A kilt is not a skirt?

[Couya]

Perhaps it is a hackneyed topic on kilt forums, where the die-hards insist vehemently that a kilt is not a skirt.

This morning, I started a new activity aqua gym for the elderly. Not very exciting, to tell the truth, but a chance to meet some new faces.
I turned up in a tartan kilt; no mention was made in the changing room, where the only remarks were a warning not to leave anything in the lockers.
In the water, without my kilt, I assumed I would look the same as everyone else, but my clothes had been noticed, and as we did our exercises, moving round the pool as we did so, one man after another asked me how to say "falda escocesa", in English. It's called a kilt, I said. Later, I even heard one fellow explaining it to another. After that, it was mostly comments about whisky and the climate, all quite friendly, not very original.

It was obvious that they had all heard that Scotsmen wear skirts, but none knew the local name. Confirmation for me that a kilt is a skirt (as I have always said) once you leave the anglophone world -- and probably before then too.

Martin

[Caultron]

Of course a kilt is a type of skirt. Anything that starts at the waist and extends downward with a single leg-hole is a skirt.

I think some people distinguish the two because they want to believe a kilt is a man's garment while a skirt is a woman's. And while there may be some justification to that, don't forget that women wear kilts too.

But of course it's a much bigger deal for a man to wear a woman's garment than a woman to wear a man's, at least in the eyes of many.

[Stu]

In terms of semantic relations, there is no question that a kilt is a type (or hyponym - http://course.cug.edu.cn/cug/eng_langua ... /5-3-3.htm) of skirt in the same way that jeans is a type (hyponym) of trousers.

If you saw some cows in a field, you natural instinct is to call them "cows" - and not go straight to the breed, e.g. "Herefords", unless you were either a cattle breeder etc yoyrself, or you wanted to distinguish them from some other breed. Similarly, if a woman is wearing a skirt, we would normally say she is wearing a "skirt" and not specify whether it was an A-line, pencil, straight, gathered or wrapover. However, because a kilt is distinctive because it can be worn by men, and also by virtue of its very strong cultural associations with Scotland, we tend to go straight in at the level of "kilt"; but that does not mean it isn't a skirt.

Resistance to the acceptance that a kilt is a type of skirt seems to be predicated on the belief that, by admitting it is a skirt, one is admitting it is a feminine garment even when it patently is not. Men who wear kilts with pride should be secure enough to accept that, semantically at least, this garment is a type of skirt.

Stu

[Caultron]

Stu: Exactly.

All kilts are skirts, but not all skirts are kilts.

KIlts, in my view, are much easier for a man to wear than most skirts, not only because of tradition but also because the pleats and apron provide much better coverage when sitting down. But to each his own. Fabrics and the various ways of sewing them have no innate gender.

[crfriend]

I firmly hold the notion that a kilt is a type of skirt -- and always have. However, it is a skirt of a very distinctive type, is internationally recognizable, and understood as a man's garment (even though there are "kilted skirts for women); hence, I tend to call it by its formal name out of respect for "brand recognition". Calling it a skirt usually starts an argument that nobody wins and gets many upset, so it's worth avoiding.

I will, on occasion, gently correct somebody who calls a calf-length velvet number a kilt, mainly to point up that I would not be offended in the least to have my lower garment called out for what it is. Positive comments (e.g. the, "I like your skirt!", from the bride at a wedding photo-shoot in Boston a few years ago) are always welcomed and acknowledged if they name the garment correctly.

[Wesley]

This question leads to another one: when is a kilt not a kilt?

I prefer a kilt at least 30 inches long (below my knees). I would have to have one custom made or wear a "woman's kilted skirt" (several of which I own and wear). What length, fabric, pleat style, direction of closure, etc. constitutes a kilt?

[jimskirts]

Stu: Exactly.

All kilts are skirts, but not all skirts are kilts.

KIlts, in my view, are much easier for a man to wear than most skirts, not only because of tradition but also because the pleats and apron provide much better coverage when sitting down. But to each his own. Fabrics and the various ways of sewing them have no innate gender.

Coverage and freedom of movement are big differences i found.
But the general population will say skirt because most in the U.S. do not know of other cultures, despite how we portray ourselves.

[Caultron]

...the general population will say skirt because most in the U.S. do not know of other cultures, despite how we portray ourselves.

I dunno, I've never had anyone ask a question about or comment about my kilt and call it a skirt.

[jimskirts]

I got some looks but no comments but as for the heritage/history of the kilt I think few people know or care.

[Hemitom]

ok since this is a question ive had for a while, would this be a kilt or a skirt??


http://www.landsend.com/pp/StylePage-43 ... id=5626009

[Departed Member]

Looking at the word "kilt" linguistically, it seems most dictionaries I've come across describe the kilt as a type of skirt worn by men in Scotland, or anything made to look like a kilt, which is what somebody up above already mentioned in their comment.

The OED says the following:

"A part of the modern Highland dress, consisting of a skirt or petticoat reaching from the waist to the knee: it is usually made of tartan cloth, and is deeply plaited round the back and sides; hence, any similar article of dress worn in other countries."

Notice the words "skirt" and "petticoat" being used.

Webster's Dictionary says the following:
":a knee-length pleated skirt usually of tartan worn by men in Scotland and by Scottish regiments in the British armies

:a garment that resembles a Scottish kilt.

: a type of skirt traditionally worn by men in Scotland

: a woman's skirt that resembles a Scottish kilt"

Cambridge Dictionaries Online says:

"a skirt with many folds, made from tartan cloth and traditionally worn by Scottish men and boys"

And New Oxford American Dictionary says:

"a knee-length skirt of pleated tartan cloth, traditionally worn by men as part of Scottish Highland dress and now also worn by women and girls."

Interestingly, "kilt" is also a verb, and means to gather a garment into vertical pleats, or "to tuck up (as a skirt)" as the Merriam-Webster dictionary says. The OED defines the verb "kilt" as "To gird up; to tuck up (the skirts) round the body. Also with up," and "To gather in vertical pleats, fastened at the top and free at the bottom, as in a kilt."

Notice how all these sources indicate that the kilt is indeed a type of skirt, linguistically, both historically and currently.

Now, it also seems that women too can wear kilts, which are a type of skirt, both linguistically and in actuality. There are many women out there who wear kilts made for men, either as part of a piping band or for other reasons, and linguistically we see a kilt is anything, even a women's skirt that is made to look like a kilt. So, if women can wear a man's skirt, the kilt, or have their skirts called a kilt, then why can't men wear their skirt, the kilt, and other types of skirts as well worn by women, either those made for women or those made for men and meant to look like women's skirts?

Really, all common sense tells even the most barely rational/reasonable individual that there is no logical reason why men can't wear skirts, and even our English language proves this!

To those who insist the kilt is not a skirt, who are they kidding? It's as plain as day that it is; it's a hyponym, skirt being the superodinate and kilt being the subordinate. But, let them stubbornly resist, and I'll stubbornly not care whether its called a kilt or skirt. But, it is kind of like saying a knife isn't cutlery because it's a knife and there's a difference. Whatevs. Funny old world full of funny old people, innit?

[Departed Member]

ok since this is a question ive had for a while, would this be a kilt or a skirt??


http://www.landsend.com/pp/StylePage-43 ... id=5626009

It's both, linguistically at least. Like I mentioned above, "kilt" and "skirt" are hyponyms, meaning they are rleated to each other and are the same thing but exist in a hierarchy of labels. So, if a knife is a type of cutlery, then a kilt is a type of skirt, as has already been mentioned. It's a skirt that is pleated in the back and on the sides, has a flat panel or apron in the front, and wraps around to be fastened in some way. So, yes, in answer to your question, that Landsend kilt is both a kilt and a skirt. But this particular item linked here http://www.landsend.com/products/womens ... /id_274315 is simply a skirt, unless its style has another particular name/hyponym. Similarly, linguistically, this skirt here http://www.landsend.com/products/school ... /id_253564, pleated all around is simply a "pleated skirt" and not a kilt because its different from a kilt in its features, again, linguistically.

[Grok]

Of course a kilt is a skirt. So what?

[crfriend]

Of course a kilt is a skirt. So what?

The unfortunate thing is that it's not a "skirt" to the die-hard kilt-wearer -- and that's where some sensitivity on our part is required. Yes, we know that semantically and by construction kilts are a form of skirt, but by calling them skirts we are causing irritation to kilt-wearers who do not regard their garments as skirts. A bit of respect is required here.

[Caultron]

Oh good grief. All kilts are skirts, but not all skirts are kilts.