Mendele: Yiddish literature and language ______________________________________________________ Contents of Vol. 08.148 April 30, 1999 1) Reply to David Assaf (Seth Wolitz) 2) "quasi Middle High German" (Vulf Plotkin) 3) tashme (Ruben Frankenstein) 4) di yiddishe sprakh (Stephen Berr) 5) Japanese Yiddish Beginner's Question (Bernard Katz) 6) Russo-Japanese War Lid (Ken (Koppel) Sipser) 7) similarly sounding words (Harvey Varga) 8) leynen - lezn (Joachim Neugroschel) 9) Tseylem kop (Faith Jones) 1)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 10:39:21 -0400 (EDT) From: slwolitz@mail.utexas.edu (seth l. wolitz) Subject: Reply to David Assaf In reply to David Assaf [Mendele Vol 08.145] of whom I have fond memories in Israel over the many years and whose scholarly accomplishments I know and admire, my letter hardly attacks his performance or questions the meaningful and indeed wonderful erudition in Israel but rather the American reality in which many scholars-no less accomplished than David Assaf- could not expect to find a printed expression of something as interesting as the Kotik memoirs for such Yiddish material was refused for print for decades in our scholarly presses. My critique was directed at the American publishing scene not because we lacked the scholars as David Assaf mistakenly interprets but rather because there was and has been a wary attitude to publishing Yiddish material. My comment was pointed: how ironic that a Yiddish text suddenly becomes kosher for an American university press if it has been published first in Israel! My mistaken position was that the Kotik text was translated into Hebrew and then into English. That the text has come directly into English obviously pleases me but my criticism still stands: 1) why do the American publishers feel something of Yiddish interest becomes more "publishable" if it has been published first in Israel and 2) in the case of the Kotik Memoir, who will publish the second volume now? I could care less if the translator resides in Bat Yam, Rockaway or Melbourne. My concern is the reluctance until most recently to find American academic presses willing to publish translations of Yiddish literature and critical studies of it. We are happily about to see the MLA publish a new version of Bergelson's Opgang and Yale will re-publish the Schocken Library of Yiddish Classics of the Hillel Halkin translations of Sholem Aleykhem but notice, these are texts that were already "tried-out" and therefore are somewhat "safe" to publish. That Wayne State and Farleigh Dickinson have published Yiddish translations long before is to their credit but they were the exceptions which prove the rule. Syracuse and SUNY Albany have series recently established to bring out translations but this is fresh. The University of California Press brought out the Harshav Anthology of Yiddish Poetry which was supposed to be 3 volumes. Only one has appeared and that of American Yiddish Poetry!. And let me use this text as an example of the sadness I am discussing and which might interest our readers. It was the recent Guggenheim Fellowship winner Kathy Hellerstein who suggested putting out the Anthology to the UC Press and she would be the editor and a translator. Young she was, a young PhD with high talent then and shown by her accomplishment in the field and now fully recognized. The UC Press was impressed but leary to give her the direction of such a large project and so in a strange legerdemain, one of the readers of the project, Benjamin Harshav of Tel Aviv University, her former Professor, emerged and displaced her. His wife, suddenly became the major translator of what was supposed to be Hellerstein's role, and Kathy graciously found her name in the smallest print on the cover as one more contributor. Were Ruth Wisse or Irving Howe, both closer to and knowledgeable of the American-Yiddish milieu, not just as appropriate to be editors- if not more so- than the accomplished Israeli? One must wonder who advises the American university presses on matters Yiddish and Judaic! What David Assaf mistakes as superior performance in Israel might better be argued as the proof of ideological superiority: Zionism and a Jewish State permit more easily the celebration of Jewish accomplishment by having a ready press whereas in the Diaspora, we do have to convince Others that the Yiddish material is valid for publication. Yiddish is, danken Got, taught at Harvard and even at Yale today-not for certain in my yungvarg-but we had to buy our way in to do it. And it is still fairly marginalized. American University Presses have opened a little more now to Yiddish material following the developments on the campus but it has yet to be really accepted except, at best,as a minor part of Judaica which has suddenly become "a good sell." Let us be proud that Jewish scholarship is flourishing around the world today and that Israel is living up to its Ahad Ha'amian role; but isn't it ironic that the American academic press, certainly not a Jewish enterprise, looks with such odd devotion regarding Yiddish scholarship to Jerusalem as the light unto the nations when a large majority of Yiddish speakers and scholars built a remarkable Yiddish-American culture in America that has yet to be given recognition for its cultural and scholarly accomplishments in the Old Sod and in New York? Seth