Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Jump to content
WikipediaThe Free Encyclopedia
Search

Yiddish orthography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article has multiple issues. Please helpimprove it or discuss these issues on thetalk page.(Learn how and when to remove these messages)
This articlepossibly containsoriginal research. Pleaseimprove it byverifying the claims made and addinginline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed.(September 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
This article includes a list ofgeneral references, butit lacks sufficient correspondinginline citations. Please help toimprove this article byintroducing more precise citations.(September 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
(Learn how and when to remove this message)
How Yiddish is spelled and written
שָׁלוֹם
This article containsHebrew text. Without properrendering support, you may seequestion marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of Hebrew letters.

Yiddish orthography is thewriting system used for theYiddish language. It includes Yiddishspelling rules and theHebrew script, which is used as the basis of a full vocalicalphabet. Letters that are silent or representglottal stops in theHebrew language are used asvowels in Yiddish. Other letters that can serve as both vowels and consonants are either read as appropriate to the context in which they appear, or are differentiated bydiacritical marks derived from Hebrewnikkud, commonly referred to as"nekudot" or"pintalach" (literally "points" as those marks are mostly point-like signs). Additionalphonetic distinctions between letters that share the same base character are also indicated by either pointing or adjacent placement of otherwise silent base characters. Several Yiddish points are not commonly used in any latter-day Hebrew context; others are used in a manner that is specific to Yiddish orthography. There is significant variation in the way this is applied in literary practice. There are also several differing approaches to the disambiguation of characters that can be used as either vowels or consonants.

Words ofAramaic and Hebrew origin are normally written in the traditional orthography of the source language—i.e., the orthography of these words, which isconsonant-based, is generally preserved (Niborski 2012). All other Yiddish words are represented withphonemic orthography. Both forms can appear in a single word—for example, where a Yiddishaffix is applied to a Hebrew stem. Yiddish diacritics may also be applied to words that are otherwise written entirely with traditional orthography.

Reform and standardization

[edit]
Traditional orthography
Soviet orthography

In the early 20th century, for cultural and political reasons, efforts were initiated toward the development of a uniform Yiddish orthography. A specimen initial practice was described in detail by the Yiddish lexicographerAlexander Harkavy in aTreatise on Yiddish Reading, Orthography, and Dialectal Variations first published in 1898 together with his Yiddish–English Dictionary (Harkavy 1898). Additional illustrations of this variation are provided in source excerpts inFishman 1981, which also contains a number of texts specifically about the need (pro and con) for a uniform orthography. A detailed chronology of the major events during this normative action, including rosters of conference participants, bibliographic references to the documents they produced, and summaries of their contents, is given in Yiddish inSchaechter 1999. There is a less detailed (but extensive nonetheless) English language review of this process inEstraikh 1999.

The first action formally undertaken by a government was in theSoviet Union in 1920, abolishing the separateetymological orthography for words ofSemitic (i.e., Hebrew and Aramaic) origin. Under this reform, Hebrew words were respelled according to their Yiddish pronunciation rather than their etymological spelling. The reform also eliminated German-inspired orthographic conventions such as silent "hej" and "ajen" letters and redundantgemination ofconsonants.[1]

A more comprehensive reform was developed in 1928 and finalized in 1932. It abolished the five special word-final allographs for the consonants [f], [kh], [m], [n], and [ts], which had been a distinctive feature of the Hebrew-based Yiddish writing system;[1] this change was widely reintroduced in 1961.[citation needed] Additional changes included: elimination of the silent aleph in word-medial positions; differentiating between the prefixes "af" and "uf"; changing the spelling of "ba" for prefixes and prepositions; eliminating doubled consonants at morphological seams; and adopting a Russified spelling of international terms and proper names. The most radical proposals involved the Latinization of Yiddish, which had precedents in pre-revolutionary plans likeLudwig Zamenhof's 1909 blueprint. During the Soviet period, Latinization gained momentum between 1930-1933, coinciding with a broader campaign toLatinize writing systems of multiple Soviet languages.Nojekh Shulman published an article supporting a universal Roman alphabet in 1919, while in 1930Mojshe Kamenshtejn advocated for Latinization in the pedagogical magazine "Ratnbildung".Eliezer Zaretski, initially opposed to Latinization, became one of its strongest proponents by 1930, arguing that the Roman alphabet was more international, ideologically closer toCommunism, and would make it easier to eliminate Hebrew words from Yiddish. Proposals included a 26-letter Roman alphabet (V. Kolchinski) and a 28-letter version (Bentsion Grande). Though some songbooks were published using a Latin-based "Czech transcription" for musical notation, the Latinization initiative was ultimately shelved by 1934, when it began to be mentioned negatively in official publications.[1]

The changes are both illustrated in the way the name of the authorSholem Aleichem is written. His own work uses the formשלום־עליכם but in Soviet publication this is respelled phonetically toשאָלעמ־אלײכעמ also dispensing with the separate final-formmem and using the initial/medial form instead. This can be seen, together with a respelling of the name of the protagonist of hisTevye der milkhiker, by comparing the title pages of that work in the U.S. and Soviet editions illustrated next to this paragraph. The Germanizedמילכיגער (milkhiger) in the former exemplifies another widespread trend,daytshmerish, discussed further below.

