Mendele: Yiddish literature and language ______________________________________________________ Contents of Vol. 08.089 November 27, 1998 1) Klinghoffer on Yiddish (Norman Guzick) [Moderator's note] 2) Regarding comments about Ruth Wisse (Gennady Estraikh) 3) Ellen Prince and my "summer school class" (Gail Gaston) 4) a toyte shprakh (Benyomin Moss) 5) If you want, Yiddish is dead. If not, also good. (Ruvn Millman) 6) The "Death" of Yiddish (Hershl Hartman) 7) Ellen Prince/Ruth Wisse (Bruce Mitchell) 8) A nomen (Mendy Fliegler) 9) sports names (Doodie (David) Ringelblum) 1)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 00:23:31 -0500 (EST) From: NGUZICK@aol.com Subject: Klinghoffer on Yiddish [Moderator's note: This message was submitted to Mendele by Norman Guzick almost three weeks ago. I was not sure whether it should be posted for several reasons. One of them is that it is very difficult to avoid loshn-hore in commenting on such materials. Another -- Mendele tries (if not always successfully) to maintain certain standards on what can be quoted. Today, if one searched the web for the word "Yiddish", sadly enough, a sizable portion of the results would come from the sites of assorted "national-patriots", Holocaust revisionists and neo-nazis of every stripe. Although they do discuss various aspects of Yiddish, it does not mean that we should repost their delirious drivel. Such junk does not become any cleaner when it is printed in the respectable pages of the Wall Street Journal. The author of this sample, David Klinghoffer, is not a novice in a crusade to protect the Jews from the "obsessive ethnic Jewishness" and "obsessive Holocaust veneration", while at the same time protecting the Christian Right from the Jewish "notorious attack" based on their "preoccupation with phantom anti-Semitism" (see e.g. Mr. Klinghoffer's article in "Books & Culture. A Christian Review", v.4, no.1, 1998 or a number of his columns in "National Review"). However, the material quoted below is a standout even among his creative writings. I made up my mind about posting it to Mendele after reading some entries to our ongoing discussion on the death of Yiddish. It is difficult to imagine a better illustration of how easily seemingly serious academic constructs can be reduced to ugly and absurd ideological proclamations. Somehow I believe that one day Mr. Klinghoffer will become ashamed that he produced and published this ignorant piece. Meanwhile, with friends like Klinghoffer, Yiddishists on the right hardly need any enemies. -Iosif Vaisman] I am a "lurker" on the Mendele list. My interest in the subject of Yiddish is greater than my ability in the language. I wanted to submit some quotes from a column from this past Friday's (November 6) Wall Street Journal. Each Friday in the WSJ's Weekend section they publish a religion column called "Houses of Worship." This Friday, the column was on the subject of Yiddish by David Klinghoffer. He is identified as an editor of National Review and apparently has become Orthodox recently. I think the article is not only replete with errors about Yiddish but -- more importantly -- reflects an interpretation of the relationship between the Yiddish language and the Jewish religion that is terribly perverse. A better scholar and writer than I needs to respond to Klinghoffer's diatribe. I hope this submission will stimulate a fellow Mendele reader to do so. Norman D. Guzick Houston, Texas ------------------------ SCHUMER'S YIDDISH LESSON (WSJ, Nov 6, 1998, p.15) By David Klinghoffer ... Once the lingua franca of Eastern European Jewry, Yiddish arose in medieval Germany as a melange of German, Hebrew and Aramaic. Speakers of English owe it a great debt. We would be at a loss without untranslatable words like "schmuck," "mensch" and "schmaltz". ... At universities, the study of Yiddish is lately regarded as a highly serious endeavor. Harvard endowed a chair, while other colleges have created Yiddish faculty positions of their own: Ohio State, UCLA, UC Berkeley and the Universities of Michigan and Texas. Adult-education classes also proliferate, drawing young and old, not least homosexuals, whose community has developed an affection for the language. Yet despite all this enthusiasm, there are reasons not to love Yiddish. >From the mouths of native speakers, it sounds like German, neither beautiful nor ugly. On the other hand, many amateur Yiddish fanciers, dropping phrases in English conversation, apply a thick layer of cutesy-poo relish to its pronunciation, in an exaggerated attempt at authenticity. The result can be aesthetically problematic. That's the least of it, though. In the minds of certain fanciers, Yiddish is the embodiment of all things authentically Jewish. Thus some Jews of Spanish and North African ancestry regard its exaltation as a form of bigotry. More revealing is the fondness for Yiddish among gays. For many Jews, gay and straight, what attracts in Yiddish is its very deadness, at least compared with 60 years ago. They find it comforting to think of Jewishness and Judaism as an object in a museum of antiquities, surrounded by nostalgia, implying no divine displeasure if we, say, eat non-kosher food, marry gentiles or do whatever gays do. For