the men..." doesn't work.

Edit: I should add that the OED doesn't just say that "juise" is obsolete, it shows it to have been very much a mediæval word. All the examples of its use in the OED date between the 1200-1400s, and most of those have widely varying spellings: "iuwys"; "juwyse"; "iewis"; "iewesse"; "iewes".

[DJA]

Thank you. Hope I'll be useful.
I do it's in the dictionary.
jewes
jewes, -esse
var. juise Obs., judgement.
Jews, Juwes, Jewes, Jeuwes, or Juews.

A GRAMMAR OF MODERN INDO-EUROPEAN
you......... juwes / juwe /
law ........jewos (jéwesos)
judge................ jewesdiks
just ...............................jéwestos

So, if the word is jewes, what's he saying?
I am judge, jury and excutioner?

https://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=5226

Worth a good read.

Especially William Morris's involvement with The International Working Men's Club at 40 Berner Street late September 1888,given his busy schedule.

Seems our Jack was well read.

Anyone else read Henry Gawen Sutton's obituary?

Juwes still turns up today as peoples names in Brazil and Ecuador.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/juwe

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ju#Middle_Low_German

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=accusative&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=B42hWdq1CfPc8wer9YKABQ

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=dative&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=no2hWaCqLvPc8wer9YKABQ

[Sam Flynn]

Seems our Jack was well read.

He may have been well-read, but surely not to the extent where he understood Proto-Indo-European [PIE]? This theoretical "language" had only started to be reconstructed in earnest by scholars in the mid/late 19th Century, and the full lexicon of suggested PIE root-words has continued to be developed since - an enormous undertaking, considering the tens/hundreds of thousands of words that would need to be covered. Intriguing though the idea may seem, it's quite possible that PIE "words" like juwe, juwesdiks or jéwestos hadn't yet been proposed by scholars, still less published, by the time the GSG was written.

[DJA]

You totally ignored the first three lines of my post,and as usual singled out one piece out of context.

[Sam Flynn]

You totally ignored the first three lines of my post,and as usual singled out one piece out of context.

I just used your comment about Jack being "well-read" as an opportunity to provide some observations on Proto-Indo-European, that's all, thus saving me having to reply to two posts (yours and Callmebill's) separately.

[DJA]

Thus missing the point of my post,being that Jack may have been familiar with "Piers Plowman" and William Morris who had been listed to speak at IWMED the week before Stride's murder.

[Sam Flynn]

Thus missing the point of my post,being that Jack may have been familiar with "Piers Plowman" and William Morris who had been listed to speak at IWMED the week before Stride's murder.

I didn't respond to the rest of your post, otherwise I'd have quoted it. Instead, I only quoted "Seems that our Jack was well read" and responded to it (quite appropriately, and without contradicting you) because it formed a nice conversational "hinge" by which I could also respond to Bill's suggestion that the GSG author might have known Proto-Indo-European.

I thought that, by doing so, I'd save time and keystrokes. Evidently I was over-optimistic

[DJA]

You used one line from the first section of my post to reply to Bill's fourth last post.
Why did you do you reply to his last post earlier!

For someone who has called me a Troll,best you rummage around under your bridge for a mirror

[Sam Flynn]

You used one line from the first section of my post to reply to Bill's second last post.
Why didn't you do you reply to his last post earlier!

Because I didn't, and your comment about Jack's being well read triggered another thought, that's all.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Callmebill;427102]

The judges/law are not the men who will be blamed for nothing.
So, as I favour judgement . . . he’s saying – OK. I don’t know, but something like:
The judges are the men to blame? It’s their fault. Whose fault? The men of the laws’ fault.

Hi,

They will not be blamed in vain.

Compare "The soldiers died for nothing".

Compare: The soldiers will not die for nothing. They will not die in vain.

Conclusion: Therefore they will die for something.

The judges are not the men that will be blamed for nothing.

Conclusion: They will not be blamed in vain. Therefore they will be blamed for something.

For "something": something is the price for blaming them. The price is the murdered victims.

How about that?

Pierre