Quite sad, really
December 7, 2008 Heeb, Liberal Judaism dreidel hustler, Jewdar
dreidel hustler, a Heeb columnist, is taking some heat in his futile efforts to legitimize the phrase Tushy-Shtup, which as Jewdar noted, “isn’t even Yinglish, it’s just your own dorky private language used between you and your imaginary friends.”
In the late 60’s, Cynthia Ozick mocked young male Jewish writers who displayed their extensive linguistic knowledge of the various Yiddish words for “penis.” Today our youth don’t even know that. So they just make words up, declare them Yiddish, and publish them in Heeb with great fanfare.
33 comments
Nu, nu, when has Yiddish become a dead language? Blame my former linguistics professors, but I’ve come to understand that while the syntax of each language is limited, languages as such aren’t; positively speaking, languages are infinite.
Just consider, West [original] Yiddish had no vocabulary taken from Slavic languages, the German language sees an addition of roughly 1,000 words per year to its vocabulary, and if not for the Bard of Stratford-upon-Avon, Modern English would lack quite a few words: http://www.nosweatshakespeare......-words.htm
I’d rather Yiddish novices abandoned klal sprakh as that one has never caught quite on among native speakers of Yiddish.
I’d rather Yiddish novices abandoned klal sprakh as that one has never caught quite on among native speakers of Yiddish.
I don’t understand this last sentence.
S/F, do you have an opinion as to the identity of the man who wrote Shakespeare’s plays?
Jeff,
Or woman. Isn’t there a theory that his plays were written by a Jewess?
Jeff, in all likeliness, it was the Bard himself. All rumours saying he was not, indicating a member of a certain minority group people wish to associate with are just that, rumours. And they’re rather recent.
Klal sprakh was YIVO’s attempt at standardizing Yiddish and merging Poilish and Litvish into a “high” language; the results were disastrous as they granted too much dominance to Litvish (which has / had a less extensive vocabulary), and the language remained largely artificial (just as Esperanto never caught quite on other than among nerds; same for Elvish). Many today’s learners of Yiddish learn klal sprah, which is a primitive, low common denominator of two rich, colourful varieties of Yiddish.
they granted too much dominance to Litvish
No, it was just the right amount.
So YIVO attempted to sort of “genericize” Yiddish? I’ve never heard of this. Where are people learning this today? Is it at the collegiate level? What about Europe, where educational standards are generally higher?
I looked for a reference to a Jewish woman writing Shakespeare’s plays, and came up with these: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/987681.html
http://www.jewcy.com/post/shak.....wish_woman
S/F, I don’t know enough about the matter to have an opinion as to the author’s identity, but it has seemed to me that it would be difficult to reconcile an English village education with the use of language in Shakespeare’s work. The site you linked to claims that 1,700 of the words in the plays were first used by him. Also, my understanding is that this was the period in which a lot of French modifiers and descriptive terms were imported. From what little I know, I’ve thought the Oxfordians had a pretty good case.
1,700 hundreds words were first used by him? You mean like he adapted them from other languages first? Or like he made them up?
Jeff, YIVO offers classes even in Lithuania. They came up with that horrible “kh” transliteration for the /ch/ sound – simply just because they didn’t want Yiddish to resemble German too much. Linguistically, there is no convincing argument whatsoever to transliterate /ch/ by “kh”. German as well as Yiddish have got phonetic spelling, so the “kh” is actually incorrect.
In Germany, you can study Yiddish, Yiddish literature, music and theatre at the university of Trier as part of the Germanistics [all languages that are varieties of or derived from German] department.
The Norman influence on English was 400 to 500 years prior to Shakespeare. (The Norman conquest more or less brought English literature to a halt, so there is a gap of written documents of several centuries between Old English and Chaucer’s Middle English; an analysis of Middle English into its Old English and Norse components is therefore a tricky job.) We can compare his works to that of his contemporaries, e.g. Christopher Marlowe. Don’t underestimate British education at Shakespeare’s time; it was the best generally available in Europe. Just consider Britain’s wealth – even the pauper had five varieties of meats per day, and that didn’t include fish or poultry. Britain was flourishing. The social and religious changes that came with the Established Church of England (aka Anglican Church) make England be way different then from Continental Europe. There are lots of theories as to who had originally written Shakespeare’s plays, but since the style and vocabulary used compare rather convincingly and contemporaries credited him with works as well as his work at the Globe, reputable linguistis and literary analysts do not doubt his authorship.
If you’re interested in the history of the English language, I suggest you get “The Cambridge Encylopedia of the English Language” and “Stories of English” by David Crystal (currently the world’s most renowned linguist). His books are brilliant, and he explains well.
DK, therein lies the death of the Yiddish that could have been.
HS, he made them up; prtly “from scratch”, partly as loanwords from other languages, e.g. Latin.
I like to think I have a pretty extensive Yiddish vocabulary despite having only one set of grandparents from whom to learn it. I certainly am not fluent, nor fluid in the language — but I’ve taught you a word or two in the past.
Ya know why that is? Because my father (first generation) learned Yiddish from his father (a Holocaust survivor) who was originally from Romania. So you see, us 1st and 2nd generation Jews do have a use in this country. Perhaps you should stop thumbing your nose at us then.
Being old enough to have hand-me-down comedy albums with Jewish comics allowed me a little exposure to Yiddish, and it is a nice language but given that it is a mixture, ongoing additions should be taken for granted.
I suppose though it might be good to see what the younger everyday Yiddish speakers are tossing into the mix as well as mostly English speakers who use a few Yiddish words.
