View source for Talk:Cant (language)

{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk page header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Linguistics|importance=low|applied=Yes}}
{{WikiProject Languages|importance=low}}
}}
{{merged-from|Cryptolect|September 2017}}
{{merged-from|Argot|April 2019}}
{{merged-from|Anti-language|April 2019}}

==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment==
[[File:Sciences humaines.svg|40px]] This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2021-08-18">18 August 2021</span> and <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2021-12-10">10 December 2021</span>. Further details are available [[Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Sonoma_State_University/ANTH382_Language_Change_(Fall_2021)|on the course page]]. Student editor(s): [[User:Brian Cox95|Brian Cox95]].

{{small|Above undated message substituted from [[Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment]] by [[User:PrimeBOT|PrimeBOT]] ([[User talk:PrimeBOT|talk]]) 16:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)}}
== Merge? ==

Should this be merged with [[Cryptolect]], or vice versa? --[[User:Jim Henry|Jim Henry]] | [[User talk:Jim Henry|Talk]] 15:38, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

:done. [[user:ntennis|ntennis]] 01:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

There is much work to do on this subject. See [[Argot]] Some of the variants are written up in separate articles, such as [[izzle]] Proposing a call for assistance from all concerned.[[User:Mydogtrouble|Mydogtrouble]] ([[User talk:Mydogtrouble|talk]]) 22:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

== Etruscan ==

I'm removing the claim that Etruscan has been hypothesized to be a cryptolect of Latin until someone can provide a reputable, published source for it. --[[User:Angr|Angr]]/[[User_talk:Angr|<sub>{{IPA|tɔk tə mi}}</sub>]] 22:05, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

: A simple google search revealed [http://www.geocities.com/hbry/ this link]. Surely the fact that Etruscan has been ''considered'' a cryptolect (rightly or wrongly) is reason enough for its inclusion on this page? [[user:ntennis|ntennis]] 03:02, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Only if the view is widespread enough to be notable. One person holding a theory (rejected for publication, apparently, as the letter from [[Edgar Polomé]] included on that website indicates) does not render it notable enough for inclusion. I did say a ''reputable, published'' source for it. --[[User:Angr|Angr]]/[[User_talk:Angr|<sub>{{IPA|tɔk tə mi}}</sub>]] 22:15, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

The Etruscan as Cryptolect theory was not submitted to Edgar polomé for publication and his positive responses outweigh his reservations(read the letter again).
The author of the theory
 
== [[Leet]] ==

I've removed [[leet]] from the list, and I don't want it here until it is shown (with reliable sources) that it is indeed used primarily "to bypass automatic text parsers". [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 16:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

:Why the requirements for [[leet]] to have reliable sources or a showing that it is used "to bypass automatic text parsers" when there are no proper citations for other entries in this article to reliable sources?  This may be besides the point, in my experience leet was primarily formed on BBS systems long before text parsing was used to censor content.  Later developments in leet did emerge from the need to bypass filters, primarily via AOL chat rooms, but that was after the leet cant was well formed.  At present it's a little hard to call it a Cant as the use of leet is so widespread it hardly classifies as a secret language.  [[User:DanRP|DanRP]] ([[User talk:DanRP|talk]]) 16:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

::As of 2008-08-31, Leet is up again; I am going to remove it. --[[User:Politizer|Politizer]] ([[User talk:Politizer|talk]]) 23:02, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

== Origin of the word ==

Could someone more learned than me explain th origin of the word ''cant'' itself. I have a few theories myself-

* From the Irish ''caint'' meaning ''to talk''
* From ''chant''
* Or from ''cant'' meaning ''an oblique angle'' (had to look at my dictionary for that one)

I would say the Irish origin is most likely as shelta supposedly has a similar origin but I'm biased! [[User:Afn|Afn]] 12:05, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

:Dictionary.com[http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=cant] indicates that it is indeed related to (though not derived from) ''chant''. [[User:EldKatt|EldKatt]] <small>([[User talk:EldKatt|Talk]])</small> 16:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I think the Irish origin is unlikely as there is no Irish connection with the earliest use of the word in England. Although chant is possible I would tend to favour "oblique angle" i.e., "bent" as being involved, perhaps as well. Cant seems to come from "canting" meaning dishonest or outside society, for which "bent" was/is also used. [[User:GBH|GBH]] 16:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
:While the common noun ''cant'' in the sense of "jargon" is certainly ultimately from Latin ''cantāre'' "sing", I wouldn't be in the least surprised if the Irish word ''caint'' had something to do with [[Shelta]] being called "the Cant". I doubt oblique angles have anything to do with it. [[User:Angr|Angr]] ([[User talk:Angr|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Angr|contribs]]) 16:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

