128 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



the rules of strict grammar, or disregard the principles of analogy, or 

 belong by their origin to what we now deem the worst sort of vulgar- 

 isms. These so-called corruptions are found everywhere in the vocabu- 

 lary, and in nearly all the parts of speech." 



Yet the feeling of the pedants and purists reflects the traditional 

 attitude of professional men of letters in respect to the so-called cor- 

 ruptions that have been creeping into English during the last few 

 centuries. It may be worth while to give some of the utterances of 

 our representative English authors on this subject, showing how great 

 solicitude they felt for the purity of our language in consequence of 

 the increasing slang introduced into English. But before doing this, 

 let us make a brief digression, in order to discuss what is meant by 

 slang, which appears to be the source of the alleged corruptions of our 

 speech. 



In the first place one must differentiate slang from cant. It is evi- 

 dent, on a careful analysis, that much of the reputed slang now current 

 is really cant, not slang, in the proper sense of the term. Both cant 

 and slang are closely allied and have a kindred origin. This is the 

 reason for the confusion of the two in the popular mind. 



Cant is the language of a certain class or sect of people. It is the 

 phraseology, the dialect, so to say, of a certain craft or profession and 

 is not readily understood save by the members of the craft concerned. 

 It may be perfectly correct according to the rules of grammar, but it 

 is not perfectly intelligible and is not understood by the people. It is 

 an esoteric language which only the initiated fully comprehend and are 

 familiar with. For example, the jargon of thieves is called cant, as is 

 also the jargon of professional gamblers. Slang, on the other hand, 

 belongs to no particular class. It is a collection of words and phrases, 

 borrowed from whatever source, which everybody is acquainted with 

 and readily understands. It is not uncouth gibberish intelligible only 

 to a few. It is composed of colloquialisms everywhere current, but 

 homely and not refined enough to be admitted into polite speech. 

 Such expressions may be allowed a place in certain departments of lit- 

 erature, as familiar and humorous writing, but they are objectionable 

 in grave and serious composition and speech. 



Now, slang is reputed to have had its origin in cant, specifically 

 'thieves' Latin,' as the cant of this vagabond class is called. Indeed, 

 this appears to have been the only meaning of slang till probably the 

 second quarter of the last century. In ' Bed Gauntlet,' published in 

 1824, Scott refers to certain cant words and ' thieves' Latin called 

 slang ' ; and the great romancer seems to have been fully aware that 

 he was using a rather unknown term which required a gloss. Some- 

 time during the middle of the last century, so Professor Brander 

 Matthews informs us, slang lost this narrow limitation and came to 