“Kh” is harder than “ch”, correct?
My understanding – and I think I recall this from Robert MacNeil’s Story of English – is that during the Elizabethan period, a lot of French words, mostly adjectives, came flooding in, so that English after that point could no longer claim to be derived largely from German and Celtic dialects.
Since American Yiddish pretty much is YIVO Yiddish – I guess theirs is the standard – it really isn’t possible to learn real Yiddish in America, unless one has grandparents?
“Kh” is supposed to reflect the /ch/ – “kh”, going by the rules of German[ic] phonetics, knows no other pronunciation than /k/.
If you want to learn real, good Yiddish, you’ll have to emerge into the Chasidishe communities with true Chasidish backgrounds (i.e. not turned Chasidish after WW2). Chasidim in Antwerp still speak a “rich” Yiddish.
Michael Wex’s books give a fairly clear description of the klas shprach issue, among other things. Besides the fact that he is far more knowledgeable about Yiddish linguistic than his light tone would suggest, his utter irreverence is a delight. Deliciously nisht far kinder, and guaranteed to appall the dossim.
Wex actually favors Poylish pronunciation, which alleviates some traumatic childhood events asking relatives from the Litvishe side of the family for more “kiggel”. We had an aunt who insisted that her family was from “the Austrian side of Poland”. The word “Galitzianer” never, chas veshulem, passed her lips.
Man, I am so sick of this Litvak, elitism. So what, the dirt floors in your shtetle were cleaner than the dirt floors in mine? It isn’t fashionable anymore to look down on the Mizrachim, so of course the less educated whites should have a turn being kicked around? Cut the crap.
Jeff wrote,
Since American Yiddish pretty much is YIVO Yiddish – I guess theirs is the standard
Yes, Jeff, it is.
HalfSours wrote,
It isn’t fashionable anymore to look down on the Mizrachim, so of course the less educated whites should have a turn being kicked around?
What are you talking about? “Looking down” as you kids put it — on Galicianers never goes out of style.
C. Siegel wrote,
Wex actually favors Poylish pronunciation, which alleviates some traumatic childhood events asking relatives from the Litvishe side of the family for more “kiggel”.
I slapped my sister-in-law the first time she said it like that. I apologized, I didn’t mean to. It was a visceral reaction, and not really my fault.
Yeah, “kiggel” never sat right with me, either. I’ve only known one person to do it, and I was in my thirties when I heard it. I thought she just didn’t know any better.
Actually, I still think that.
DK,
Don’t be an asshole.
Jeff,
You know better than that.
Mr Siegel, Wex’s book indeed is great.
HS, DK, as a compromise I suggest we return to West Yiddish and ditch the Poilish and Litvish altogether.
I don’t know; it seems to me that chaos and divisiveness suits the character of Yiddish far more than any compromise, which, as we note, would not be accepted by anyone whose opinion we respect.
The Litvish/Poylish antagonism was also mentioned in Leo Rosten’s brilliant “The Education of Hyman Kaplan”. Our hero Kaplan’s classroom rival, Bloom, is revealed to be “A Litvak! Mit a “ess” like stimm comink out from a pipe!” Kaplan later intones against his Litvisher rival, “Bloom, Bloom, Go out de room”.
In spirit from Keplen, mein Poylisher mottel roller, I say, “DK, DK, Go Avay”, and “Eyges, Eyges, Go pish on de hedges”.
Seriously (how much more serious can we get), go read Wex. He’s the only writer who has ever reduced me to tears of laughter over technical details of grammar and pronunciation.
As regards which dialect to adapt, it is probably most appropriate to find a teacher and fight, fight, fight for whichever dialect he/she uses, in the absolute conviction that everyone else is wrong.
How about, “Kelsey, Kelsey, Genug mit di jeal’sy”
Actually, it’s pronounced “ee-jes”. Rhymes with “egregious”.
Jeff,
In total agreement with you abt the “kiggel” crap. Ew.
OK, it sounds funny to me too, but isn’t it a bit immature to look down on people because of their dialect, for freak’s sake?
HS, certainly, but I can just imagine how amused DK is.
The “kiggel” business is actually fairly benign. (“You say ‘po-tay-to’ and I say ‘po-tah-to’…”) What slays me is the dialect in which they pronounce one of the ineffable names of God as “Elo-Hiney” Hearing this at a chuppa always reduces me to snickering uncontrollably like an 8th grader.
“Elo-Hiney”
Seriously?
Yes, indeed. I was younger then. I remember being thankful that this had not happenned during the kabbalat panim as I would have snorked the Sprite right out of my nostrils.
It’s even worse as this pronunciation is inevitably used by very choshuva European rabbis of the old school.
I’m older and wiser now; when I hear this pronunciation coming, I dig my fingernails into the palms of my hands, and try not to look at any of my would-be co-conspiritors.
Oh, my. That’s just wrong.
My grand-uncle was a Galicianer. The Litvish at his shul would have him be the sheliach tzibur (prayer service leader) just so when he sang “V’all Coo-lum” and pronounced it “v-all killum” they could shout, “I’ll kill him!”
I just got back from a lecture at Harvard by James Kugel, the Biblical scholar. I spoke to him for a few minutes afterward, and I was tempted to tell him he’s mispronouncing his name, but I managed to restrain myself.
A Galicianer, huh? Well, we won’t tell anyone.
A Galicianer, huh? Well, we won’t tell anyone.
no, please don’t.
Leave a Comment