Klosowski docs wrongly translated

[Magpie]

Magpie

Which in Victorian England would have been the equivalent of a "physician and surgeon".

Absolutely NOT. You are belittling them by suggesting it. I have studied in depth the struggle women had to become doctors, and I wrote a biography of one of them, and that gave me an insight into exactly the qualifications needed for anyone (m/f) to become a physician and surgeon.

A "physician and surgeon" was the lowest rung on the medical ladder, requiring only a LRCS and a LRCP (which could be obtained through apprenticeship).

And we did not have such a thing as a nurse-practitioner, which is why Pietrykowski floundered when he had to translate the word "felczer". He had a wild stab in the dark (no pun intended) and went for "surgeon".

Giving the context at the time, it was a pretty good stab, as it happens, for reasons I've just explained. Absent the concept of "nurse-practioner", "field surgeon" is a pretty apt description.

[HelenaWojtczak]

Magpie

Which in Victorian England would have been the equivalent of a "physician and surgeon".

Absolutely NOT. You are belittling them by suggesting it. I have studied in depth the struggle women had to become doctors, and I wrote a biography of one of them, and that gave me an insight into exactly the qualifications needed for anyone (m/f) to become a physician and surgeon.


In Victorian times, a "surgeon" was not necessarily someone who was qualified to perform surgery--there was no term for what today we would call a general practioner (or indeed a nurse practioner).

You are correct here. They just used to call people "doctors" back then, not GPs. And we did not have such a thing as a nurse-practitioner, which is why Pietrykowski floundered when he had to translate the word "felczer". He had a wild stab in the dark (no pun intended) and went for "surgeon".

Little did he know what a can of worms he was opening!

Helena

[Magpie]

"I did not say they were "just" nurses. I told the truth, they were nurse-practitioners. They ran their own polyclinics, under the supervision of a qualified physician who visited now and again."

Which in Victorian England would have been the equivalent of a "physician and surgeon". In Victorian times, a "surgeon" was not necessarily someone who was qualified to perform surgery--there was no term for what today we would call a general practioner (or indeed a nurse practioner).

It's not enough for a translator to literally translate word "A" in one language into work "A" in another language--they also have to convey a sense of equivalency between the two phrases.

[HelenaWojtczak]

Wow you are an arrogant piece of work. My sources are intelligence and the fact that we went over this stuff years ago when you were out writing whatever little pamphletsl you were writing. Feldshers were often the only medical people available in villages in Russia and Poland (which was part of Russia) and were not just nurses. In the 50s and 60s they were assistants and nurses. In the 19th century they did all kinds of things. Your sources are outdated or you didn't read them. Do some homework and get back to me.

Mike

You can abuse and insult me as much as you like, it won't make you right.

A felczer is NOT a surgeon. Rapoport was not a "senior surgeon". Klosowski was not apprenticed to a surgeon. This is all relevant because this nonsense is repeatedly cited to prove he was Jack the Ripper because he was a surgeon i.e. someone who cuts open people's bodies, cuts out organs etc.

I did not say they were "just" nurses. I told the truth, they were nurse-practitioners. They ran their own polyclinics, under the supervision of a qualified physician who visited now and again.

You said a felczer was a barber surgeon earlier on.

Lastly, I don't write pamphlets, I write award-winning books of factual history. What do you write?

Carry on with the abuse, it's water off a duck's back to me!

Helena

[The Good Michael]

I'm afraid you need to do your homework, Mike, before making such statements. What exactly is your source for your assertions?

Wow you are an arrogant piece of work. My sources are intelligence and the fact that we went over this stuff years ago when you were out writing whatever little pamphletsl you were writing. Feldshers were often the only medical people available in villages in Russia and Poland (which was part of Russia) and were not just nurses. In the 50s and 60s they were assistants and nurses. In the 19th century they did all kinds of things. Your sources are outdated or you didn't read them. Do some homework and get back to me.

Mike

[HelenaWojtczak]

A Feldscher is a surgeon, a barber-surgeon and did perform field surgery. I don;t think this is new. People have said for a a long time that Koslowski had Feldscher training. As for names: Rarely do difficult names get translated to anyone;s satisfaction. In fact, name translation is conjecture as teh name only really exists in its given language.

Mike

I'm afraid you need to do your homework, Mike, before making such statements. What exactly is your source for your assertions?

Here (below) I give my expert sources, published in a learned medical journal and an authoritative book relevant to the period.

Ramer, Samuel C. (1976). Who Was the Russian Feldsher? Bulletin of the History of Medicine 50:213–225. Ramer, Samuel C. (1996).

Professionalism and Politics: The Russian Feldsher Movement, 1891–1918. In Balzer, H (ed). Russia’s Missing Middle Class: The Professions in Russian History.

Helena

[The Good Michael]

A Feldscher is a surgeon, a barber-surgeon and did perform field surgery. I don;t think this is new. People have said for a a long time that Koslowski had Feldscher training. As for names: Rarely do difficult names get translated to anyone;s satisfaction. In fact, name translation is conjecture as teh name only really exists in its given language.

