Green's Dictionary of Slang [3 Vol Set] by Jonathon Green (OXford University Press)

Deriving (historical) value from the vulgar tongue

Samuel Johnson defined his profession as that of a “harmless drudge”. Yet it has been well served by lexicographers writing entertainingly about their work. Two good examples are Kory Stamper waxing lyrical about the job itself and Jesse Sheidlower, in “The F-Word”, about the ubiquitous English swear word.

But lexicography really is patient, slow and yes, sometimes tedious work. Trying to find citations here or there that show what some rare word means or, perhaps even harder, revising the endless definitions for all-purpose words that run for page after page in a big dictionary is not for those of an impatient bent.

Few lexicographers are lucky enough, then, to have both endlessly pleasurable work and the talent to write amusingly about it. Jonathan Green is one. Mr Green is the world’s most respected chronicler of slang. His masterwork is the three-volume “Green’s Dictionary of Slang”. First published in 2010, it is continually updated in an online version, much of which is free (his extensive citations require a subscription). In addition he has written a comprehensive history of slang, “The Vulgar Tongue”, and a new book, “The Stories of Slang”. The latest volume is a bit of a notebook-dump, as journalists would say in their own slang, but what a glorious notebook-dump it is.

For centuries few lexicographers bothered to record slang. The first dictionaries defined only difficult words. Later dictionaries would be more comprehensive, trying to define most words in common use. Johnson’s dictionary included some slang terms. But the great majority stayed away from the vulgar stuff. There is a story that two sisters, Mrs Digby and Mrs Brooke, once congratulated Johnson on not including “ghastly” words; Johnson, so the tale goes, replied “What! My dears! Then you have been looking for them?” Sadly, the story, first recorded in 1829, strains credulity. In the era of Johnson’s dictionary (1755), readers would hardly expect to find rude words in a learned tome.

Research on slang is speculative and difficult. Early dictionaries ignored it and later ones, in a more puritanical age, disapproved of it. But a few old works on “cant”—the language of the thieving underworld—give lexicographers like Mr Green a view of the unguarded, mostly unwritten language of centuries past. One unusual dictionary from 1676 included a list of cant terms, with the explanation that learning such language “may chance to save your Throat from being cut, or (at least) your Pocket from being pick’d”. Another book alerted readers to different kinds of thieves and their acquaintances, among them the “blue pigeon flyer” who stole lead from roofs, the “mace” who stole watches or even the “queer rooster”—a police spy.

Another area that slang chroniclers study is how taboos change over time. Shakespeare’s work was censored for political reasons, but not, at least early on, for its often riotous sexual slang. Mr Green reckons that Shakespeare used about 500 slang terms, of which 277 had never been recorded before. The sex act itself is “tick-tack”, “night-work” or “nibbling”. It is performed with the man’s “potato-finger” or “kicky-wicky”, as well as “Venus’s glove”, the woman’s “buggle-bo”. The buttocks were a rich source of puns, from the “wind instrument” to the “low countries”.

Sex and “the human giblets with which we do it” has always been a rich source of slang, Mr Green points out. But “Stories of Slang” explores some “understudy” sources of slang terms. It chronicles slang from medicine, city life, food, love and more. Boxing yields terms like the “knowledge-box” and “top-loft” for the head, and the “tripe-shop” for the stomach. The grim and messy work of doctors and nurses is another rich seam: consider the “frequent flyer” (someone continually turning up to the emergency room, in need or not), the “plumber” (a urologist) or “watering the rose garden” (changing the drips on patients in a geriatric ward).

The slang of the past always seems cleverer and more creative than today’s. That is probably because every era looks down on the most usual sources of slang: the underworld and the young. But with the benefit of time and perspective, it is clear how fertile the imaginations of those in these much-derided groups really are. Lovers of language should be grateful to those who create slang, and to those few like Mr Green who make it their work to open this window into the psyche for the benefit of all.