The efforts preliminary to the 1920 reform, which took place in several countries — most notably in Poland with focus on a uniform school curriculum — resulted in other devices that were not implemented as a result of any governmental mandate. These were further considered during the 1930s by theYidisher visnshaftlekher institut,YIVO (YIVO 1930). This led to the development of theirתּקנות פֿון ייִדישן אויסלייג (takones fun yidishn oysleyg – "Rules of Yiddish Orthography"), also known as the "SYO" (Standard Yiddish Orthography) or the "YIVO Rules" (1st editionYIVO 1935, current editionSYO 1999). This has become the most frequently referenced such system in present-day use. Although it regularly figures in pedagogical contexts, it would be misleading to suggest that it is similarly dominant elsewhere. Other orthographies are frequently encountered in contemporary practice and are house standards for many publishers.

A useful review of this variation is provided in the Oxford Universityכלל־תקנות פון יידישן אויסלייג (klal takones fun yidishn oysleyg – "Standard Rules of Yiddish Orthography") (Oxford 1992 andavailable online), written in and codifying a more conventional orthography than the one put forward by YIVO. Differences in the systems can be seen simply by comparing the titles of the two documents but they differ more fundamentally in their approaches to theprescription and description of orthographic detail. The former treats orthographic variation as a positive attribute of the Yiddish literature and describes essential elements of that variation. The latter presents a uniform Yiddish orthography, based on observed practice but with proactive prescriptive intent. Strong difference of opinion about the relative merit of the two approaches has been a prominent aspect of the discussion from the outset and shows little sign of abating. Although the Yiddish alphabet as stated in the SYO is widely accepted as a baseline reference (with a few minor but frequently encountered variations), the spelling and phonetics of the YIVO system ofromanized transliteration discussed below, remain subjects of particular contention. The intent of the SYO is not to describe the spectrum of traditional orthographic practice. The bulk of Yiddish literature predates the formulation of those rules and the discrepancies are significant.

Transliteration

[edit]

A few Yiddish letters and letter combinations are pronounced quite differently in the variousYiddish dialects. Whatever impact this may have on the discussion of standardized orthography, it becomes a significant factor when Yiddish istransliterated into other scripts. It is entirely possible to assign a specific character or sequence of characters in, for example, theLatin alphabet to a specific character or character sequence in the Yiddish alphabet. The transliterated form will, however, be pronounced in a manner that appears natural to the reader. A choice therefore needs to be made about which of the several possible pronunciations of the Yiddish word is to be conveyed prior to its transliteration, with parallel attention to the phonemic attributes of the target language.

The romanization of Yiddish has been a focus of scholarly attention in Europe since the early 16th century. A detailed review of the various systems presented through the 17th century, including extensive source excerpts, is provided inFrakes 2007. The Harkavy treatise cited above describes a late 19th-century system that is based on the pronunciation of the Northeastern Yiddish dialect,Litvish, for ananglophone audience. This was also a mainstay of the standardization efforts of YIVO, resulting in the romanization system described in detail below. The Harkavy and YIVO initiatives provide a convenient framework within which intervening developments may be considered. There was significant debate about many aspects of that sequence, including the need for any form of standardized orthography at all (Fishman 1981).

The outright replacement of Hebrew script with Roman script in the native representation of written Yiddish was briefly considered, among others byL. L. Zamenhof. This had no impact on mainstream orthography but a number of Yiddish books are currently available in romanized editions. These include Yiddish dictionaries, a context in which consistent and phonetically tenable transliteration is essential.

There is no general agreement regardingtransliteration of Hebrew into the Roman alphabet. The Hebrew component of a Yiddish text will normally reflect the transliterator's preference without being seen as a component of the methodology applied to the romanization of words presented in the phonemic orthography.

Transcription

[edit]

A transliteration system uses one script to represent another as closely as possible. It normally permits unambiguous conversion between the two scripts. Where the intent is to indicate phonetic variation, some form oftranscription (frequently done through usage of the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)) will be required. There are also many contexts in which phonetic distinctions are indicated by the diacritical marking of the base characters, or through the similar use of some alternate script that is familiar to the intended audience. These approaches are all also seen in native Yiddish texts, where distinctions that cannot be directly represented with the basic Yiddish script but do need to be highlighted, are indicated by using additional Hebrew diacritical marks, with Roman letters, or with the IPA.

There is no intrinsic reason why a transcription scheme cannot also be used for transliteration. In general, however, there is no expectation that the representation of a word in the source script can be retrieved from a transcription. Its purpose is to indicate how a word is pronounced, not its native orthography.

The table in the following section indicates two alternatives each for romanized transliteration and phonetic transcription, and is keyed to the Yiddish character repertoire as codified by YIVO. Other transliteration systems are also regularly employed in a variety of contexts, but none represent the full range of variant pronunciation in Yiddish dialects. Nor is the YIVO system equally appropriate phonetically to all languages using Roman script. This issue becomes particularly complex when dealing with older texts where little is known about contemporaneous pronunciation; transmitting the fullest possible detail of their notation is historically important. There are several approaches to the romanization of such material. The YIVO transliteration system is solely intended to serve as an English-oriented phonetic counterpart to themodern Standard Yiddish described (and to some extent prescribed) in the SYO. That work does, however, consider the transcription of variant pronunciation as will be discussed below.