Mike

[HelenaWojtczak]

one of my old friends wrote a detailed article about G.Chapman years ago, it was printed in ``Ripper notes``.

he said that G.Chapman could hardly run and that he was a clumsy walker too, ( two left feet) now i dont really believe this and i dont remember where he got it from, i'm just mentioning it that's all.

Excellent cyclist, though!

[HelenaWojtczak]

Hi Helena---I see well fair enough.But I still think we need a qualified translator
Norma

And what is such a person going to translate, when the documents are missing?

Helena

[Malcolm X]

one of my old friends wrote a detailed article about G.Chapman years ago, it was printed in ``Ripper notes``.

he said that G.Chapman could hardly run and that he was a clumsy walker too, ( two left feet) now i dont really believe this and i dont remember where he got it from, i'm just mentioning it that's all.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Helena---I see well fair enough.But I still think we need a qualified translator
of medical documents pertaining to the 19th century to really get to the root of these inconsistencies.For all we know the same man who translated his little book of 500 medicines might have wrongly translated that too---it could have been something much more sinister!
Norma

[HelenaWojtczak]

Please keep it to this thread now Norma, saves confusion!

"are we to understand the following subject matter referring to the subject of surgery is also wrongly translated as it has nothing to do with Rapoport"

You have misunderstood me Norma.

The problem does not lie with Rapoport, but with the police interpreter, Joseph Pietrikowski.

Pietrikowski saw the words "starszy felczer" and translated them as "senior surgeon".

Therefore he translated "felczer" as "surgeon".

A felczer is not a surgeon; it is a nurse.

Therefore, every time we see Pietrikowski use the word "surgeon" (and doubtless its derivatives such as "surgical") we cannot trust that the original word he is translating from was, in fact, surgeon/surgical.

The point is, if he mistranslated once, he could have --- nay, is LIKELY to have --- mistranslated every occurence of the word (which we don't know as the docs no longer exist).

I hope that is clearer.

So it could have been "seal of the medical society" and "the degree of a junior nurse-practioner".

Hasn't it ever struck you as odd that someone who had been apprenticed to be a felczer (i.e. nurse) could suddenly jump to going for a degree in surgery? I'd be pretty surprised if the nurse who takes my BP every year told me she was doing that!

Helena

[Natalie Severn]

Carrying on from my and Norma's posting on this thread:

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=6016

in which they were off topic I have started this new thread to discuss the matter.

Regarding the mistranslation of Klosowski's Russian documents, I believe the translator was inaccurate. I have discovered that Rapoport was not a chirurg (surgeon) but a felczer (nurse-practitioner).

I bring further evidence to support my contention:

On 27th August 2009 Adamkle, a member of this forum whose mother tongue is Polish, wrote:

"In my opinion these translations provoke many questions...there are many such linguistic enigmas... in these translated documents..."

He goes on to say that such names as "Colimowski" and "Zyanski" don't exist in Polish language... maybe there is a mistake in translation?"

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=3039&highlight=Colimowski

I agree with Adamkle on the above.

So you now have two Polish speakers (one born in Poland who learned English; one born in England who learned Polish) writing idependently and at separate times that there are mistakes in Pietrikowski's translations, which are the sole translations ever made of SK's Russian documents.

Thoughts anyone?

Helena

Hi Helena,

As I have written on another thread are we to understand the following subject matter referring to the subject of surgery is also wrongly translated ? This has nothing at all to do with Rapoport!!!



Translations of Documents, &c.
was paid by him into the Treasury of the said Society.— In witness whereof, Brodinski, the Chief of the Society, testifies by affixing his signature and the
" seal of the Surgical Society."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" This is given to Severin Klosowski, surgery pupil, to the effect that from October 1, 1885, till January 1, 1886, he received instructions in practical surgery at the Hospital of Praga, Warsaw,

" Ministry of Interior, Medical Administration of Warsaw, December 5, 1886.—In consequence of the application pre sen ted by Severin Klosowski, surgical pupil, the Medical
222
Translations of Documents/ &c.


Administration hereby testify to the effect that they do not see any reason to oppose his receiving the degree of a Junior Surgeon. The required stamp duties have been paid.— (Signed) Dr. M. Oreszaief, Collegiate Councillor and Inspector. A. Pominski, Secretary."

[HelenaWojtczak]

Carrying on from my and Norma's posting on this thread:

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=6016

in which they were off topic I have started this new thread to discuss the matter.

Regarding the mistranslation of Klosowski's Russian documents, I believe the translator was inaccurate. I have discovered that Rapoport was not a chirurg (surgeon) but a felczer (nurse-practitioner).

I bring further evidence to support my contention:

On 27th August 2009 Adamkle, a member of this forum whose mother tongue is Polish, wrote:

"In my opinion these translations provoke many questions...there are many such linguistic enigmas... in these translated documents..."

He goes on to say that such names as "Colimowski" and "Zyanski" don't exist in Polish language... maybe there is a mistake in translation?"

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=3039&highlight=Colimowski

I agree with Adamkle on the above.

So you now have two Polish speakers (one born in Poland who learned English; one born in England who learned Polish) writing idependently and at separate times that there are mistakes in Pietrikowski's translations, which are the sole translations ever made of SK's Russian documents.

Thoughts anyone?

Helena