Mendele: Yiddish literature and language ______________________________________________________ Contents of Vol. 3.295 March 20, 1994 1) Literary translations into Yiddish (Zachary Baker) 2) Perenial Yiddish debate (Arre Komar) 3) Purism or not purism (Louis Fridhandler) 4) Bubbi's and Bobba's of Canadian Jews (Ruth Minden) 5) Introduction (Keith Plaster) 1)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat Mar 19 15:03:53 1994 From: Subject: Literary translations into Yiddish A hartsikn dank mayne Yugntruf-khaveyrim (amolike un hayntike), vos hobn gedenkt dem moker funem yidishn nusekh fun Lewis Carrolls a lid "Jabberwocky." Kh'ob gekent shvern benemones az ikh hob amol azoyns gezen, nor fargesn vu. Un itst vel ikh ariber af a breyterer frage: I have always been puzzled by the fact that some classics of world literature made it into Yiddish translation (alongside some decided non-classics) while others did not. Co-territoriality helps to explain why translations of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky -- and later, Sienkiewicz and Wyspianski -- abound. Jewish themes and sympathies also help to explain why certain writers got translated, and I imagine that the vogue of turn-of-the-century naturalism appealed to a politically radicalized Yiddish readership. The prestige and popularity of French culture throughout Eastern Europe may explain the many translations of Dumas and Maupassant (probably the largest repository in the Western Hemisphere, of Guy de Maupassant's works -- at least if measured by weight -- is a certain warehouse in Western Massachusetts, known to contain a million other books in Yiddish), but all in all, the corpus of translations is very patchy. Turning to English literature, why indeed is there no Yiddish translation of "Alice in Wonderland" -- which was already a bestseller by the time that Yiddish-speaking immigrants made it to Britain and America --? Disraeli and Shakespeare made it into Yiddish -- even Charles Dickens's "A Christmas Carol" has been graced by its Yiddish version ("Vaynakht" -- or perhaps "Vey nakht"? -- translated by Esther Kreitman, whose youngest brother was later to be a Nobel Prizewinning Yiddish author). Jane Austen and Anthony Trollope, however, are absent (as best as I can recall, sitting at home, away from the YIVO Library's catalog). The great American novels are, if anything, even more sparsely represented in Yiddish translation. Sinclair Lewis's "Babbitt" is a curiosity, but that's one of the few famous American novels of the 1920s that made it into Yiddish. (No "Farewell to Arms," no "Great Gatsby"...) Are there any literary scholars out there who would care to speculate about the factors that caused certain works to be translated and others not? (I am specifically referring to the era when there was a mass Yiddish readership and a commercially viable Yiddish book trade.) Is it possible that the multilingualism of many Jewish immigrants rendered translations unnecessary, as they acquired English? Or is it a matter of cultural and literary tastes that made "Alice in Wonderland" less appealing to Yiddish readers than "A Tale of Two Cities"? Submitted for your consideration, fellow MENDELnikes and MENDELnitses. Zachary Baker 2)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat Mar 19 15:52:18 1994 From: Subject: Perenial Yiddish debate The debate over what constitutes proper Yiddish usage as opposed to coloquial dialectal variants of mameloshen seems to brake out on Mendele with reasonable frequency. In the 19th century Yiddish began to grow a litterary tradition which, in the absence of a national state, might have helped settle that question. Unfortunately, as we are all painfully aware, the holocaust destroyed the natural soil on which that literature grew. the current attempts to resurect a literary Yiddish seem to me as quixotically noble as the earlier attempt to foster Esperanto by creating a body of Esperanto literature. It's putting the cart before the horse. There must be a soil in which the literature can take root and that can only happen if there is a living community employing the language as their everyday zhargon, patois, dialect, call it what you will. But all is not hopeless for Yiddish. Some years ago I was walking through the Mea Shearim in Jeruslaem when a little boy of about 7 came over to me and asked me a question in Hebrew. As my knowledge of Hebrew is very rusty I asked him if he spoke Yiddish. He replyed sort of indignantly "Farvos nisht? Ikh bin a Yid nisht a Goy!" I could have kissed him. There are several surviving communities in the world where Yiddish is their natural language rather than an auxiliary. We see them on the streets of Brooklyn, Jerusalem, Moncey, but they don't don't interact with the professional Yiddishist of academia, nor should they be expected to. It is the duty of the academic to go out in the real world to learn what is happening out there rather than