YIVO published a major study of the range of Yiddish phonetic variation inThe Language and Cultural Atlas of Ashkenazic Jewry, commonly referred to as theLCAAJ. This uses a detailed system of marked Roman characters andsuprasegmental marks to indicate that variation, and does not apply standard YIVO transliteration at all. Although the full phonetic transcription scheme is not amenable to presentation in the table below, its core elements have been included. This scheme has been used by later authors to indicate "phonetic transcription", and is labeled in that manner below. One recent example of this is provided inJacobs 2005. Another transcription system frequently cited in academic contexts was devised and presented (in German) bySolomon Birnbaum inBirnbaum 1918 and was used in his later German works, as well as his English publicationBirnbaum 1979. This was intended to provide extreme flexibility in the representation of differences between dialects but failed to gain further practical acceptance due to its intricacy and idiosyncratic appearance:

Illustration with a passage from Sholem Aleichem'sShprintse
BirnbaumYIVO transliteration
Vaaihii haaiym, tréft zex a maasy, éiryv śvjjys iz dus gyvéin, kjm ex cj fuurn mit a bisl milexiks cj ainy fjn maany koinytys, a ijngy almuuny jn a raaxy fjn iékaterinoslav, vus is gykjmyn cj fuurn mit ir ziindl, aronćik haist er, kain boiberik ifn zjmerVayehi hayoym, treft zikh a mayse, erev-shvues iz dos geven, kum ikh tsu forn mit a bisel milkhigs tsu eyner fun mayne kundes, a yunge almone un a raykhe fun katerineslav, vos iz gekumen tsu forn mit ihr zundl, arontshik heyst er, keyn boyberik oyfn zumer

The Yiddish alphabet

[edit]

This table lists the Yiddish alphabet as described in theUriel WeinreichEnglish–Yiddish–English Dictionary (Weinreich 1968), with a few variants that may be seen in readily available literature. The YIVO romanizations are taken from the same source, where they are presented as "sound equivalents". The romanizations indicated inHarkavy 1898 are included for comparison. The IPA transcriptions correspond to the examples provided by YIVO[2] (with a few additional variants). The transcriptions in the following column were extrapolated from the LCAAJ. The Dutch transliteration system was taken from theJiddisch–Nederlands Woordenboek.[3] The elements of the two transcription systems appear in this table as appropriate to the standard pronunciation discussed under the next heading. The same elements, particularly those indicating vowels anddiphthongs, are associated with other Yiddish letters when other pronunciations are being transcribed.

The table also includes severaldigraphs and atrigraph that are standard elements of the Yiddishwriting system. They appear here in normalalphabetic order but are commonly collated separately at the end of a listing of the basic single-character alphabet.

The pronunciation in contemporaryHasidic communities reflects theregional dialects from which these communities originate, and therefore may differ from the standard presented below.

SymbolYIVOHarkavyIPALCAAJGermanDutchNameNotes
א(none)shtumeralef[a]
אַapasekh alef[b]
אָoɔokomets alef[b]
בbbeys
בּ(none)b(b)bbbeysNon-YIVO alternative to ב
בֿvwvveys[c]
גɡgiml
דddaled
דזשdzh(none)d͡ʒdschdzjdaled zayen shin
הhhey
וuʊuoevov
וּu(none)ʊuoemelupm vov[d]
וֹ(none)ɔ,ɔj(o,oj)o,oj,eu,äukhoylemNon-YIVO alternative to אָ and וי
ווvwtsvey vovn
ויoyoiɔjojoj,eu,äuoi, ojvov yud
זzszzayen
זשzhʒžj,schzjzayen shin
חkhchxchkhes[c]
טttes
טשtsht͡ʃčtschtsjtes shin
יy, ij,ij,ii, ieyud[e]
יִi(none)iikhirik yud[f]
ייeyei, aiɛjejeejtsvey yudn
ײַay(none)ajei, ai, ajai, ajpasekh tsvey yudn
כּkkof[c]
כkhchxchkhof
ךlange/ende khof[g]
לll,ʎllamed
מmmem
םshlos/ende mem[g]
נnnun
ןn, mn,ŋ,mn, mnlange/ende nun[g]
סsss,ßssamekh
עeɛ,əeeayin
פּppeyAlso used as a final form
פֿffey
פ(none)f(f)fNon-YIVO alternative to פֿ
ףflange/ende fey[g]
צtstzt͡scztstsadek
ץlange/ende tsadik[g]
קkkuf, (Hasidic)keef
רrʀ,r,ɾrreysh
שshʃšschsjshin
שׂsss,ßssin[c]
תּttof[c]
תsss,ßssof[c]

The Standard Yiddish Orthography

[edit]

The SYO is presented in Yiddish, and a few romanized transcriptions are included only where needed to indicate variant pronunciation. Given that the YIVO standardization initiative has been severely criticized for failing to accommodate such variation, it may be worth noting that the SYO explicitly references the three major branches of Eastern Yiddish —Litvish (Northern),Poylish (Central), andUkrainish (Southern), as developed in the regions centered on present-day Lithuania/Belarus, Poland, and Ukraine/Moldova. The SYO gives dialect-specific romanized equivalents for the following characters:

SymbolLitvishPoylishUkrainishName
וuiivov
ייejajejtsvey yudn
ײַajāajpasekh tsvey yudn

A few further romanized equivalents are provided but do not indicate dialectal differences. These are identical to what is contained in the table in the preceding section, with the following exceptions:

SymbolRomanizationNameNote
כch, x, [kh]khofkh is not included in earlier SYO editions
שšshin

YIVO took Litvish as thestandard dialect with only slight modification, to a large extent because of the consistency with which its phonemic attributes could be represented by a standardized orthography similarly requiring only minimal elaboration of traditional practice. The important distinctions between Litvish, Poylish, and Ukrainish are therefore not indicated in either the SYO or Weinreich dictionary. These are, however, discussed in detail in the LCAAJ to which Uriel Weinreich was a major contributor. The Roman characters appearing in the SYO correspond to those used in the LCAAJ, and their marking according to Central European orthographic convention provides greater flexibility in notating dialectal distinction than does an English-oriented approach. Phonetic transcription is therefore common in linguistic discourse about Yiddish, often using a wide range of diacritical marks in clear contrast to the totally undecorated YIVO romanization.

The SYO listing of the Yiddish alphabet (which predates the Weinreich dictionary) explicitly states that the vowels with combining points, and thevov andyud digraphs, are not counted as separate letters, nor are the additional consonant digraphs and trigraphs listed at all:

דער סדר פֿון אותיות אין אַלף־בית איז אַזאַ׃ א, ב, בֿ, ג, ד, ה, ו, ז, ח, ט, י, כּ, כ (ך), ל, מ (ם), נ (ן), ס, ע, פּ, פֿ (ף), צ (ץ), ק, ר, ש, שׂ, תּ, ת
אַ, אָ, וּ, וו, וי, יִ, יי, ײַ רעכענען זיך ניט פֿאַר קײן באַזונדערע אותיות אין אַלף־בית

The order of the letters in the alphabet is as follows, from right to left:

א, ב, בֿ, ג, ד, ה, ו, ז, ח, ט, י, כּ, כ, (ך), ל, מ, (ם), נ, (ן), ס, ע, פּ, פֿ, (ף), צ, (ץ), ק, ר, ש, שׂ, תּ, ת

These are not counted as separate letters of the alphabet:

אַ, אָ, וּ, וו, וי, יִ, יי, ײַ

Common variation

[edit]
Transliteration in Yiddish alphabet of English text on bus stop signs inKiryas Joel, New York. This is completely unpointed; for examplestop is writtenסטאפ rather thanסטאָפּ

There are several areas in which Yiddish orthographic practice varies. One of them is the extent to which pointing is used to avoid ambiguity in the way a word may be read. This ranges from unpointed text, through a small number of pointed characters, to the redundant use of the full system of Hebraic vowel pointing. Text being prepared for print generally uses a certain amount of pointing. In other contexts, however, there is an increasing tendency to forgo it entirely.

The most frugal application of pointing is the distinction ofpey andfey by enclosing a dot in the former (further details below). Immediately beyond that is the differentiation of thekomets alef from the unpointed form and then the further use of thepasekh alef. Where additional points are applied, there can be significant variation in their number and disposition and there are often internal inconsistencies in a single system. (The belief that this variation was an impediment to the recognition of Yiddish as a literary peer to the other major European languages was a primary driving force toward the development of orthographic norms.)

A detailed generalized description of the pointing of Yiddish text is given inHarkavy 1898 and the topic is also treated briefly in the SYO (which otherwise simply declares the prescribed characters). A more extensive character repertoire is presented and discussed inBirnbaum 1918.

Although consonants are basically represented in the same manner, the indication of vowels differs more widely. One noteworthy situation that does pertain to the representation of consonants is the indication of phonetic distinctions between each of the four character pairsbeys/veys,kof/khof,pey/fey, andtof/sof. The 'hard' (plosive) pronunciation of the first letter in each pair is unequivocally denoted by a dot (dagesh) in the middle of the letter. The 'soft' (fricative) pronunciation is similarly notated with a horizontal bar over the letter (rafe). Most orthographic systems usually only point one of the two characters in a pair but may be inconsistent from pair to pair in indicating the hard or soft alternative. Text that otherwise conforms to the SYO therefore frequently omits therafe fromfey, in harmonization with its unpointed final form, and makes the contrastive distinction from apey solely with adagesh in the latter (פ פּ). The similar avoidance of therafe and preferential use of thedagesh is a common alternative for the contrastive distinction betweenbeys andveys (ב בּ), although in Yiddish, becausebeys is used much more thanveys, withveys limited to words of Semitic origin, thedagesh is avoided andrafe used instead.

Therafe is an attribute of earlier Yiddish orthographic tradition and thedagesh is an adaptation of what is more generally a Hebrew practice. This also applies to the alternatives for indicating the distinction betweenyud when used as a consonant or as a vowel. There is a related need for marking the boundary between ayud andtsvey yudn where they appear adjacent to each other and, again, in the corresponding situation withvov andtsvey vovn. A dot under ayud (khirik yud) and to the left of avov (melupm vov) unambiguously indicates the vocalic form of those letters. Harkavy does not use these pointed forms in the main table above, being among the details codified in the early 20th century. In the traditional Yiddish orthographies where these letters are not pointed, the vowel is indicated by preceding it with ashtumer alef (reducing the use of which was a major focus of the normative efforts). The single and digraph forms of, for example,vov can be separated either with a dot or an embeddedalef asוווּ orוואו (vu, 'where'). Although only the former spelling is consistent with the SYO and appears in Uriel Weinreich's dictionary, he uses the unpointed alternative exclusively in his ownSay it in Yiddish (ISBN 0-486-20815-X), a phrase book that contains the word in a large number of "Where is...?" queries and was published when the rules had already been well established.

