This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Cant (language) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The contents of the Cryptolect page were merged into Cant (language) on September 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
The contents of the Argot page were merged into Cant (language) on April 2019. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
The contents of the Anti-language page were merged into Cant (language) on April 2019. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Brian Cox95.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 16:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Should this be merged with Cryptolect, or vice versa? -- Jim Henry | Talk 15:38, 30 August 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. Mydogtrouble ( talk) 22:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
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. -- Angr/ tɔk tə mi 22:05, 25 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. -- Angr/ tɔk tə mi 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
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". EldKatt ( Talk) 16:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Could someone more learned than me explain th origin of the word cant itself. I have a few theories myself-
I would say the Irish origin is most likely as shelta supposedly has a similar origin but I'm biased! Afn 12:05, 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. GBH 16:00, 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 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. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmldalton ( talk • contribs) 21:37, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
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.
Would you consider Cockney rhyming slang to be a Cant language? If so, I'll add the 'Cant language' category to that article.-- 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. GBH 17:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Do we think Carny is a cant? It seems to be a US English fairground speak - which is also used in professional wrestling (!) Secretlondon 01:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
It seems to that Cant may be both, and that the articles overlap significantly. Should they be combined ? 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. -- 88.114.251.192 ( talk) 11:16, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
you may mention that Louchebem is the cant of the french Butchers: in Louchebem, "louchebem" means "boucher"
(butcher in french) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.206.162.141 ( talk) 22:54, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
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? Northtowner ( talk) 18:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
I would suggest merging the following articles:
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. - 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.109.132.30 ( talk) 16:19, 17 October 2018 (UTC)