The American Dialect Society

What Is Slang?: A Survey of Opinion

Author(s): Haviland Ferguson Reves
Source: American Speech, Vol. 1, No. 4 (Jan., 1926), pp. 216-220
Published by: Duke University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/452521 .
Accessed: 05/03/2014 03:07
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The American Dialect Society and Duke University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to American Speech.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 175.111.91.40 on Wed, 5 Mar 2014 03:07:44 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

WHAT IS SLANG?
A SURVEY OF OPINION

LANG is the changingvocabulary condemns the use of slang and relegates

of conversation; it comes into sudden vogue, has a meaning, usually
figurative, which is known by a particular
set or class and which constitutes a sort of
shibboleth during the brief period of
its popularity, and then dies in the obscure
corners of forgotten words and unabridged dictionaries, or passes into the
legitimate speech. The importance of
slang and its breadth of meaning have not
always been recognized. Older lexicographers ignored the word, as of no importance in relation to language, and the
earliest recognition it received gave it an
undeserved taint of illegitimacy-an illegitimacy which it has not entirely lost in
the popular mind today.
The origin of the word slang is doubtful,
and cannot be determined. On the surface, its most probable relationship is to
the Scandinavian word, slengja,to sling; a
derivative of this verb is a synonym for
a nickname. Weekley' has surmised that
it may be a perversion of the French
langue. It did not occur in the language
in any form or sense approximating the
present during the Middle English period,
nor was it in legitimate use as late as the
Stuart period, according to Mayhew and
Skeat.2
The first definition I find of slang occurs
in Webster's Dictionary, in 18z8: "low,
vulgar, unmeaning language." This is
well for a beginning but it would be
invalid for the slang of the present. It
1Concise Etymological Dictionary of Modern English.
192.4.
2
Glossary of Tudor and Stuart Words.

1914.

it to the lowest social classes. This was

the origin of early slang, only in so far
as it was synonymous with cant. It
cannot be said that slang was ever unmeaning; it has always had an arbitrary
meaning, usually different from the accepted sense of the particularterm utilized.
It was perhaps this element of secrecy and
intimacy in slang, or at least the appearance of it, that Webster intended to
indicate in the first edition of his Dictionary. He notes that the use of the
term itself was considered "low" in his
day; and this explains why earlier authorities-Phillips (1696), Bailey (i7'z), Johnson (1755), Ash (I775) and other lexicographers-as well as many who came
later-ignored the term entirely.
The same definition was followed in
later editions of Webster, with a difference only of punctuation, until 1864,
and it was used as well by Craig (1849),
and Wright (185Z-56). Maunder (1853)
followed Webster, while Storrs (1855) in
a dictionary printed in a unique phonetic
alphabet, added that slang was particularly the cant of sharpers. In 1863,
Bolles for the first time used the "low and
abusive language," which has so often
been quoted; and the next year a new
edition of Webster enlarged the definition to read: "low, vulgar, unauthorized
language; a colloquial mode of expression, especially such as is in vogue with
some class in society." This is the first
notice of the element of vogue in slang,
an element that is today distinctive.
Latham, two years later (1866), agreed in

216

This content downloaded from 175.111.91.40 on Wed, 5 Mar 2014 03:07:44 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

WHAT IS SLANG
condemning the use of slang, and noted
that it is "language peculiar to a class."
A writer in The OverlandMonthly, in
1870,' defined slang as the "spontaneous
outburst of the thought power become
vocal." This is the first time that slang
was defined as something thoroughly
worthy of respect, and the first notice of
the importance of the figurative element.
The same writer adds that slang can have
no "ulterior purpose other than emphasis
or illustration," thereby recognizing permanently the purposes of slang.
Zell (I871) advanced no further in the
definition, and did not recognize the
figurative element; while an 1876 Webster
used the first definition again, as did
the Encyclopedic
Dictionaryas late as 1891.
sometimes
Lexicographers
progress
slowly.
The AmericanCyclopaedia(1876) called
slang a burlesque form of expression, and
this idea, confirming recognition of the
figurative element, was popular with
writers for a long time. It is erroneous
in that it makes slang always extravagant
in metaphor, whereas the most choice use
of slang is almost precise.
There was little further advance in
accepted definitions of slang for a number
of years. Worcester, in 1879, called it
"vile, low, or vulgar language; the
cant of sharpers or of the vulgar; gibberish." This was a return to the earlier
definitions. Davies (1881) contributed
the additional meaning, "to scold, abuse."
The Imperial(1883), the Progressive
(1885),
and the Encyclopaedic
(1887) dictionaries,
and the People'sCyclopedia
(1882) contained
fairly comprehensive articles, including
most of the material available at the time
of publication, presenting it in a loose
fashion.
Walt Whitman wrote in the North
3 "The Rationale of Slang," vol. 4, p. I87. February, 1870.