A further graphic example of this distinction is seen in the official announcement, on 14 November 1997, of a change in editorial policy for the prominent Yiddish periodical,פֿאָרווערטס (Forverts,Yiddish Forward). It was first during that year that they adopted the YIVO orthography. The previous editorial position overtly opposed any such change and the following is included in the explanation of the shift (quoted in full inSchaechter 1999, p. 109):

און דערנאָך האָבן מיר באַזײַטיקט דעם אלף אין די ווערטער ייד און יידיש (פֿריער איד און אידיש), ייִנגל (פֿריער אינגל); און איצט וועלן די ווערטער געשריבן ווערן מיט אַ חיריק אונטערן צווייטן יוד, װי׃ ייִד, ייִדיש, ייִנגל

And then we removed thealef in the wordsייד [yid] andיידיש [yidish] (previouslyאיד andאידיש) andייִנגל [yingl] (previouslyאינגל), and now will spell the words with akhirik under the secondyud as:ייִדיש‎,ייִד andייִנגל.

The appearance of three alternate spellings for the name of the Yiddish language in a statement intended to describe its orthographic standardization might not require any comment if it were not for the clear indication that the cardinal representation —יידיש — was neither the older nor the newer editorial preference. Regardless of the intent of that statement, a word-initialyud is consonantal and an adjacentyud is vocalic in all Yiddish orthographic systems, as is the constraint on a word initialtsvey yudn diphthong. Pointing the secondyud inייִדיש is therefore, indeed, redundant. The spellingאידיש also illustrates some of the dialectic breadth of the Yiddish language, the name of which is both written and pronounced with and without an initial consonant. In earlier texts, a singlevov in word-initial position was often used to indicate/f/ (a reflex of the German use ofv to denote/f/).

Finally, letters other thanshtumer alef may be used as silent indications of syllable boundaries and in compound consonants, as well as for extending the length of an adjacent vowel. This became particularly common in deliberately Germanized orthographies dating from the late 19th century, collectively termeddaytshmerish. Its most obvious further attributes are the heavy use of double consonants where traditional orthography uses single ones, and the gratuitous substitution of German vocabulary for established Yiddish words. The desire to reverse that trend was another of the reasons for the effort toward orthographic standardization.

Publishers of Yiddish newspapers have, however, been particularly conservative in their attitude toward that development and the preceding editorial statement inForverts provides a useful capsule summary of the details about which opinions differed. Other current Yiddish newspapers and magazines retain the spellingאידיש and many elements ofdaytshmerish. This is typified inדער איד (Der Yid), which is one of several weeklytabloids — others beingדער בּלאט (Der Blatt) andדי צייטונג (di tsaytung,News Report) — that all adhere to the earlier orthography and are in wider circulation and of substantially greater length than thebroadsheetForverts. It may also be seen in the online version of theאַלגעמיינער זשורנאַל (algemeyner zhurnalAlgemeiner Journal), as well as in its printed edition. Extensive additional source material relevant to the stance of the daily press on orthographic reform is provided inFishman 1981.

Editorial acceptance of varying orthographies is a general characteristic ofHasidic publication, and a single work written by multiple authors may differ in that regard from section to section depending on the preferences of the individual contributors or the typographic context. One example of the latter situation is the use of the pointed forms ofalef only in specific instances where they are deemed necessary to avoid misreading. (As may be noted with the preceding discussion of the spelling ofייִדיש, and the pointing of bothfey andpey, the SYO contains some redundant elements.) The online manifestation of such orthographic heterogeneity can readily be seen in theYiddish Wikipedia. This is an expansive aspect of contemporary Yiddish publication and will require detailed accommodation in future codifications of orthographic practice.

Graphic innovation

[edit]

Orthographic reform, as considered here, embraces two distinct actions. The first is concerned with the way Yiddish words are spelled, as illustrated in the preceding section with the name of the language itself. The second relates to the graphic devices used to distinguish, for example, between א when representing what in English is an /a/ and when representing an /o/. The pointed אַ and אָ came into use for that purpose in the mid-18th century and were thus well established by the time the 20th century reforms were initiated, as were several other traditional Yiddish pointings. The most deeply entrenched of these was the distinction between פfey and פּpey. YIVO proposed the additional use of pointed letters that were not in the Yiddish (or Hebrew) fonts of the day. This is a frequently cited reason for the SYO being slow to gain acceptance, but regardless of any opinion about their utility, most of the graphic elements introduced in that manner are now readily available. (The SYO explicitly states that pointing to disambiguate vowels does not change the identity of the base character; a pointed alef, for example, is not a letter of its own.)