others, the attraction is similar in its trumpeting of liberation from God. Yiddish is the tribal language of Eastern European Jews, rather than their holy tongue, which is Hebrew. Jews have never entirely resolved the question of whether we are a tribe or a religion. In rabbinic thinking, we are a religion grafted onto a tribe, the tribe possessing zero intrinsic importance without the religion. But in the view of tribalists, who number disproportionately among Yiddish fanciers, the religion forms a mere appendage of the ethnic group, our ancestral faith being little better than an, adorable myth, adaptable at will to the needs of Jewish "culture." ... Embodied in Yiddish as one often hears it today, the tribal, secular view of Jewishness really is a slur. 2)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 04:53:48 -0500 (EST) From: yiddishstudies Subject: Regarding comments about Ruth Wisse Ikh bin zikher az Ruth Wisse neytikt zikh nit me zol zi farteydikn (ir akademishe reputatsye iz di beste "farteydikung"). Bifrat nokh az ale onfaln af ir dernomen in an altn anekdot: a malpe zogt a ferd: "arbet, arbet, vestu efsher oykh - vi ikh - vern a mentsh". Es hot af mir fun ot der "diskusye" a veye geton mit epes a bolshevistishn vokabular, vos, lemoshl, politish aktive studentn (oder poshet karyeristn) hobn genutst kegn zeyere profesorn beshas dem kamf kegn kosmopolitism un andere "izmen". Es hot mir oykh dermont in dem impet fun der "publitsistik" fun "Sovetish heymland"... Ikh bin nit kegn, me zol diskutirn mit Ruth Wisse tsi mit andere gelernte un shrayber. Ober me tor nit farvandlen dos alts in perzenlekhe onfaln. Gennady Estraikh 3)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 00:13:37 -0500 (EST) From: gigi1924@webtv.net (Gail Gaston) Subject: Ellen Prince and my "summer school class" I would not assume to place myself on a scholastic or professional level with Ruth Wisse, that is beyond my reach. My only point was the fact that such a class exists - and at the University of Arizona - is an indication that there is still an interest in Yiddish and there are people who do not believe it is a dead or dying language. I don't feel that such a class or those attending it should be belittled or considered inconsequential. Gail Gaston 4)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 02:51:27 -0500 (EST) From: Ken Moss Subject: a toyte shprakh Vey iz mir! A tsvey-dray teg zint ikh hob a kuk geton af Mendele, un yidish iz fun haynt af morgn nifter gevorn! Ven ikh volt gevust, volt ikh haynt nisht gehat geredt mit der khaverte af yidish -- un farshteyt zikh, visndik az yidish iz aleya hasholem in yener velt, vel ikh botl makhn di trefung der Shtanforder shmues-krayz vos hot gezolt forkumen iber akht teg. Nu, khaverim un khavertes, avade zol men nisht oplakhn fun ernste shmuesn iber ernste temes. Ober fun lekherlekhe kukvinklen zol men yo oplakhn. Dos vos Sholem Berger, unzer shamesh un andere hobn shoyn gezogt iz vi shtendik reyn emes: Yidish iz gornisht toyt, zi vet say vi say hobn a kiyem in di mayler fun khsidishe kinder, un di frage far unz, vi (tsum merstns) nisht-khsidishe libhober fun mame-loshn iz nisht tsi vet yidish hobn a kiyem, nor prost un poshet tsi zi vet hobn a kiyem far unz, un far der breyterer kehile, un oyb azoy, vos far a kiyem, un nokh vikhtiker, vos kenen mir aleyn ton ltoyves nisht nor a shprakh nor oykh a kultur vos iz unz vikhtik. Benyomin Moss 5)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 03:46:40 -0500 (EST) From: Ruvn@aol.com Subject: If you want, Yiddish is dead. If not, also good. Yiddish is dead? Fine...Yiddish is dead. Okay, nu...what can you do...mekhaye meysim zan something is what Frankenstein does, not regular people. We're having a levaye. Mame-Loshn '99. We're going to celebrate Yiddish. Anyone who wants to come should leave us their email address and we'll send them details as it comes in. Ruvn Millman 6)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 16:58:18 -0500 (EST) From: Hershl@aol.com Subject: The "Death" of Yiddish Seems to me that, of almost all the ethnicities in the world, Jews should be among the last to measure the "life" and "death" of a language by the yardstick of its use in daily speech. The history of Hebrew provides proof positive that a language used "only" for religio/cultural purposes can survive quite nicely, thank you, even without the help of in-marriage and populous families. For millennia, Hebrew was taken out of the ark along with the toyre, chanted without meaning for the vast majority, and returned to its shelter without a single word having been "spoken" in the sense of use for daily, mundane tasks, chores and/or pleasures. One did not use loshn koydesh to say "pass the salt," much less "what are you doing tonight?" For centuries Hebrew was the language of roots, of heritage, preserved in this "artificial," manner. In our time, it was revived to become a full-fledged spoken language. Years ago, I propounded a theory about Hebrew and Yiddish that I know must be right, because 24 hours after hearing me state it informally, a prominent professor proclaimed it from the platform, without attribution. I contended then and now that, in our time, Yiddish and Hebrew have exchanged places. The