theorizing in an ivory tower. Some time ago I asked a question about the linguistic practices of these communities. My question was not intended rhetorically but rather because I really wanted to know. Has Mendelnik ever looked into that? Do they use or shun what some have been calling daytshmerisms? Do the use lezn or leyenen, or perhaps both but make distinctions between their employment? Do they say vinde or fenster, bagrebnis or levaya, ikh hob dos gern or ikh glaykh dos, feygele or parpar or something still different? Is there a large difference between Satmarish and Lubovitch, Jerusalem and NY? Until questions like these are answered the prescriptive rules of the academics are really vacuous and the Yiddish that they are fostering and teaching in the universities will remain the sterile academic game that Esperanto has become. We should remember that even the full, active power of the French state has not succeeded in compelling the "purification" of the French language. What then can be expected from nebakh a por arme Mendelniks vos kenen sikh nisht eynem mit eynander aynshtimen? However you slice it, migldik is ekldik in my book. Arre Komar 3)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat Mar 19 18:51:52 1994 From: <74064.1661@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Purism or not purism Vos iz der heypekh fun a "Purist?" An "Impurist?" Avade neyn. Efsher a "Pluralist?" Ken zayn. Bay mayn meynung zoln yidishistn haltn tsey eyntsaytike hasoges in zinen: "Purism" un "Pluralism." Eyne shtimt nit ayn mit der anderer, ober (merkvirdik!) 'siz meglikh. Zet nor vi Sholem-Aleykhem shraybt tsu Shemen Dubnov fun Kiev, May 29, 1888: "Bayleygndik mayn bikher 'Dos Bintl Blumen' oder 'Der Buket', ferzn in proze, (in der yidisher shprakh der ershter pruv tsu shraybn azelkhe lider, vos derfirt di shprakh tsu fulshtendikeyt, nit onkumendik tsu keyn daytshishe, nit tsu keyn rusishe oysdrukn un verter), ...." Do zeyen mir az fun eyn zayt iz er geveyn a "Purist" vos hot gevolt gefinen dem veg tsu a loyterer mameloshn. Ober er hot gefunen yidishe oysdrukn in farsheydene svives vos er hot zey keynmol nisht gehert. Berkowitz dertseylt vi Sholem-Aleykhem hot eynike fun zey genitst in zayne verk mit groys fargenign. Do zeyen mir az eyntsaytik iz er geven a "Pluralist" oykh. Er un andere yidishe shrayber zenen geven azoy populer az zey hobn oysgelernt yidish-redners iber der velt tsu nitsn a sakh naye, zaftike, batamte oysdrukn fun farsheydene lender. Mir zenen ale baraykhert gevorn durkh zeyere "Purism" un oykh durkh zeyere "Pluralistic" batsiung tsu mameloshn. 'Siz faran nor getseylte yidishistn, un mir zenen vayt tseshpreyt. Dos un andere sibes veln nit lozn az mameloshn zol vaksn un baytn zikh azoy gikh vi andere leshonim vaksn un baytn zikh. Ober ikh meyn az mir veln zen az "Purism" un "Pluralism" zenen dokh beyde vikhtik far yidish, take hayntike yorn. Louis Fridhandler 4)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun Mar 20 09:51:59 1994 From: R_MINDEN@oise.on.ca Subject: Bubbi's and Bobba's of Canadian Jews Mark Flumerfelt wrote that Toronto Jews tend to say "bubbi and zedi" whereas Montreal Jews said "bauba and zeda". I believe the reason is the demographic history of the two places. Here is my conjecture: Toronto was settled first by British Jews who had become fairly assimilated by the time the Polish Jews arrived in the twentieth century. Montreal's Jews on the other hand are mainly Russian and Lithuanian. (These are gross generalizations, I realize.) The Polish influence explains the "u" in "bubbi" of Toronto, while the earlier assimilation of the British Jews accounts for the cutesy North American "i" diminutive in "bubbi and zedi". Montreal in general seems to have kept a more European flavor and sensibility to its Yidishkayt, imho. Ruth Minden 5)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun Mar 20 10:34:25 1994 From: Subject: Introduction Hello, I just joined this mailing list and presently know no Yiddish. As a senior at Harvard studying economics (and almost finished with my thesis), I don't have too much free time. I'm taking my second semester of Modern Hebrew right now, and I have become very interested in Yiddish literature and language over the past year. I'd be interested in any recommendations anyone could make for introductory textbooks, etc. I'm looking forward to this! Keith Plaster ______________________________________________________ End of Mendele Vol. 3.295 To subscribe, send SUB MENDELE FIRSTNAME LASTNAME to: LISTSERV@YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU Mendele has 2 rules: 1. Provide a Subject: line. 2. Sign your article. Send submissions/responses to: mendele@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu Other business: nmiller@starbase.trincoll.edu Anonymous ftp archives available on: ftp.mendele.trincoll.edu in the directory pub/mendele/files Archives available via gopher on: gopher.cic.net