The first edition of the SYO was preceded by a collection of essays published by YIVO in 1930 entitled, "A Standard of Yiddish Spelling; Discussion No. 1" (דער איינהייטלעכער יידישער אויסלייגder eynheytlekher yidisher oysleyg,YIVO 1930). Neither the title of this work, nor its contents, were written using the conventions that YIVO was subsequently to put forward on its basis. The pivotal essay in the 1930 collection was written byMax Weinreich. His, "A Projected Uniform Yiddish Orthography" (Weinreich 1930), was not written with the pointing that was to be prescribed in the SYO and introduces a character that was entirely absent from the previous repertoire. This is the V-shapedgrapheme on the second line of that text, replacing thetsvey vovn in Weinreich's name, and in the name of the city where the work was published, Vilna. It appears at numerous additional places in the text and in two other essays in the same collection but did not appear in any subsequent printed work. It was, however, included in the SYO as a recommendation for use in handwritten text, where it is also encountered. Yudl Mark, who authored one of the other 1930 essays in which thetypeset form was used, was later to dub this character theshpitsik maksl ("acute Maxy"), and it remains enshrined in the YIVOlogo.

Further orthographic variation is seen in other YIVO publications from the same period, also using markings that were not included in the SYO, but which did have typographic precedent (for example, אֵ to represent /e/). The way in which thepasekh tsvey yudn are set in the heading of the Weinreich article (in his name) is discussed below.

Computerized text production

[edit]
See also:Unicode and HTML for the Hebrew alphabet

There are orthographic alternatives in the digital representation of Yiddish text that may not be visually apparent but are of crucial importance to computer applications that compare two sequences of characters to determine if they match exactly. Examples of this aredatabase queries andspell checkers. Situations where differing representations of typographically similar characters can give unexpected or incorrect results are described below. This may prove a particular concern for Internet users as Yiddish is increasingly used inInternationalized Domain Names, and in Web and e-mail addresses.

Some mobile clients only provide limited support for typing pointed text, restricting the range of available characters for such things asinstant messaging and other forms of spontaneous digital text. Even people who are skilled in using laptop or desktop keyboards for that purpose (which also requires some erudition) are subject to this constraint. This fuels the move toward unpointed text and is illustrated in the blog,Yiddish with an alef. This is of particular note given the late acceptance of the SYO by its parent publication,The Jewish Daily Forward, discussed below.

Digraphs

[edit]

There are two different ways in which each of the digraphstsvey vovn,vov yud, andtsvey yudn can be typed on Yiddish and Hebrew keyboards (which are both commonly used for the production of Yiddish text). If the digraph appears on a single key, as is normal in a Yiddish keyboard layout, pressing that key will produce a single-characterligature. In theUnicode code chart the HEBREW LIGATURE YIDDISH DOUBLE VAV appears in positionU+05F0, the HEBREW LIGATURE YIDDISH VAV YOD atU+05F1, and the HEBREW LIGATURE YIDDISH DOUBLE YOD atU+05F2 (where theU+ indicates that the numerical position of the character in the Unicode chart is given by following fourhexadecimal digits).

These ligatures are, however, frequently missing from Hebrew keyboards — a characteristic inherited from the similarly differentiated Yiddish and Hebrew typewriter layouts. A separatevov yud was, however, not provided on either. Hebrew typewriters were modified specifically for Yiddish by the replacement of the first two keys in the second row, which were used for punctuation marks, with one shifting key for "tsvey yudn/tsvey vovn" and another for "komets alef/pey" (withdagesh). This can be seen on a typewriter that belonged to the Yiddish authorIsaac Bashevis Singer[1]. Typewriters built directly for Yiddish include the same four additional characters in different positions, as can be seen on another typewriter that belonged to Singer[2]. The salient difference between the two designs is that each key on the Yiddish typewriter produces one character only, available in two different sizes through shifting.

As a result of the widespread practice of writing Yiddish on Hebrew keyboards and other legacy effects of the variant digraph forms on both modified Hebrew and native Yiddish typewriters, when Yiddish text is entered from a computer keyboard with single-key digraphs, many people nonetheless type the digraphs as two-key combinations, giving the corresponding two-letter sequences (tsvey vovnU+05D5 U+05D5;vov yudU+05D5 U+05D9;tsvey yudnU+05D9 U+05D9). Although ligatures can be appropriate inmonospaced typewritten text, other than in the smallest type sizes they rarely appear in proportional typesetting, where the elements of a digraph are normallyletterspaced as individual characters (illustrated in Max Weinreich's name in the facsimile text in the preceding section). It may be of further interest to note that a useful, albeit highly colloquial, test of whether digraphs are regarded as single or double characters is provided by the way they appear incrossword puzzles. In Yiddish, each element of a digraph is written in its own square (and the same practice applies to other word games where letters are allocated to positions of fixed width in a regular array).

The pointed digraphpasekh tsvey yudn can also be typed in different ways. The one is simply to enter aprecomposedpasekh tsvey yudn, which is both displayed and stored as a single characterײַ (U+FB1F). The second option is to enter thetsvey yudn ligature as a base character and then to enter a combiningpasekh for display together with it. Although appearing to be a single characterײַ, it is stored digitally as two separate characters (U+05F2 U+05B7). These two forms can only be directly entered from a keyboard on which the ligature appears. As a result, a practice is developing wherepasekh tsvey yudn are indicated by enclosing apasekh between the elements of a two-character digraph. Thepasekh aligns correctly only with the firstyud (subject to conditions described in the next section) but the display is tolerably that of a fully marked digraphיַי and in some display environments may be indistinguishable from one or both of the previous alternatives. However, this option requires the storage of three separate characters (U+05D9 U+05B7 U+05D9). As a fourth alternative, albeit the least stable typographically, the second of two consecutiveyudn may be pointedייַ (U+05D9 U+05D9 U+05B7). Apasekh yud is otherwise not part of any established Yiddish character repertoire, and its use in this context manifests conditions that are specific to computerized typography. The four possible representations of thepasekh tsvey yudn thus have even greater potential for causing confusion than do the other digraphs. A further potentially confusing option specific to computerized text production, but not a component of any Yiddish orthographic tradition, is the combination of akhirik with atsvey yudn ligature to represent the consonant–vowel sequenceyudkhirik yud, asײִ (U+05F2 U+05B4) rather than the correctייִ (U+05D9 U+05D9 U+05B4).

