Mendele: Yiddish literature and language ______________________________________________________ Contents of Vol. 2 no. 51 August 2, 1992 1) Lachoudisch (Sam Feldman) 2) Lachoudisch (Bob Hoberman) 3) Ptsha (Paul Weichsel) 4) Galitsyaner (Mikhl Herzog) 5) Two queries (Seymour Axelrod) 1)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 12:02:42 EDT From: sam@pong.cns.nyu.edu Subject: Lachoudisch Mikl Herzog writes (Mendele Vol 2.48) > > I'm inclined to derive Lachoudisch, a > non-Jewish designation, from the frequent designation, > among Jews, for their own language as something like > "loushnakoudish". > I believe that Loshn Koydesh refers to Biblical Hebrew/Aramaic, not to spoken Hebrew, nor to Yiddish. In my home, loshn koydesh was also used to indicate "the official word." Sam Feldman 2)---------------------------------------------------- Date: 30 Jul 1992 12:57:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert D Hoberman Subject: Lachoudisch I finally located the reference to the book on Jewish expressions in German that I mentioned at first. It is MASSEMATTE: DAS LEBEN UND DIE SPRACHE DER MENSCHEN IN MUENSTERS VERGESSENEN VIERTELN, by Margret Strunge and Karl Kassenbrock (Muenster, published by the authors, 1980). As far as I remember, it is a fairly serious description of the language as it's used nowadays by non-Jews in Muenster, and respectful of its Jewish origin. "Massematte" is what the Muensterites call their slang -- and I think (i.e. guess) it is from Hebrew "massa u-mattan" 'take and give', i.e. 'negotiations' or 'business'. That's probably what gave me my idea that the word "Lachoudisch" had a similar meaning. Anyway, the derivation of the word Lachoudisch from loshen hakodesh (maybe with a bit of "lakhn" misched in?), suggested by Yitzhak Kertesz and Mikhl Herzog, sounds plausible to me. Apparently I knew the word Lachoudisch not from that book but from an article in the New York Times, Feb. 10, 1984, p. A2, "Dialect of Lost Jews Lingers in a Bavarian Town", one of the journalistic "discoveries" Mikhl Herzog mentioned. Bob 3)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 21:51:43 -0500 From: Paul Weichsel Subject: RE: Mendele Vol 2.50 Boo to you Zachary Taylor and yaasher koach to the shames. The wonderful piece about Montreal put me in such a good mood until I encountered the hurtful "(ugh) ptsha". All the more painful as, despite my every effort, it is esentially impossible to acquire the essential ingredient for that great treat of my childhood. At least in the State of Illinois it is illegal to sell the appropriate portion of a steer. It is a great tribute to the level of culture of Canada that it is still possible to prepare ptsha. Maybe someone can send me a care package? Paul Weichsel [The shames is constrained to add that even with the necessary materials the product when not prepared by licensed mothers or grandmothers looks and tastes like gray soap.] 4)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 17:03 EDT From: ZOGUR@CUVMB.Columbia.edu Subject: Galitsyaner Bob Werman, are you sure that Dzhigan and Shumakher were Galitsyaner? I thought they were from Lodz--tif poylish, for sure. Part of the stereo among Litvakes has been that anyone who says "gayn" and "shtayn" (rather "geyn" and "shteyn") is a Galitsyaner. 'I just didn't know about D & S. Mikhl Herzog 5)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1992 14:03 EST From: Seymour Axelrod Subject: 1. Dybbuk video; 2. Gender of *kop* 1. A couple of weeks ago (2.33), I solicited information on the quality of the videos of the Yiddish film of *The Dybbuk* (Warsaw, 1937) offered by Ergo Home Video, the Workmen's Circle, and the Brandeis National Center for Jewish Film. I have now had the opportunity to compare Ergo's ($44 including shipping & handling) with NCJF's ($93). No contest: the latter is a first-rate restoration, whereas the former (better than nothing, to be sure) appears to have been made from a poor print. I have not viewed the WC product (ca $55). 2. Can *kop* (head) have any gender except masculine? I once wrote to Michael Lerner, taking him to task for quoting (NOT using) the expression *goyishe kop* in a piece in Tikkun. Because I thought I had never seen the noun used as anything but masculine, I argued that he should have written *goyisher kop*. But I notice that #10 in Olsvanger's *Royte Pomerantsn" (cited by Ellen Prince recently) has "Goyishe kop!" No dictionary I have consulted (Weinreich, Harkavy, Harduf) has anything but masculine for *kop*, but I know that there are occasional regional variants in gender for some nouns. So ... Do I owe Lerner an apology? Can the Olsvanger story have a misprint? Have I fallen victim to my own pedantry? Or what? Seymour Axelrod ______________________________________________________ End of Mendele Vol 2.51 If your message is intended for MENDELE, please write to: mendele@vax1.trincoll.edu If you want to discuss personal business or have a shmues with the shames, please write to: nmiller@vax1.trincoll.edu Please sign your articles.