Mendele: Yiddish literature and language ______________________________________________________ Contents of Vol. 7.033 July 2, 1997 1) Say it in Yiddish (Seth Wolitz) 2) Weinreich's "Say it in Yiddish" (Ronald Florence) 3) Weinreich's phrasebook (Andrew Cassel) 4) Say It In Yiddish (Zachary Baker) 5) Weinreichs' "Say It in Yiddish" (Morris Feller) 6) Yiddishistn (David Herskovic) 7) Yiddish-English phrase book (Harvey Spiro) ------------------------------------------------------ [Note from der shames de jour: Al Grand's brief review of Michael Chabon's article in _Civilization_ inspired a very interesting and lively discussion. However, having strong vested interest in the phrasebook industry through the TIAA retirement plan, this shames respectfully suggests to declare a moratorium (at least temporarily) on any further exploration of this issue. i.v.] ------------------------------------------------------ 1)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 00:34:39 -0600 From: slwolitz@mail.utexas.edu (seth l. wolitz) Subject: Say it in Yiddish The "Say it in Yiddish" exchanges have become like a B'nai Brith Hillel event on Purim: The celebrated Latke and khumantash debate. Mendele should have better things to treat than showing off pilpul. For example: most Jewish students in America today don't even know what are humantashen or latkes ! And forget about a krepl, pecha...or even shav! In short while emotions run high over a little book to an imaginary Ashkenaz, the last memories of our Jewish Krypton fade away...lost on the tunes of neo-klezmer makharaykes. Do you need to know how to say in Yiddish : this way to the ferry? It is going in but one direction for Yiddish culture: to SHEOL! Seth Wolitz Austin, Texas 2)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 08:20:55 -0400 From: ron@mlfarm.com (Ronald Florence) Subject: Weinreich's "Say it in Yiddish" Rick Turkel writes: When I was younger it was common knowledge that a Jew travelling anywhere in the Western Hemisphere, Europe or Israel would be able to communicate with other Jews using Yiddish. My aunt Jenny, who lived in London, was part of a generation who believed it was possible to get by in Yiddish almost anywhere in the world, and not only with Jews. Jenny was an inveterate traveler who claimed she never needed any language other than English and Yiddish. When she returned from a trip to Switzerland I asked her what she had spoken there. `Yiddish,' she said. `Everyone there speaks Yiddish.' I said that the people she met were probably speaking Schweizerdeutch. Jenny answered, `I didn't say they spoke good Yiddish.' Ronald Florence Stonington, Connecticut 3)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 09:32:24 -0400 From: "A. Cassel" Subject: Weinreich's phrasebook Like Michael Chabon and probably many others, I too was struck at first by the apparent irony of the Weinreich "Yiddish for Travelers" book. In fact, I think it was given to me by someone who thought it was kind of amusing that I had begun to study Yiddish myself. But a couple of years later, when I traveled to Lithuania to visit my ancestors' home town, I found myself several times in the company of people with whom I had only one language in common -- Yiddish. And, yes, I did indeed find myself employing phrases like "do you know where I can find a taxi?" and "Is there any fresh fruit on the menu?" and so forth. So where's the irony? Andrew Cassel 4)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 11:41:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Zachary Baker Subject: Say It In Yiddish The ongoing discussion surrounding Michael Chabon's article about Uriel and Beatrice Weinreich's book, "Say It In Yiddish," once again illustrates the marvels of Mendele and the listserv medium. Now for my own two cents' worth: As a subscriber to "Civilization" and a staff member at YIVO I was able to observe at close range Bina Weinreich's reaction to Chabon's article, and suffice it to say that it was not a happy one. (Bina Weinreich is one of the two co-authors of "Say It In Yiddish," the other being her late husband Uriel.) If one is looking for the "original intent" of the authors, I daresay -- and this point has already been made -- that it was not to be "witty." The Weinreichs took their assignment (and that is what it was -- a "fill-in-the-blanks" assignment) very seriously. But, to my mind, the salient question is not necessarily "What were the Weinreichs thinking?" Rather, one should ask: What was the editor of Dover Publications thinking when he added Yiddish to the list of "Say It In..." guides? And why, having made the decision to publish "Say It In Yiddish," did he approach Uriel and Beatrice Weinreich, rather than, say, a Leo Rosten (to be sure, publication of "The Joys of Yiddish" was still a decade off)? I believe that the answers to these questions lie in a consideration of the status of Yiddish within American Jewish culture during the 1950s. Chabon's article and his subsequent response to the Mendele postings are overly colored by a latter-day Holocaust awareness, and pay very little attention to the role that Yiddish played in the lives of American-born Jews coming of age after World War II. In retrospect, the 1950s present us with a paradox: Yiddish was far more widely