Talk:Polari/Archive 1

Archive 1

What I think ...

This Polari language looks like a mock-up of the Scots language, and is why I wouldn't classify it as a seperate language. With those, no offense, but homosexual people who devised it, why couldn't they just speak regular English? Glad I won't ever have to use it! Be straight, and you won't have to woory about this! IlStudioso 22:25, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

If you had read the article, it was used in homosexual circles because "it was used to disguise homosexual activity from potentially hostile outsiders". Homosexuality was illegal at the time. Your comments about being straight are not constructive and could be seen to be offensive to some. Saying "no offence" and then saying something that can be deemed offensive is not a good get-out clause. Howie ☎ 15:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps one could try reading the article, hmm? Maybe? Just a smidge?

• "This Polari language..." Beg pardon? S'cuse me? Language? No one said anything about a language, well, until you did of course. From the article: "a form of cant slang". That's "a form of cant slang", not "language". Mmkay?? Confused? Click the blue words, it'll help, mmkay??
• While used by "those, no offense, but homosexual people", no where is it claimed Polari originated with "those, no offense, but homosexual people".
  From the article: "the roots of Polari/Parlyaree lie in the period before both theatre and circus became independent of the fairgrounds" and "...has been spoken in fairgrounds since at least the 17th century". Mmmkay?

Perhaps one could try reading WP:Talk, hmm? Maybe? Just a smidge?

• To say "no offense" means that (a) you know what you are saying is, in fact, patently offensive, and (b) you are too lazy or too much an @$$ to not say it anyway. (And it tells the reader exactly what kind of unattractive smug look the speaker has on their face as they say it.)
• I have excerpted the second sentence from WP:Talk page here for your convenience:
  "Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views."

But, you know, no offense.

--Snozzwanger (talk) 20:15, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Sailor Slang

I see that there are supposed origins in slaior slang- I guess there are quirte some influences from this. ESPECIALLY for English or languages spoken in areas affected by the English speaking peoples. I think that this article has been writen with an emphasis on the gay subculture and not the origins of teh language / dialect / Jargon / argot / creole / pidgin (which ever it actually is) which I suspect are sailor slang. So its would be good if links could be put to other such things. I recall seeing a map of about 60 creoles and pidgins around the world in Prof. David Crystal's Encylopaedia of Language. e.g. Rauma dialect So there is a def need for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.197.75.191 (talk • contribs) -- Banjeboi 13:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Naff

Resolved

I'm not sure that the reference to Naff's usage in Porridge is correct. Ronnie Barker claims he invented the word.

I thought it was already in use in the 19th century. -- Error

Yeah, I thought so, too...

help

Resolved

I do not understand. All these words

• bloke
• bimbo
• bijou
• camp
• drag
• mince

vastly predate the 50s and 60s! Doops 01:24, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Agreed, bloke I think comes from Sheldru, which I understand is similar to Romany but is a travellers' cant rather than that of the gay subculture. Bijou is the French word for jewel, and I've never seen it used to mean small. thefamouseccles

A lot of that seems suspect to me too (but then again, any etymology that relies on an acronym does). OED2 says:

* naff - Origin unknown, various theories; naff may perh. be < Italian gnaffa despicable person (16th cent.); Not Available For Fucking is prob. later rationalization; OED Suppl. 1976 compares to N. Engl. slang naffy, naffhead, simpleton.

* bloke - Origin unknown, plus cite of Romany connection. First cite 1851, so definitely not specific to Polari.

* bimbo - It., cf. bambino. First cite 1929 for "woman" sense.

* bijou (a.) - as thefamouseccles says; F. bijou (16th c. in Littré), but "Loosely as adj.: small and elegant, luxurious (applied esp. to houses)." First cite 1668; first cite in "small" context 1860.

* camp (a.) - Etym. obscure, first cite 1909 in present sense.

* drag (n.) - first cite 1870, no etym. beyond drag (v.)

* mince (v.) - first cite 1562!

So it seems pretty clear that those are all fake etymologies (esp. naff, which has two disagreeing etymologies in the article!), so I've elided that section and touched up the bit on naff. — mendel ☎ 23:49, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)

Unless Polari itself predates the 50's,60's, which I think it does...

