834 POPULAR SCIENCE M0N1HLY. 



precedes their introduction, while in the argot the birth of a 

 new word is a chance. Thus in the last three years there 

 have been three different words for watch super, thimhle, and 

 yellow and white each of which was, in its turn, the only 

 term used. 



Every writer on the subject has noticed that the argot is very 

 rich in expressions to denote certain common actions. This is a 

 peculiarity shared by all primitive languages, the only difference 

 being in the selection of the common acts. Thus in Sanskrit 

 there are nearly one hundred roots which exj^ress the idea of 

 killing or wounding, without counting secondary derivations. 

 Some of these roots are embodied in our language to-day. In 

 the dialect of the thieves there are nearly one hundred expressions 

 to signify theft. It was necessary for the pickpocket to describe 

 the various pockets in a man's clothing and in a woman's dress. 

 The average man does not often need to specify a particular 

 pocket ; when he does, he lays his hand on it to assist the poverty 

 of his language ; the thief has a separate name for each separate 

 pocket. 



It is a curious and instructive study, full of interest to the 

 metaphysician, the philosopher, or the scientist. 



But in spite of this richness in synonyms, which is in itself a 

 very marked sign of degeneracy, for the tendency of a language 

 is to eliminate its synonyms, giving to each a different shade of 

 meaning, the argot is a poor language. It has not a single ex- 

 pression for abstract emotion ; to attempt to render a philosophic 

 thought, a moral emotion, a synthetic or esthetic idea into the 

 dialect of the thief would be like attempting to translate " elec- 

 tricity " or " steam engine " into Latin. It is impossible, because 

 the words do not exist. They are not needed. The criminal has 

 no more conception of abstract emotion than a blind man has of 

 color. 



A fact which does seem to ally the argot to a primitive lan- 

 guage is its ability to form additional words from its own re- 

 sources, a power of self-development which we find in the old 

 Anglo-Saxon and especially in the German of to-day. This trait 

 is the more striking, as it seems in direct contradiction to the im- 

 potence of the English language in this respect. The English has 

 little formative power ; it relies on the Greek and Latin languages 

 for the extension of its vocabulary. 



Dr. Laurent states, in his work on the French criminal, that 

 some authors have claimed that the slang of the criminal was a 

 kind of international language for thieves, a Volapiik of crime. 

 It is unfortunate that the names of these authors were not given. 

 Were it not for the reputation of the learned doctor it might be 

 suspected that he was creating men of straw that he might forth- 