It might also be useful to coniser an ethhmological link of the word cant to a nanlicisationof the gaelic word for 'talk' : caint
comment moved from page


:The Concise Oxford Dictionary has it as ''cantāre'' as well. Also, the dic states that it was used 'contemptuously' as  early as the 12th century to singing in church services. As for the Irish or Gallic connection: I think it unlikely that in the 16 th century  (when it was used  to refer to slang)  that a gentleman in polite company would use a word with a vulgar (common) root  when a word derived from Latin was already in use with a close essence of ''of little worth'', thus reflecting that he was a man of education and capable of discerning judgments. The vocabulary of the low orders would have been unfamiliar to them--[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] 11:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

The current page stated that the Irish origin is invalid without stating a real origin.  That should be found in secondary sources. (It is not for a discussion page to throw out Irish origins simply because we have only late citations.) In the meantime I will edit the page to list all potential roots, without bias.  <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Jmldalton|Jmldalton]] ([[User talk:Jmldalton|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jmldalton|contribs]]) 21:37, 14 October 2008 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:As a compromise, I have tagged with <nowiki>{{fact}}</nowiki> each of the possible origins listed; we are lacking sources not just for or against the Irish origin, but sources for and against all of the origins suggested in the article. &mdash;[[User:Politizer|Politizer]]<sup><small>(&nbsp;'''[[User talk:Politizer|talk]]'''&nbsp;•&nbsp;'''[[Special:Contributions/Politizer|contribs]]'''&nbsp;)</small></sup> 21:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

[[User:Bobzer|Bobzer]] ([[User talk:Bobzer|talk]]) 14:17, 29 June 2010 (UTC) I would say it came from "caint", in primary school I remember we just called it "an caint" when we were learning about it, I could still be wrong though.

== Cockney rhyming slang ==
Would you consider [[Cockney rhyming slang]] to be a Cant language? If so, I'll add the 'Cant language' category to that article.--[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] 15:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

No. Cant is normally associated with criminal or "anti-social" (not normalised) behaviour. Cockneys are not distinctly associated with criminality. Also Cockney rhyming slang is not a cryptolect as it is often easily interprested by the overhearer. [[User:GBH|GBH]] 17:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

:With respect: I don't think you have read the article properly. Now that I have, it is easily a cant, and looking it up else where (like [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Cockney_rhyming_slang  Wiktionary: Cockney rhyming slang]) it is also classed as a cant there too. So I 'll be adding it soon.--[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] 13:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

==[[Carny]]==
Do we think [[Carny]] is a cant? It seems to be a US English fairground speak - which is also used in professional wrestling (!) [[User:Secretlondon|Secretlondon]] 01:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

==[[argot]] or [cryptolect]]?==
It seems to that Cant may be both, and that the articles overlap significantly. Should they be combined ?[[User:GBH|GBH]] ([[User talk:GBH|talk]]) 09:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I am somewhat mystified by this article. In the Dorsai series  by the Canadian outhor Gordon M. Dickson, cant is the distinct speech pattern of this Quaker like culture of "Friendlies". Could be father from any connotation offered in the article. I just don't understand that. Would be cool if somebody could explain the discrepancy. -- [[Special:Contributions/88.114.251.192|88.114.251.192]] ([[User talk:88.114.251.192|talk]]) 11:16, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

:Well that would be a "characteristic or secret language used only by members of a group" then, wouldn't it? 
:You can't rely on science fiction authors as authorities on linguistic terms though.<span style="border-left: 1px solid #c30; padding: 3px;">[[User:Pablomismo| pablo]]</span><sub style="background-color: #ffc; color: #c30;">[[User talk:Pablomismo|hablo]].</sub> 11:51, 6 June 2009 (UTC)


 you may mention that Louchebem is the cant of the french Butchers: in Louchebem, "louchebem" means "boucher"
(butcher in french)  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/83.206.162.141|83.206.162.141]] ([[User talk:83.206.162.141|talk]]) 22:54, 22 December 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Eurocentric Examples List ==
Looking at the present list of  examples, it is, (as is so much of academic discourse), noticeably eurocentric, i.e. few examples from outside Europe. This creates what is probably a distorted impression: one might think it is primarily a European phenomenon, which I am sure it isn't. Anyone got any more non-European  examples?
[[User:Northtowner|Northtowner]] ([[User talk:Northtowner|talk]]) 18:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