Combining marks

[edit]

Fonts that support Hebrew script do not always correctly render the combining points that are specific to Yiddish (and in many cases have general difficulty with Hebrew marks). Some applications display extraneous blank space adjacent to a letter with such a mark, and the mark may be displayed in that space rather than properly positioned with the base character. Writing text for presentation in a reading environment that has unknown font resources — as will almost invariably be the case withHTML documents — thus needs special care. Here again, this is not simply a matter of typographic preference. The disjunction of combining and base characters can easily lead to error when character sequences are copied from one application into another.

The same alternative modes of entry that are illustrated above with thepasekh tsvey yudn are available for all of the other pointed characters used in Yiddish, with largely indistinguishable visual results but with differing internal representations. Any such character that appears on either a physical or avirtual keyboard will normally be recorded as a two-character sequence consisting of the base character followed by the combining mark. If a graphic character selector is used that does not emulate a keyboard, the desired character will be chosen from a table on the basis of its appearance. Since such facilities display combining marks separately from base characters, it is likely that the precomposed character form of a character will be the more readily recognized of the alternatives.

Most applications will accept either form of input, but frequentlynormalize it to the combining characters. There are, however, some applications that normalize all input to precomposed characters. Digital texts containing the combining, and the precomposed alternatives are therefore both encountered. An example of extensive text using precomposed characters is provided by the online edition of the periodicalלעבּנס־פֿראַגן (lebns-fragn,Life Questions).

The present article was written using combining characters with the exception of the second row in the following table, which is provided to illustrate the differences between the two forms. In a viewing environment prone to the misalignment of base characters with their combining marks, precomposed characters are more likely to be typographically stable (but may cause greater difficulty in other regards).

Combiningאַאָבּבֿוּוֹיִײַכּפּפֿשׂתּ
Precomposed

Punctuation

[edit]

The punctuation marks used to indicate sentence structure — the comma, period, colon, and semicolon — are the same in Yiddish as they are in English. The punctuation used for the abbreviation, contraction, and concatenation of words — the apostrophe and hyphen — are conceptually similar but typographically distinct in a manner that, yet again, can cause confusion when represented digitally. This can be illustrated with the contraction forעס איז (es iz, 'it is'), which isס׳איז (s'iz, 'it's'). Although the Yiddish punctuation mark is termed anאַפּאָסטראָף (apostrof) the character used to represent it is the Hebrewgeresh, which differs both in its graphic appearance and, more importantly, in its digital representation. (The APOSTROPHE isU+0027, and the HEBREW PUNCTUATION GERESH isU+05F3.) What is termed a double apostrophe is used to indicate abbreviation through the removal of several consecutive letters. For example,דאָקטאָר (doktor, 'doctor') is abbreviatedד״ר (equivalent toDr.). The punctuation mark is, however, not the QUOTATION MARK (U+0022), but the HEBREW PUNCTUATIONGERSHAYIM (U+05F4), which is thedual form of the wordgeresh.

Yiddish words are also hyphenated in a manner that is directly comparable to English punctuation. The character used to indicate it is, however, not the HYPHEN-MINUS (U+002D), but the HEBREW PUNCTUATION MAQAF (U+05BE). The latter character appears as the horizontal mark flush with the top of the text inמאַמע־לשון (mame-loshn, 'mother tongue'; the common vernacular designation for the Yiddish language). Typeset text may also indicate hyphenation with a character resembling an equal sign (⸗), sometimes in an oblique variant, but this is uncommon in digital text.

The distinctions betweengeresh – gershayim – maqaf and "apostrophe – quotation mark – hyphen" are always indicated correctly in typeset material (with exception for the occasional deliberate use of the hyphen instead of themaqaf). All characters in the first group are, however, not directly available on many Hebrew or Yiddish keyboards, and any that is lacking is commonly replaced by the corresponding character in the second group. Here again, in situations that depend on the correct matching of character sequences, the fall-back representation of a punctuation mark may not match the stored target of a database query, without the reason for the failure being apparent to a non-specialist user.

Paired characters such as parentheses, brackets, and quotation marks, which are typographically mirrored —( ) [ ] { } “ ” — are prone to incorrect presentation in digital Yiddish text, with the opening and closing forms appearing to have exchanged places. (There are several instances in the preceding text where this problem will be apparent on systems that do not properly render mirroring characters inbidirectional text.)