Wolitz Austin, Texas 2)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 04:12:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Vulf Plotkin Subject: "quasi Middle High German" I see no reason for the controversy about Early (Western) Yiddish and its relationship with (Middle High) German and with Eastern Yiddish to be so acrimonious. To begin with, there is simply no place in serious linguistic writing for disparaging epithets like "disguised, deformed, debased, quasi" in characterizing a certain language, and no language is "eine Mischsprache" in need of "cleaning up". What does need cleaning up is the language of the polemic. This done, what does it all boil down to? In a nutshell, to when and where the Yiddish language came into existence. The two extremes are plain: it happened either at the turn of the millennium on German soil or five centuries later in Poland. Now, as the birth of a language is a protracted process, may I be forgiven for drawing an analogy with a very different, but so similar controversy - between pro-lifers, who regard conception as the moment of birth, and pro-choicers who prefer parturition. Another, purely linguistic approach takes into account the general trends in the use of languages by the numerous communities of the Jewish Diaspora. At least two dozen languages were spoken by large Jewish communities from the Iberian peninsula to Southern India. The question is whether what they spoke was a socio-cultural dialect of the ambient language of the respective country, adapted to the special needs of the Jews, or a completely different language. The answer seems clear, to me at least: designations like "judeo-espanol" or "ivre-taitsch" unequivocally characterize these forms of speech as Jewish Spanish and Jewish German, that is, Spanish (resp. German) as spoken by Jews. All such dialects, except these two, have remained in that linguistic category. But these two were retained by their speakers as they migrated eastwards. In the new countries the umbilical cords binding these dialects to the respective parent-language were severed, when Jews no longer had everyday contact with German (resp. Spanish) speakers. Only then did Yiddish and Ladino start their independent evolution as languages in their own right, and the entire course of that process could not but distance them more and more from the parent-languages. It is highly significant that in its historical development Yiddish, as befits an independent language, did not merely lose some German features and acquire some Slavic features - it has also developed a number of features found in other Germanic languages, and there are some innovations without Germanic, Slavic or Semitic analogs. Vulf Plotkin 3)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 05:35:14 -0400 (EDT) From: frankens@uni-freiburg.de Subject: tashme Tsu Shloyme-Khayim Cohen `s frage vegn "Kinder-Tashme": - Tashmesh far kinder iz tsu freyk! ("Ta shma!" iz aramish far: "Kum un her! Do iz di tsefirung, der entfer"). Ruben Frankenstein, Freiburg 4)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 09:21:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Stephen Berr Subject: di yiddishe sprakh In response to Yuichi Shimomura [08.143]: Although I am by no means an experton the language, to me "di yiddishe sprakh" is a friendly way of referring to yiddish as "the language of Jewish people" It is (to me) a comfort phrase, much as mashed potatos is called by some a comfort food. It is warm, haimish, and "in". I hope that this helps you understand how one person hears this phrase. Zai gezunt, Stephen Berr 5)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 18:34:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Bernard Katz Subject: Japanese Yiddish Beginner's Question Yuichi Shimomura (burikh habah frayndt fun Yapan!) freygt vi azoy ibertsutoshen oyf English: "di Yiddishe shprakh". Far mir iz dus zyer klar - es mus zayn: "the Yiddish language". After all, there really is no such thing as "the Jewish language". What can it be - Yiddish, Hebrew, Ladino, Judeo-Spanish, Yinglish, Aramaic, etc.?? Zay gebensht, Bernard Katz. 6)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:22:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Kenneth K Sipser Subject: Russo-Japanese War Lid In response to Bill Rodman [08.141]: Here is the song you requested. My father (Olav Hashalom) used to sing it when we were children, and even when we were grown. At one point I recorded a segment of that song. Of course I will tell my brothers and my sister about your request, and all will be very interested in how you came to know of this very obscure song. I do believe there is a fourth verse which I did not include because it just doesn't make any sense for me. My translation is approximate. The song appeared in a column in the Forvitz perhaps ten or so years ago, and was printed using hebraic characters. Now that I've done some work digging this up, and working on the translation, I would really appreciate your telling me about your father who may have lived close to where my parents lived in a small Polish town, Lisic (pronounced Lisitz) near the city of Stanislawow, subsequently renamed Ivano-Frankovsk when the Russians took it over. My parents belonged to the Solotviner Society which used to meet in the old Forward building when they lived on Rivington Street on the lower East Side, Manhattan, and where I was born. Would love to hear from you or anyone else in this connection either via Mendele or my email address. Der Lied Fon Der Russish-Yapponaizisher Milchume. 1. Yeder eyner veyss, vie mechtig un vie groiss Es iz gevehn die Russishe medineh. Er hut zich vorgeshtelt fahr dem gantzen velt Az ehr shpielt der greste rolle an der bieme. Die mechten fon arim zennen im geblibben shtim, Tzeigendig, zein heldeshe geviere. Un die dumme kepp, mit die langeh tzepp, Hut er eingenemen azzan land Manchurie. Refrain: Aber yetzt zeht nur vie er hut es alles oisgekrenkt. Az dus veht im arupgehen glatt hut er zich forgedenkt. Yappan hut zich forgeshtelt, Un mit sympatieh fon der gantze velt Un shlugt Fonian, der groisen heldt. 2. Endlich zich dervahrt, mir hubben zich dervahrt. Mir hubben sich dervahrt die nikummie. Siz arrein in der krieg, a leyb mit a flieg, Un chapt yetzt klep in die blittige milchumme. Fahr Kishoniver blut, betzalt Yapponia gut, Zein shtrahf hut er endlich atzind bekummen. Getzeigt hut im Gutt, az alles vos er hut, Iz als shuldik die bluttige pogrommen. (REFRAIN) 3. Admiral Mahkarof, hut gehat a shvartzen suff, A yahm-Kozzak is er gevehn der gresste. A shiff "Petropovlovsk" gevehn, Vos yetzt is nisht tzu sehen, 'S gibt shoyn guht kein tzveite un kein fesste. (?) In oigenblik, tzushmettert oif shtik. Tieff in yom muhz sie yetzt poilen, Zey vissen Markarov, az dus is nisht Kishenov. Kleine kinder ois-tzukoilen. (REFRAIN) Approximate Translation: * See below. I believe these were sarcastic references 1. Everyone knows how strong and big Was the Russian country. It presented itself for the whole world As if playing the main role on the world stage. The neighboring powers all remained silent When it showed its enormous* strength And the dumb-heads with the long beards Conquerred the land of Manchuria . Refrain: Now just take a look at how painful it became, Since it (Russia) thought to consume it easily. Japan came forward, With the sympathy of the entire world Beating Fonia, the great power*. 2. Finally it happened. We waited for it to happen. We waited for the outcome. In the war, a lion took on a fly, But is getting beaten badly in the bloody war. Because of the Kishonov blood, Japan is repaying well. Its (Russia's) punishment was finally received. God showed that everything that it had Is the result of the bloody pogroms. 3. Admiral Markarov, received a black ending, As a naval cossack he was considered the greatest There was the ship Petropovlovsk Which now is no longer to be seen There is no second one (?) In the blink of an eye, it was smashed to pieces Deep in the ocean is it now. They showed Markarov that this was not Kishenov, Where they killed small children. Ken (Koppel) Sipser 7)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 02:14:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Varga96@aol.com Subject: similarly sounding words I grew up often phrases used that were couplets of similar sounding or words that have a "mimic-one-another" quality e.g.- petche- metche, shiycher-miycher. If any fellow Mendelyaners know of any more, kindly list them or send them directly to me. They are the kinds of words that add a unique quality or color to a language. Harvey Varga 8)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 12:46:08 -0400 (EDT) From: ACHIM1 Subject: leynen - lezn Im not sure where or how Sam Kweskim gets his (mis)information about the difference between "leynen" and "lezn." Contrary to his claim that "leynen" originally referred only to reading religious texts, it was used in medieval and late medieval Yiddish to refer to any reading. The best example is the 16th-century verse epic PARIS UN VIENNE, which constantly uses "layen" in regard to secular texts. As for the etymology of "leye(ne)n"--the source can hardly be Spanish/Ladino. historians of Yiddish generally derive the verb from old French and/or Italian (cf. modern French "lire" and modern Italian "leggere"): see Weinreich, Timm, et al. when "lezn" was taken in from 19th-century German, it did indeed refer purely to secular reading--but it did not replace "leynen" as the generic term. "Lezn" was used even by Sholem-Aleichem--for instance, in the last paragraph of THE JINXED TAILOR he addresses his readers as "lezer." among German Jews, certain Yiddishisms survived even in their standard German speech--for instance, the verb "lajnen" = to read the portion in synagogue. But that is a later development. Joachim Neugroschel 9)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 13:25:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Faith Jones Subject: Tseylem kop The Jewish Folk Choir here in Vancouver, in which my partner sings, is singing cantata based on Peretz' "Oyb nit nokh hekher" and some of the words are baffling even the native Yiddish speakers (not to mention everyone else). One thing in particular is the term "tseylem kop" which is used to describe the Litvak in the story. What would this mean colloquially? Possible explanations being kicked around include: non-believer (cross=church); stubborn (cross=made of wood); stupid (cross=goyishe, opposite of a yidishe kop). Thanks, Faith Jones ______________________________________________________ End of Mendele Vol. 08.148 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