spoken, written, read, and even performed in those days -- after all, there were many more European-born Jews alive in the United States back then -- and yet its prestige in the wider American Jewish culture could hardly have been lower. Embarrassment, shame, mockery -- these were among the characteristic attitudes that one might have encountered vis a vis Yiddish, which in the popular imagination was associated above all with the vulgarities of the Borscht Belt and the barnyard humor that pervaded a second-generation community that was losing its fluency in the mother tongue. As far as "serious" interest in Yiddish is concerned, "College Yiddish" was already on the market in 1958, but where, aside from Columbia University and CCNY, might the prospective student actually study the language? An academic interest in the language was a very solitary pursuit. (For an answer to that question, take a look at Ronald Sanders' classic article, "On Learning Yiddish," which appeared in "Midstream" circa 1970.) Viewed in this perspective, its charms (intentional or otherwise) notwithstanding, I think that "Say It In Yiddish" can be viewed as an attempt by both publisher and authors to endow Yiddish with a modicum of the prestige they felt that it deserved, yet which was lacking in the surrounding culture. The culmination of the effort to elevate Yiddish was the posthumous publication, a decade later, of Uriel Weinreich's "Modern Yiddish-English, English Yiddish Dictionary." "Say It In Yiddish" was therefore a step in that direction. (Ironically, both the Weinreich dictionary and "The Joys of Yiddish" shared the same publisher -- McGraw Hill -- and the same year of publication: 1968.) Interestingly enough, as has been commented upon previously in Mendele, the Weinreich dictionary lacks the vulgarisms that can be found in earlier dictionaries (such as the 1928 trilingual Harkavy dictionary) -- a reaction, perhaps, to the prevailing popular view of Yiddish as a language best fit for the mouths of stand-up comedians. And in 1997, we learn, the number one bestseller at the National Yiddish Book Center is the Weinreichs' "Say It In Yiddish" -- an organization whose mass constituency in large part comprises the very same second-generation American Jews, 40 years later -- for whom that slim volume was likely intended in the first place. Zachary M. Baker New York, NY 5)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 17:28:38 -1000 From: feller@indirect.com (Morris Feller) Subject: Weinreichs' "Say It in Yiddish" The Weinreich "Say It in Yiddish" lists over 1,600 words and phrases in Yiddish, transliteration, and English - much like the Berlitz "Self-Taught" books. Even if we assume that at least half of the terms are so travel oriented that they are not likely to be utilized, there still remain hundreds and hundreds of useful general terms and expressions which constitute a foundation vocabulary for everyday discourse. This alone is justification for having published this book. Morrie Feller Phoenix 6)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 01 Jul 1997 23:39:15 +0100 From: David Herskovic Subject: Yiddishistn A phrase book that can only be a sad joke on the part of those who wish to take it literally and a nice piece of wishful thinking to anybody with a pair of eyes in their heads has caused az es zol zikh tin of tishn in of benk. Given that there has never been a country where Yiddish has been the official language, the onus is on those who wish to take the book seriously to produce the evidence. And so far the evidence is anything but conclusive, to say the least. Rick Turkel mentions Benei Berak and parts of Brooklyn. Well, just try asking directions to a casino in one of those places in men vet dir shoyn vazn! This however brings me to a wider point: of yidishistn in general. I think the best definition of yidishism is of a secular chasidic movement. But before the more irate amongst you hit the reply button please let me finish. Like khsidim, yidishistn have rebes. The ershte rebe is of course Mendele, the mantle then went on to Sholem Aliechem and Yitkhok Laybish and from them a whole dynasty was created. The rebes may all be dead but similar to breslever khsidim, also known as toyte khsidim, a substitute was found for a live rebe. The breslever khsidim have a book and a grave; yidishistn have books and a language. Like a khsides which has a hundred and something followers but in print their numbers are closer to the ten thousand figures, yidishistn too have a tendecy to swell their numbers by methods of creative accounting that would do any accountant proud. In az ayner dervagt zikh tsi redn ofn reb'n well we all know the chasidic response, and likewise, it seems, is the yidishistishe response: shaygets aros! But on the plus side just as in a khsides there are the true khsidim who know that their rebe is the greatest in the world zol zan vos zol zan, so there are true yidishistn who know the state of yidish, and though they may lament it, they can nevertheless enjoy Yiddish in whatever state it may be. Khsidim have a saying, a fresr iz nisht der vos est nor der vos ret fin esn. (A glutton is not the one who eats but the one who talks about eating.) I think that again the same applies to yidish. A yidishist is not one who