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^Indicates that a syllable starts with the vocalic form of the following letter. Neither pronounced nor transcribed.Also used forpasekh alef andkomets alef, in which case it is simply called "alef."
  2. ^abAs a non-YIVO equivalent, an [a] or an [o] may also be indicated by an unmarkedalef.
  3. ^abcdefOnly used in words of Semitic origin
  4. ^Only used adjacent to ו or before י
  5. ^Consonantal [j] when the first character in a syllable. Vocalic [i] otherwise.
  6. ^Only used following a consonantal י or adjacent to another vowel
  7. ^abcdeFinal form, only used at the end of a word

References

[edit]
  1. ^abcEstraikh, Gennady (February 4, 1999). "Soviet Yiddish orthography".Soviet Yiddish: Language-Planning and Linguistic Development. Oxford University Press.
  2. ^YIVO,IPA transcriptionsArchived 2006-02-11 at theWayback Machine
  3. ^"Thuis | JNW – Jiddisch Nederlands Woordenboek".www.jiddischwoordenboek.nl. Retrieved2022-03-01.

Sources

[edit]
  • Birnbaum, Salomo A.,Praktische Grammatik der Jiddischen Sprache für den Selbstunterricht, Hartleben Verlag, Vienna, 1918, (in German), 5th ed.,Grammatik der Jiddischen Sprache, mit einem Wörterbuch und Lesestücken, Buske Verlag, Hamburg, 1988,ISBN 3-87118-874-3.
  • Birnbaum, Solomon A.,Yiddish: A Survey and a Grammar, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1979,ISBN 0-8020-5382-3.
  • Estraikh, Gennady,Soviet Yiddish: Language Planning and Linguistic Development, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1999,ISBN 0-19-818479-4.
  • Fishman, Joshua A. (ed.),Never Say Die: A Thousand Years of Yiddish in Jewish Life and Letters, Mouton Publishers, The Hague, 1981, (in English and Yiddish),ISBN 90-279-7978-2.
  • Frakes, Jerold C.,The Cultural Study of Yiddish in Early Modern Europe, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2007,ISBN 1-4039-7547-7.
  • Frakes, Jerold C.,Early Yiddish Texts 1100–1750, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004,ISBN 0-19-926614-X.
  • Frank, Herman,Jewish Typography and Bookmaking Art, Hebrew-American Typographical Union, New York, 1938.
  • Harkavy, Alexander,Harkavy's English-Jewish and Jewish-English Dictionary, Hebrew Publishing Company, New York, 1898. Expanded 6th ed., 1910.scanned facsimile
  • Harkavy, Alexander,Yiddish-English-Hebrew Dictionary, Hebrew Publishing Company, New York, 1925. Expanded 2nd ed., 1928, reprinted, Yale University Press, 2005,ISBN 0-300-10839-7.
  • Herzog, Marvin, et al. (ed.), YIVO,The Language and Culture Atlas of Ashkenazic Jewry, 3 vols., Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tübingen, 1992–2000,ISBN 3-484-73013-7.
  • Jacobs, Neil G.,Yiddish: A Linguistic Introduction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005,ISBN 0-521-77215-X.
  • Katz, Dovid,Grammar of the Yiddish Language, Duckworth, London, 1987,ISBN 0-7156-2161-0.scanned facsimile
  • Katz, Dovid (compiler),Code of Yiddish Spelling, Oxforder Yidish Press, Oxford, 1992, (in Yiddish),ISBN 1-897744-01-3.scanned facsimile
  • Niborski, Yitskhok,Verterbukh fun loshn-koydesh-stamike verter in yidish, 3rd ed., Bibliothèque Medem, Paris, 2012,ISBN 979-10-91238-00-7.
  • Schaechter, Mordkhe,The Standardized Yiddish Orthography: Rules of Yiddish Spelling, 6th ed., andThe History of the Standardized Yiddish Spelling, YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, New York, 1999, (in Yiddish with introductory material in English),ISBN 0-914512-25-0.
  • Weinreich, Max,Proyektn fun an aynheytlekher yidishen oysleyg, inDer aynhaytlekher Yidisher oysleyg: materialn un proyektn tsu der ortografisher konferents fun YIVO, ershte zamlung, Yidisher Visnshaftlekher Institut, Vilna, 1930. pp. 20–65scanned facsimile
  • Weinreich, Uriel,Modern Yiddish-English English-Yiddish Dictionary, YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, New York, 1968,ISBN 0-8052-0575-6.
  • Weinreich, Uriel,College Yiddish: an Introduction to the Yiddish language and to Jewish Life and Culture, 6th revised ed., YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, New York, 1999,ISBN 0-914512-26-9.
  • Yardeni, Ada,The Book of Hebrew Script, The British Library, London, 2002,ISBN 1-58456-087-8.
  • YIVO,Der aynhaytlekher Yidisher oysleyg: materialn un proyektn tsu der ortografisher konferents fun YIVO, ershte zamlung, Yidisher Visnshaftlekher Institut, Vilna, 1930.scanned facsimile
  • YIVO,Oysleyg-takones fun Yidish, Yidisher Visnshaftlekher Institut, Vilna, 1935.scanned facsimile

External links

[edit]
Wikibooks has a book on the topic of:Yiddish
Indo-European
Germanic
Celtic
Romance
Baltic
Slavic
Iranian
Indo-Aryan
other
Uralic
Turkic
Tungus—Manchu
otherEuropean
Afroasiatic
Niger–Congo
Dravidian
Japonic
otherEast Asian
Austronesian
Algic
otherNative American
Creole
Constructed
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yiddish_orthography&oldid=1281324136"
Categories:
Hidden categories:

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp