Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

attentionpaysme t1_jdmgqx3 wrote

You know what they say about men with big barleycorn

38

Low_Brass_Rumble t1_jdnayv3 wrote

I know this isn’t what the post is about, but that chart is absolutely idiotic. It’s like ten different measurement systems with totally different use cases, no connection to each other, and zero reason to ever convert between them, mashed together without rhyme or reason and arranged in a way that seems deliberately haphazard to make them look more confusing:

  • Twips, points, picas, lines, and sticks are typesetting measurements, and never used outside of that context.

  • Nails, spans, ells, skeins, and spindles are units of measure specifically for fabric, and never used outside of that context.

  • Ropes, rods/poles, Gunter’s chains, and Ramsden chains were units for surveying, named after actual tools, and never used outside of that context. They have no real relation to each other aside from through feet, and generally weren’t ever converted from one to the other.

  • Fathoms, shackles, cables, and nautical miles are all nautical units of measure, and never used outside of that context. Fathoms are also a unit of depth, and as such not generally used to measure distance.

  • Hands, digits, palms, fingers, shaftments, paces, and grades/steps were mostly colloquial units of measure used before measuring implements were widely available.

  • Furlongs are mostly anachronistic, and were only ever really used to measure horse races.

  • Poppyseeds and barleycorns are units defined by a standard set in the 1300s and haven’t been used in any capacity for hundreds of years.

  • A Roman mile is a literal ancient Roman unit, and has nothing to do with the rest of this chart.

Just because all these units were somewhere, at some point, used by some number of English-speakers for some purpose, doesn’t mean they’re all part of the same system of measurement.

32

Plexiii13 t1_jdoe9h8 wrote

I watched a whole video that heavily focused on how bad that chart was.

https://youtu.be/iJymKowx8cY

4

Low_Brass_Rumble t1_jdoeg98 wrote

Ooh, love me some Jan Misali! I’ve mostly watched his ConLang content before - def gonna give this a look

3

Plexiii13 t1_jdog2e5 wrote

Yeah I love his videos, glad my recommendation was well-targeted lol!

3

cool110110 t1_jdr7tfp wrote

> Ropes, rods/poles, Gunter’s chains, and Ramsden chains were units for surveying, named after actual tools, and never used outside of that context.

The Gunter’s chain is used in other contexts, the most important being in cricket.

1

Landlubber77 t1_jdmo51s wrote

I have no idea what a barleycorn is and I'm not going to google it. Life is more fun with a little mystery.

15

marmorset t1_jdnbxws wrote

Here's how it works:

​

Shoe size in the United Kingdom, Ireland, India, Pakistan and South Africa is based on the length of the last [a last is a foot-shaped template] used to make the shoes, measured in barleycorns (1⁄3 inch) starting from the smallest size deemed practical, which is called size zero. It is not formally standardised.

Note that the last is typically longer than the foot heel to toe length by 1⁄2 to 2⁄3 in or 1+1⁄2 to 2 barleycorns, so to determine the shoe size based on actual foot length one must add 2 barleycorns.

A child's size zero is equivalent to 4 inches (a hand = 12 barleycorns = 10.16 cm), and the sizes go up to size 13+1⁄2 (measuring 25+1⁄2 barleycorns, or 8+1⁄2 inches (21.59 cm)). Thus, the calculation for a children's shoe size in the UK is:child shoe size (barleycorns) = 3 × last length (in) − 12equivalent to:child shoe size (barleycorns) ≈ 3 × foot length (in) − 10.

An adult size one is then the next size up (26 barleycorns, or 8+2⁄3 in (22.01 cm)) and each size up continues the progression in barleycorns.[5] The calculation for an adult shoe size in the UK is thus:adult shoe size (barleycorns) = 3 × last length (in) − 25equivalent to:adult shoe size (barleycorns) ≈ 3 × foot length (in) − 23.

Although this sizing standard is nominally for both men and women, some manufacturers use different numbering for women's UK sizing.In Australia and New Zealand, the UK system is followed for men and children's footwear [Essentially the UK system, but they count the UK size zeros as the US size 1 and go from there]. Women's footwear follows the US sizings.

In Mexico, shoes are sized either according to the foot length they are intended to fit, in cm, or alternatively to another variation of the barleycorn system, with sizes calculated approximately as:adult shoe size (barleycorns) = 3 × last length (in) − 25+1⁄2equivalent to:adult shoe size (barleycorns) ≈ 3 × foot length (in) − 23+1⁄2.

7

A40 t1_jdmgwj8 wrote

And Australian sizes are based on.. wombat poo?

4

AtebYngNghymraeg t1_jdmtlms wrote

It was truncated at "Bar" on my phone. Was convinced it was going to say "Barclaycard"

2

ydoc04 t1_jdn3yoh wrote

...shoe sizes ARE based on the size of...

1

Tenairi t1_jdnay5q wrote

They need a chart like that for volume conversion as well.

1

phryan t1_jdp3gyz wrote

TIL my shoe size is based on the main ingredient of beer.

1

jenksy t1_jdmh4ao wrote

When you don’t use metric…

0

new-username-2017 t1_jdn54ob wrote

Did anyone else read shaftment as shaftmeat? Which just happens to be six inches.

0