former loshn koydesh (holy tongue) is now, in Israel, the language of daily intercourse (in all senses of the word), of commerce, politics, criminality, military functions, etc., etc. Yiddish, on the other hand, has assumed the mantle of loshn-hakdoyshim (tongue of the holy--martyred--ones). Yiddish is the language--both in Israel and the rest of the Jewish world--of roots, of heritage, not spoken in the street but preserved in the modern ark of books, journals and academia (and, yes, this list). The survival strength and power of Yiddish comes not from the ungrammatical, highly anglicized argot babbled in Borough Park (and around Fairfax Ave. here in lotusland) but from the "holy books" written in Yiddish to which the Jews of the 21st century and beyond will turn to know where they came from and what treasures are theirs. [Those with an overwhelming need to proclaim, mourn (or both) the death of a language are advised to examine the current state of English in public prints (even the most prestigious), popular journals and on the airwaves--to say nothing of its parliamentary bastions.] Hershl Hartman, Los Angeles 7)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 08:38:04 -0500 (EST) From: Bruce Mitchell Subject: Ellen Prince/Ruth Wisse In all due respect to Ellen Prince, I must strongly recommend that she read my previous posting more thoroughly and consult a minimal bibliography on the actual topic of my message (suggestions/statements that Yiddish is dead versus reality) before replying a second time. Had Ellen Prince actually read my email, she would have seen that my problem with Ruth Wisse's work stems more from her "sociolinguistic" essays such as "Is Yiddish Back from the Dead? -Shul Daze". The title alone seems to be an accurate enough quote of Ruth Wisse, I should think. For a more in depth critique, please consult my article, already included in the bibliography of my last posting, as well as my introduction to the Yiddish articles in "Monatshefte", Summer 1998. As for the epithet "self-professed" academic, I am fully aware of Ruth Wisse's position at Harvard University. My critique of her work is that she needs to apply more academic rigor to articles dealing with the current state of Yiddish as well as to the remarks she makes in public interviews, especially when they do not deal with her actual field (i.e. Yiddish literature). I would also like to take this oppurtunity to point out that, according to statistics, the haredi community is the only sector of the Britain's Jewish population which is growing. This also happens to be the population which uses YIddish most extensively, which means that the Yiddish speaking population is the only sector of British Jewry which is growing. Yet many a journalist and academic make announcements that Yiddish is "dying" or "dead". At the risk of beating a dead horse, I strongly urge scholars to consult facts before making public announcements regarding the demise or death of Yiddish. Bruce Mitchell Oxford P.S. While I recognize Ruth Wisse's sound, old-fashioned, positivistic literary analyses, I do not appreciate her occasional subjective outbursts such as "I am not a hasidic enthusiast" in the middle of a scholarly study. I likewise object her brother's attempted marginalization of the haredi community in the introduction to his book, "A Bridge of Longing". 8)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 18:16:33 -0500 (EST) From: emms2@juno.com (mendy fliegler) Subject: A nomen oyf a mitseyve.... Tayere khevre, Unzer rebe hot mikh gefreygt tse emetser fun unz ken dem numen: "Saltshe" . Er hot es gefinen oyf a mitseyve, un er hot keynmol nisht gehert fun dem nomen...Efsher kent ir unz aroyshelfn... Es iz geshribn: samekh, alef, lamed, tes, shin, ayin... A sheynem dank furoys.. (Our rabbi asked me if anyone of us knows of the name Saltshe. He found it on a gravestone, and had never heard of it. Maybe you can be of help. It is written: samekh, alef, lamed, tes, shin, ayin... Thanks in advance.) What is its origin? Mendy Fliegler 9)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 03:20:08 -0500 (EST) From: Doodie Ringelblum Subject: Other problematic sports names In Australia we have no problems with a Yiddish word for baseball - we just avoid the sport (though incidentally the biggest crowd to ever attend a baseball game was in Australia). And "cricket" is simply "kriket". However there are many problems rendering the positions into Yiddish. Are there any Mendelyaner (perhaps in England) who have grappled with terms such as "midwicket", "silly mid-off" "square-leg" and "covers". Another problem word is volleyball. I understand the common term is "netzbal". But that leaves no translation for Netball which is the biggest single sport in Australia. Many of us have taken to calling Volleball "finger-bul" as a result, but I wonder if anyone has another solution? And finally softball - "Vaykh-bul"??? Doodie (David) Ringelblum ______________________________________________________ End of Mendele Vol. 08.089 Address for the postings to Mendele: mendele@lists.yale.edu Address for the list commands: listproc@lists.yale.edu Mendele on the Web: http://www2.trincoll.edu/~mendele http://metalab.unc.edu/yiddish/mendele.html