217

American Review, in I885, that slang was

"an attempt of common humanity to

escape from bald literalism, and express
itself illimitably." This was the first
clear and emphatic enunciation of the importance of metaphor in slang, with a
statement of the reason. This element,
together with the transient nature of
slang-its vogue-has been the point of
disagreement among lexicographers since,
with this new distinction gradually replacing the old conception of slang as the
language of the lowest classes.
In 1889, Barrere and Leland in their
Dictionary of Slang, Jargon, and Cant, with

characteristic lack of definiteness, defined

slang as "a conventional tongue with
many dialects." It was in the same year
that Hotten's revised definition appeared:
"language of street humour, of fast, high,
and

low

life."

Nuttall's

Dictionary

represented a point between the

old and new conceptions of slang.
A number of varying definitions appeared in the early nineties. Chambers's
(1890)

Cyclopedia (1893) in a new edition defined

slang as "any kind of shibboleth used to

distinguish a class," citing only the element of secrecy. This was in accord with
a definition in the Atlantic Monthly,5 "the

using of a word or phrase differently from

the popular acceptation;" and in opposition to "F. H.'s" definition in The
Nation,""diction by which one is disagreeably reminded of a particular occupation,
class, or sect."

All the Year Round' formu-

lated the popular definition, as "language

of the streets," adding that this idea of
slang was "rubbish!"
The next formal definition was written
by BranderMatthews: "A word or phrase
4Slang Dictionary. 1889.
6
"Slang," vol. 71, p. 42.4. March, 1893.
6 Letter from "F. H.," vol. 57, p. I55. August
3I, 1893.
7 "Slang," vol. 73, P. 5Io. November
25, 1893.

This content downloaded from 175.111.91.40 on Wed, 5 Mar 2014 03:07:44 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

AMERICAN SPEECH

2.18

used with a meaning not recognized in

polite letters, either because it had just
been invented, or because it had passed out
A collection of colof memory. .....
loquialisms gathered from all sources,
and all bearing alike the bend sinister of
While this stresses to a
illegitimacy."'8
new degree the transient character of
slang, it does not mention that it is often
the peculiar language of a class, nor that
it has a meaning in some sense figurative.
It is valuable, however, as a definition
of the historical character of slang.
The first satisfactory definition of slang
that I have found was in the Standard
Dictionary, of 1895. It is of sufficient
length to give a historical treatment
which accounts for the early usage of
slang, yet it does not approve the use of
slang: "i. Inelegant and unauthorized
popular language, consisting of words and
phrases of low or illiterate origin and use,
or of legitimate expressions used in grotesque, irregular, or metaphorical senses
not approved by reputable usage and good
2. The cant or jargon
taste.....
thieves and vagrants.
to
peculiar
This
is the best definition of
"
..
written
by this date, but it has a
slang
few omissions, and is faulty in its unqualified condemnation.
Four years later, a writer in the Saturday
Review' defined slang as "a kind of
peculiar language which is not applied to
peculiar things but to ordinary." And
Marsh, three years later, merely defined it
as "inelegant language."'1 The more
liberal definitions were not accepted for
a long time, in some instances.
The CenturyDictionary (1911) gives a
8 'The Function of Slang."
Magazine, vol. 87, p. 304.

Harper's Monthly

9 "The Philosophy of Slang," vol. 88, p. -2-7.

August 19, 1899.
10 Thesaurus Dictionary of the English Language.
1902..

thoroughly inadequate definition, merely

adding that slang is "colloquial language
or expression current at any particular
period." Nelson's Encyclopedia,
published
in 1907, gives an excellent definition, including practically all the essentials, and
refraining from condemnation. It is the
first comprehensive recognition of slang:
"such colloquial words and phrases as are
felt to be out of the common run, exaggerated, metaphorical, or outr.....
Slang is essentially vivid and striking; it
comes quickly into general use; but for the
same reason it is quickly overworked,
grows stale, and is then as quickly
dropped."
The eleventh edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica(I9II) defined slang as
"the class of words and senses, more or
less artificial or affected in origin, or use,
which are not recognized as belonging to
the standard vocabulary of the language
into which they have been introduced,
but have an extensive currency in some
section of society either as a means of
concealing secrets or intentionally undignified substitutes for those modes of expression that areemployed by personswho
value themselves on propriety of speech."
The last phrase implies a condemnation of
slang, as beneath the level of accepted
speech, but the disapproval is mild. The
characteristic new note of the definition
is that slang has an artificial origin.
This is not strictly true, for slang is no
more artificial in its origin than other
forms of speech, and indeed is more often
spontaneous in its first utterance.
The new CenturyDictionary, of 1911,
had an improved definition, citing the
origins of slang, and mentioning that it
is occasionally figurative, but wholly
condemning it. The ConciseOxfordDictionary, of the same year, attempts to
establish a strict definition, but has missed
the point in attempting to obtain suffi-