speaks, reads and enjoys Yiddish, but one who gets into endless and futile debates about the state of Yiddish, ceaselessly argues on the most obscure points of a hetekh petekh on Yiddish but mostly of course in English. moyroay vraboysay lots akh op mit diye narishkaytn. If Yiddish cannot withstand a good joke then I'm afraid it is take doomed. Part of the beauty of Yiddish is its self effacing nature, so what is a Yiddishist if he cannot occasionaly poke some fun at himself? lomer gayn in Toyvye's veygn in tin vi zan mekhaber hot gehaysn: men darf lakhn. David Herskovic 7)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 00:00:40 EDT From: hspiro@juno.com (Harvey J Spiro) Subject: Yiddish-English phrase book At the risk of "preaching to the choir" (what's the proper Yiddish expression?), I'd like to add a few thoughts to the phrase book controversy. Having not seen the magazine article, I'll focus on Mr. Chabon's note to Mendele. Mr. Chabon, who admittedly "can neither speak nor read Yiddish," feels the need to proclaim: "I love Yiddish." He also informs us that he "love[s] language and humor." I can't vouch for his emotions, but I suggest that Mr. Chabon needs to learn a little more about both Yiddish history and language usage. As for his love of humor, I guess that makes him see knowledge of Yiddish as funny but useless, whereas others see a writer short on facts and long on opinions. Mr. Chabon declares that a phrase book for travelers implies "A country. An entire nation" to be travelled to, "whose principal language is that of the phrase book." Presumably, languages like Punjabi, Gujarathi, Tamil and others would not merit such a phrase book, since their tens of millions of speakers are linguistic minorities in India. Visitors to Kazakhstan should ignore that nation's seven million Kazakh speakers, since they are outnumbered by Russian speakers in their own country. No phrase books would have been needed for Armenian until post-Soviet times, since Armenia was at best just "some shortlived Soviet republic." (No matter that Armenian is spoken widely in diaspora communities in Turkey, Lebanon, and Fresno, not to mention in Armenia and Georgia.) "Ashkenaz" may never have had passports or airline ticket offices, but hundreds of the entries in the Yiddish phrase book were used and useful in places from Buenos Aires to New York to Jerusalem to Antwerp, decades after the book's 1958 printing. In 1970, Yiddish served me as a lingua franca in Paris and Copenhagen. In 1972 and 1978, when my Yiddish was better than my Hebrew, I got a lot of mileage in Israel with phrases that might be found in the Weinreichs' "little phrase book," including questions about bus stations and banks. Yiddish also worked wonderfully in Israel to communicate with cousins who were recent Soviet immigrants. A Japanese visitor to Israel who speaks some English would do better with a Japanese-English phrase book than a Japanese-Hebrew one, assuming he knew no Hebrew. How is this different from an English-Yiddish phrase book for an Anglophone in 1960s Israel who knows some Yiddish? Is Mr. Chabon suggesting that a current visitor to Israel would find no use for phrase books in Arabic, Russian or English? Mr. Chabon derides any benefit to an English-Yiddish phrase book in 1959, when there were hundreds of thousands of Israelis (not to mention English-speaking tourists) whose Yiddish was far better than their Hebrew. In 1961, Israeli government statistics show that over 270,000 Israelis used Yiddish as their sole or secondary language. Presumably, several times that number understood Yiddish well through the 1960s, from recent Polish and Romanian immigrants to the top leadership of Israel. The Dover Yiddish phrase book sits on my shelf with phrase books of a dozen other languages, some purchased for travel, others out of curiosity. Those published by Dover follow a standard format, but differ slightly from language to language. Swahili has a chapter on servants, Czech has a list of road signs, Italian has a full page each for salads, cheeses, and pastas; the Yiddish volume has none of these sections. Most phrase books have their share of silly stock phrases. I suspect that in most villages in Kenya, few tourists have ever used the Swahili phrases for "Where is the synagogue?" (Hekalu liko wapi?") or "Would you play a waltz?" All lovers of Yiddish, no doubt including Mr. Chabon, understand that the vibrant communities of Ashkenaz are gone forever. Had it been published a mere generation earlier, the Yiddish phrase book could have guided a visitor through literally hundreds of Jewish communities in Europe as well as the New World. Yet Yiddish-speakers no longer make up a third or more of the urban populations of Poland and Romania, as they once did. Warsaw and Minsk and Lodz and Berdichev and Bialystok and Odessa and Vilna are no longer 30-50% Jewish, and the hundreds of Yiddish-speaking shtetlakh are long destroyed. I guess that I will remain an object of pity for Mr. Chabon, for not seeing the "uproarious humor" in a Yiddish-English phrase book, or for contesting his limited view of the world of Yiddish. I do wonder, however, which one of us "doesn't get it." Harvey Spiro Vienna, Virginia ______________________________________________________ End of Mendele Vol. 7.033