:My guess it's a question of a) participation on the English Wikipedia and b) research. Even European cants are poorly researched, just imagine what the situation must be like elsewhere. [[User:Akerbeltz|Akerbeltz]] ([[User talk:Akerbeltz|talk]]) 22:13, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

== Merge to Cryptolect ==

I would suggest merging the following articles:
* [[Cant (language)]]
* [[Argot]]
* [[Anti-language]]
They all appear to refer to the same thing: secret, coded languages.  The even share some of the same examples.  [[Cryptolect]] (currently a redirect) is the most general and technical term, so I think it would probably be the best choice for the title of the final article, post-merger. - [[User:AdamBMorgan|AdamBMorgan]] ([[User talk:AdamBMorgan|talk]]) 11:38, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Why? They might appear to say the same thing but they don't. The origins differ and there's still a difference in definition. Read a dictionary ffs.  <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/94.109.132.30|94.109.132.30]] ([[User talk:94.109.132.30#top|talk]]) 16:19, 17 October 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Support both extant '''merge''' proposals (that for [[Argot]] and [[Anti-language]]). The terms are sufficiently similar in meaning that the concepts are best described in one place; the distincy etymologies of nuances of meaning can also be discussed here too. Note that, as described at [[WP:NOTADICTIONARY]], Wikipedia has pages for concepts, not separate pages for each word used to describe that concept. [[User:Klbrain|Klbrain]] ([[User talk:Klbrain|talk]]) 22:05, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
:'''Support merge''' proposals, I think (and certainly Argot/Cant). Currently, there is considerable overlap, and I think a merger would be less confusing for users. [[Special:Contributions/86.186.120.235|86.186.120.235]] ([[User talk:86.186.120.235|talk]]) 15:38, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
::Done for Argot. [[User:Klbrain|Klbrain]] ([[User talk:Klbrain|talk]]) 05:34, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
::Done for Anti-language. [[User:Klbrain|Klbrain]] ([[User talk:Klbrain|talk]]) 21:51, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

== "Gypsy" as an Ethnic Slur ==

This article uses the term "gypsy" multiple times in the "Thieves' Cant" section, without any mention of [[List of ethnic slurs#G|that term's status as an ethnic slur]] used on the [[Romani people]].  For neutrality's sake, I believe this should be corrected, or at least given some sort of disclaimer.  I understand preserving the original word usage from the primary source; however, ethnic slurs should not be used willy-nilly in an encyclopedic context.  I don't know how to best go about this though; I think some Roma insight would be very useful here. [[User:Warpedtour08|Warpedtour08]] ([[User talk:Warpedtour08|talk]]) 22:10, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

:After looking at the individual article for "Thieves' Cant," and seeing the exact same quote using the term "Roma," I went ahead and just substituted each instance of the slur for the term "Roma."  If there is a better way to do that, I am all ears, but I feel that this is sufficient. [[User:Warpedtour08|Warpedtour08]] ([[User talk:Warpedtour08|talk]]) 22:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
::It's a quote. Quotes should not be censored to suit modern sensibilities .[[User:Halbared|Halbared]] ([[User talk:Halbared|talk]]) 10:07, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
:::It was not used as a quote until you edited it to become one; it was a paraphrase, which is a perfect example of the correct place to use a non-slur to refer to one of the most historically marginalized ethnic minorities in existence.  You also took this bigoted language to [[Thieves' cant|another article]], and, in said article, replaced not only the instances of the term Roma/Romani people that occurred within the ""[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thieves%27_cant&diff=prev&oldid=1276353868 quote]"" (which was not, and is still not one), but also an instance of it in the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thieves%27_cant&diff=next&oldid=1276353868 history section] of the page.  There is no reason to insist upon the use of antiquated and defamatory language for any group of people in this—or any—context. [[User:Warpedtour08|Warpedtour08]] ([[User talk:Warpedtour08|talk]]) 20:17, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
::::No, it is not a paraphrase, I went to the source to check, it is a direct quote, you are editorializing historical record to suit a particular viewpoint, these are English records.[[User:Halbared|Halbared]] ([[User talk:Halbared|talk]]) 21:53, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

== Cryptolect Information ==

This article mentions the term cryptolect, and states that it isn't interchangeable with the other terms, but doesn't follow with any further information. This article would benefit from some sort of description of the term's differences. [[User:The Yellow Slug|The Yellow Slug]] ([[User talk:The Yellow Slug|talk]]) 23:17, 13 March 2025 (UTC)