This site claims that Polari originated in the 19th century, though it only became huge in gay subulture from the beginning of the 20th: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/life/story/0,6903,409178,00.html This site claims that it was most popular from the 1930's to the 1970's: http://www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/staff/paulb/polari/home.htm

As far as I know Polari was a theatrical cant rather than just a gay one. Secretlondon 8 July 2005 11:44 (UTC)

Say to any Australian over the age of about 45 "That cove was wearing really tight strides" and they would understand it as perfectly normal early to mid 20th century colloquial Australian English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelGG (talk • contribs) 06:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Announcement concerning slang glossary policy discussion

As you are probably aware, there are many slang glossaries on Wikipedia with widespread acceptance, yet virutally all of them violate the following policy:

Wikipedia is not a dictionary

Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a usage or jargon guide. Wikipedia articles are not:

1. Dictionary definitions. Because Wikipedia is not a dictionary, please do not create an entry merely to define a term. An article should usually begin with a good definition; if you come across an article that is nothing more than a definition, see if there is information you can add that would be appropriate for an encyclopedia. An exception to this rule is for articles about the cultural meanings of individual numbers.
2. Lists of such definitions. There are, however, disambiguation pages consisting of pointers to other pages; these are used to clarify differing meanings of a word. Wikipedia also includes glossary pages for various specialized fields.
3. A usage guide or slang and idiom guide. Wikipedia is not in the business of saying how words, idioms, etc. should be used. We aren't teaching people how to talk like a Cockney chimney-sweep. However, it may be important in the context of an encyclopedia article to describe just how a word is used to distinguish among similar, easily confused ideas, as in nation or freedom. In some special cases an article about an essential piece of slang may be appropriate.

---

This has created a situation where editors trying to enforce policy frequently nominate such glossaries for deletion, with most of the glossaries surviving the process with a consensus of Keep or No concensus. This ongoing battle has been raging on with respect to slang glossaries for at least the past two years. Yet the glossaries have survived, and more continue to be created. Based on the results of the majority of the Article for Deletion (AfD) discussions, the general concensus seems to be that slang glossaries should have a place on Wikipedia. The relevant policy is no longer consistent with general consensus, and this schism has resulted in a large number of pointless AfD discussions which serve only to waste the time and effort of those involved. When the majority of Wikipedians defy a policy, it is time to reevaluate the policy.

Therefore, I have started a discussion on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Slang glossaries to discuss the fate of slang glossaries (such as this one) and to discuss whether or not the policy should be ammended to reflect the defacto acceptance of slang glossaries on Wikipedia. They are here, and based on the results of AfD discussions, they seem to be here to stay. So shouldn't the policy be updated? If the policy was changed to allow slang glossaries or changed to provide for their speedy deletion, either of these solutions would save a lot of time and effort wasted on fruitless AfDs. You are welcome to join the discussion. --List Expert 10:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Naff or "naph"?

The BBC published a number of books based on "Round the Horne". In them, it is made plain (presumably on the say-so of Took and Feldman (or, if you prefer, Feldman and Took) that the word _they_ used if spelt "naph".Having seen it, I prefer it spelt so ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.13.136 (talk)

Irrelevant surely? Polari was spoken more than written (possibly was never much written down except by lexicographers and eventually Took & Feldman) so there was no opportunity for spelling conventions to evolve. Paul Tracy_|\talk 09:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd think that the spelling would only be relevant insofar as it may provide an etymological clue -- for example, it's certainly relevant to know that the spelling "riah" is often used instead of "riha," since the word in fact originated as a reversal of "hair." But since I'm pretty sure that no one has ever attempted to trace "naff" back to "naphthalene," there may be no significance whatsoever to the variant spelling "naph." Throbert McGee (talk) 19:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Latin and French

I was just checking out the article, but I am by no means a comprehensive linguist, I do notice that in the list there are certain words that are straight out of Latin (buvare, is a verb meaning "to drink"). Also, in Canadian French, "bijou" is a jewel, but can also mean a trinket or a token.--Waterspyder 21:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Baloney!

I don't have references in front of me, but to say that "balonie" has "come into usage . . . also to an extent in America" seems a little backwards. The word (in the US, indeed always spelled "baloney") is a reference to bologna sausage, a common American butcher's creation, inexpensive because of its high content of, er, "parts." Since it is loaded with the odds and ends of the pig, it makes a natural synonym for "rubbish," "bunkum," "nonsense," etc. Americans aren't too good with Italian, so "bologna" became "baloney." In the US the word has a bit of a "gee that's swell, Beaver" ring to it these days (perhaps because we've become more affluent or health-conscious and fewer of us grow up eating bologna?) Anyway, I think it's pretty clear the word crossed the Atlantic eastward, not westward. But like I said, I don't have references in front of me, so you might want to check that one. 69.7.203.153 18:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I would've assumed that the U.S. "baloney" partly originated as a conscious euphemism for "bullshit" (Cf. "fudge!" for "fuck!"), while in the U.K., it would more likely have been a substitute for "bollocks." But that's just my guess as a U.S. English speaker. Also, I'd agree that "baloney" now has a very 1950s "gee that's swell" sound to it -- but I'd suggest that this is not because Americans eat less bologna sausage than they used to, but rather because profanities such as "bullshit" aren't as taboo as they once were! (I'd also wager that despite modern health awareness, bologna remains just as popular as it ever was among children, because it's so blandly flavored and young kids are notorious conservatives at the table.) Throbert McGee (talk) 19:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)