This content downloaded from 175.111.91.40 on Wed, 5 Mar 2014 03:07:44 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

WHATIS SLANG
cient breadth. It includes words "either
entirely peculiar to or used in special
senses by some class or profession." This
is not specific enough, for all technical
terminology would then be slang; the
further distinction that slang has a
figurative meaning must be added.
In 1913, the New Standard Dictionary
reprinted its older definition, with some
additional matter, allowing slang to be
"the speech or dialect of a special sect,
profession, or class of persons." In a
note on synonyms, it was stated that
slang is used for "expressions that are
either coarse and rude in themselves or
chiefly current among the coarser and
ruder parts of the community." This
attitude of condemnation is an unjustified
survival from the earlier ideas of slang.
Today, it is felt that slang is an important
factor in the making of language, and
must be recognized as in approved use by
all classes of society.
The New InternationalDictionary,in the
same year, defined slang as: "Originally,
cant of thieves, gypsies, beggars, etc.;
now, language or words consisting either
of new words or phrases, often of the
vagrant or illiterate classes, or of ordinary
words or phrases in arbitrary senses, and
having a conventional but vulgar or inelegant use; also, the jargon of a particular calling or class of society; popular
cant." This is the most comprehensive
and satisfactory definition that has appeared. While it retains, in part, its
former expression of disapproval of slang,
it is only a part of the whole body of
slang that is condemned, and in this
alone its definition is a great advance
over older authorities. The definition is
slightly faulty in over-emphasizing the
conventionality of the meaning, when it
is more often characterized by figurativeness; and in not noting that slang depends
upon sudden vogue for its currency.

2I9

Routledge's (1914), Cassell's (19zo),

and the Graphic Dictionary (1916) give
definitions that are great advances over
those in the old dictionaries; but they
are not complete, although there is little
to differ from in their statements. The
OxfordDictionarygives variant definitions,
some of which cover practically all the
various ideas that have already been
noted of slang, and then adds: "Language
of a highly colloquial type, considered as
below the level of standard educated
speech, and consisting either of new
words, or of current words employed in
some special sense." While this does not
precisely state that slang is either figurative or transient, it is entirely satisfactory
otherwise, as a definition. It is not too
much to say that slang is below the level
of the most educated speech, if it is recognized that it is a desirable factor in the
growth of the language, and that it may,
with propriety, be used in all colloquial
situations. It is ordinarily to be barred
from writing, except in a style where it
adds vividness.
The EncyclopediaAmericana(1923) says:
"first, slang is a conscious offense against
some accepted standard of linguistic
propriety. Secondly, slang words are
deliberately substituted for words of the
vernacular." These are acceptable as
traits of slang, but there is no attempt
to set them up as a definition. The New
InternationalEncyclopedia(I9z4), ignoring
the later advances in definition, defined
slang as: "Colloquial words and phrases
originating chiefly in the lower classes of
society or in professional jargon. The
term may also include words formally in
harmony with the standard usage, but
which in meaning diverge from this
norm so far as to be generally considered
inelegant and vulgar."
For a short and final definition, the
Pocket Oxford Dictionary (I92z5) is to be

This content downloaded from 175.111.91.40 on Wed, 5 Mar 2014 03:07:44 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2.2o0

AMERICAN SPEECH

trusted: "Expressions in common colloquial use but regarded as outside of

standard English, words or phrases peculiar to some class of people." Without
going into too great detail, this definition embodies all the good features of
that in the greater OxfordDictionary. It
has the two faults that characterized the
latter's definition: it does not distinguish
slang from dialect by noting its transiency, nor from cant by noting its figurativeness. Were these two distinctions to
be added, the definition would represent
exactly the present-day conception of
slang.
And so the conception of slang has
grown, from its early meaning of the

dialect of thieves, from the days when

Ambrose Bierce called it "the speech of
him who robs the literary garbage cans on
their way to the dumps," to its present
significance. It has gained in respectability; indeed, it is now cultivated in
some forms of literature. It is characteristically figurative and exuberant, as
befits a growing language. And for
that reason, it is essentially characteristic
of America, of a country still young and
awkward in its playfulness. Its vulgarities will disappear in time, and slang
in the future will be seen to be, as indeed
it is, "a vivid way of saying something."
HAVILAND

FERGUSON REVES.

Detroit, Michigan.

This content downloaded from 175.111.91.40 on Wed, 5 Mar 2014 03:07:44 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions