05.04.2016 Views

A History of English Language

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

The nineteenth century and after 293<br />

If words sometimes go downhill, they also undergo the opposite process, known as<br />

regeneration. Words like budge, coax, nonplus, shabby, squabble, stingy, tiff, touchy,<br />

wobbfy, which were recorded with proper disparagement by Dr. Johnson, have since<br />

passed into the standard speech. In the eighteenth century snob and sham were slang, but<br />

in the nineteenth they attained respectability, the former word partly through the<br />

influence <strong>of</strong> Thackeray. The word sturdy originally meant harsh, rough, or intractable.<br />

We now use it in a wholly complimentary sense. Even the word smock, which was<br />

mentioned above as losing caste in the eighteenth century, has now been rehabilitated as<br />

applied to an outer garment. We use it for a certain type <strong>of</strong> woman’s dress and we speak<br />

<strong>of</strong> an artist’s smock. The changes <strong>of</strong> meaning that words undergo are but another<br />

evidence <strong>of</strong> the constant state <strong>of</strong> flux that characterizes the living language.<br />

225. Slang.<br />

All the types <strong>of</strong> semantic change discussed in the preceding paragraph could be<br />

illustrated from that part <strong>of</strong> the vocabulary which at any given time is considered slang. It<br />

is necessary to say “at any given time” not only because slang is fleeting and the life <strong>of</strong> a<br />

slang expression likely to be short, but also because what is slang today may have been in<br />

good use yesterday and may be accepted in the standard speech <strong>of</strong> tomorrow. Slang has<br />

been aptly described as “a peculiar kind <strong>of</strong> vagabond language, always hanging on the<br />

outskirts <strong>of</strong> legitimate speech, but continually straying or forcing its way into the most<br />

respectable company.” 5 Yet it is a part <strong>of</strong> language and cannot be ignored. One <strong>of</strong> the<br />

developments that must certainly be credited to the nineteenth century is the growth <strong>of</strong> a<br />

more objective and scientific attitude toward this feature <strong>of</strong> language. The word slang<br />

does not occur in Johnson’s Dictionary. It first occurs a few years later and in its early<br />

use always has a derogatory force. Webster in 1828 defines it as “low, vulgar, unmeaning<br />

language.” But the definition in the Oxford Dictionary, expressing the attitude <strong>of</strong> 1911, is<br />

very different: “<strong>Language</strong> <strong>of</strong> a highly colloquial type, below the level <strong>of</strong> standard<br />

educated speech, and consisting either <strong>of</strong> new words, or <strong>of</strong> current words employed in<br />

some special sense.” Here slang goes from being “unmeaning language” to having a<br />

“special sense,” and it is treated frankly as a scientific fact.<br />

One reason why slang cannot be ignored even by the strictest purist is that it has not<br />

infrequently furnished expressions that the purist uses without suspecting their origin.<br />

Even students <strong>of</strong> language are constantly surprised when they come across words that<br />

they use naturally and with entire propriety but find questioned or condemned by writers<br />

<strong>of</strong> a generation or a few generations before. The expression what on earth seems to us an<br />

idiomatic intensive and certainly would not be objected to in the speech <strong>of</strong> anyone today.<br />

But De Quincey condemned it as slang and expressed horror at hearing it used by a<br />

government <strong>of</strong>ficial. The word row in the sense <strong>of</strong> a disturbance or commotion was slang<br />

in the eighteenth century and described by Todd (1818) as “a very low expression,” but<br />

5<br />

Greenough and Kittredge, Words and Their Ways in <strong>English</strong> Speech (New York, 1901),S p.55.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!