What's new
What's new

Bastard file -name origin?

As sfriedberg says.

Why should something that is simply an intermediate grade be credited as an invention by anybody, and credited to a named individual?

The word bastard has long had a variety of uses, including 'intermediate'. 'Bastard size' is still used today. I have seen a 1767 advert for bricks - fine stock, bastard stock, and common bricks.

Incidentally, here's a 1703 reference to bastard files:-

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...oECAcQAw#v=onepage&q="baftard" "file"&f=false
 
... I wonder if it just so English author trying to credit one his countrymen? ...
Given that Audel's 'Handy' books were published by Theo. Audel & Co., 49 W 23rd St., New York, U.S.A., I think that's unlikely.

I believe it's an example of 'etymythology' where people make up explanations that sound as though they might be convincing, such as the fanciful explanations one hears for 'raining cats and dogs', 'sleep tight', 'threshold', 'sirloin of beef' and so on. I must admit to having made up a few myself, usually to poke fun at other people's efforts.

As for the file name, my father was always very proper in his speech and would not utter the word bastard, so when he was obliged to refer to it, he called it a bustard file. Plenty of scope there for the etymythologists!

George
 
Some interesting insight. Obviously, the actual origin is lost to time. However, I can see where a cultural exchange could cause a misnomer. Equally, I can see the logic in the "not course" and "not fine".
I've always found etymology to be fascinating. Thanks for contributing to my curiosity!
 
I don't know where the name bastard came from for files but it definitely did not originate from someone named Barsted. The earliest reference that I could find was from 1693, printed in London so that makes the name native to England.

Here is the reference.

Interestingly, I found that description of filing printed word for word for at least 150 years in different publications.
 
There are standard sizes for certain items, and then there are non-standard, or "bastard" sizes.

Makes plenty of sense that a file type that was originally non-standard would be termed a "bastard" type.
 
There are standard sizes for certain items, and then there are non-standard, or "bastard" sizes.

Makes plenty of sense that a file type that was originally non-standard would be termed a "bastard" type.

Bastard refers to the coarseness of the cut and not the size of the file. Two different things.

Rob
 

Attachments

  • Nicholson Files 1878 1.jpg
    Nicholson Files 1878 1.jpg
    159 KB · Views: 19
  • Nicholson Files 1878 2.jpg
    Nicholson Files 1878 2.jpg
    204.1 KB · Views: 15
  • Nicholson Files 1878 3.jpg
    Nicholson Files 1878 3.jpg
    245.9 KB · Views: 13
  • Nicholson Files 1878 4.jpg
    Nicholson Files 1878 4.jpg
    224 KB · Views: 11
  • Nicholson Files 1878 5.jpg
    Nicholson Files 1878 5.jpg
    252.3 KB · Views: 15
  • Nicholson Files 1878 6.jpg
    Nicholson Files 1878 6.jpg
    234.3 KB · Views: 18
  • Nicholson Files 1878 7.jpg
    Nicholson Files 1878 7.jpg
    250.3 KB · Views: 18
Bastard refers to the coarseness of the cut and not the size of the file. Two different things.

Rob
I am well aware of that..........And you will note that "sizes" referred to "other things" and "types" referred to files. The "bastard sizes" was simply an example (and the most common case) of using the term.......

There are standard sizes for certain items, and then there are non-standard, or "bastard" sizes.

Makes plenty of sense that a file type that was originally non-standard would be termed a "bastard" type.
 
Last edited:








 
Back
Top