- This topic has 22 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 11 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
So it seems that these days people try to be grammatically correct in their Hebrew and make fools of themselves in the process.
The worst example by far is the prevalence of the term nifteres. As in ‘my grandmother was a big tzadeikes and was nifteres last year at age 112’ Hello? There’s no such term. You can say died, passed away, was niftar, but please no Nifteres.
The next example is Oheves Yisrael. Again no such term.
The third is Seudah Shlishis instead of Shalosh Seudos or Shalishudis. Seforim speak about why it’s called specifically Shalosh Seudos, but the ‘educated’ people insist on calling it Seudah Shlishis. Be Nice
If you must be medakdek in something start with the term Chazon Ish. Many people incorrectly pronounce it Chazzan Ish as though Rabbi Karelitz was a cantor with the surname Ish. The correct pronunciation is Chazoin as in Tzoin (sheep) or Shoin (already in Yiddish)
ShalomToYou: Umm… why isn’t Nifteres a feminine form of Niftar? Or Oheves Yisrael being a woman who loves/loved Jews? Seudah Shlishis/Shlishit is Hebrew. Shalosh Seudos is the Yiddish nickname for it. They’re the same thing. If you say a Cholam as an O instead of an OI, then Chazon Ish sounds kind of close to Chazzan. And if you have a Litvish A sound for the Cholam it’s even closer.
The verb niftar (male) is nifterah for a female. The term nifteres refers to the noun form of the word. So if someone was being maspid, they could say “The Nifteres was well known for being a big tzadeikes”.
While we are on the topic, any idea why it is called makas bechoros and not makas bechorim? Isn’t the plural of bechor, bechorim?
Corrections:
It seems that these days people try to correct people who try to be grammatically correct in their Hebrew, and make fools out of themselves in the process.
One problem is that they think that there is no such thing as lashon nekeivah. While they may be right that nifteres does not mean what they think it means, oheves Yisrael is, indeed, the lashon nekeivah version of ohev Yisrael. (I have my own beef with the practice of saying “he was niftar last Monday” at all, as that literally means “he was deceased last Monday.” Not much more sense. It’s the hazard of mixing languages.)
Another is that while he is correct that seudah shelishis is incorrect, it is only because it should be haseudah hashelishis. There are perfectly legitimate reasons for one to use either lashon.
If you must be medakdek start with the name of the Chazon Ish, in which Chazon rhymes with tzon (sheep) or milon (dictionary).
I see people made it here before me. Nechomah is right, and I should have mentioned that- nifterah is the correct word.
I don’t try to be grammatically correct in my Hebrew, as long as it sounds good I think it’s fine.
What’s funny is when they say, “She should be a Melitza Yeshara.” Do women have a different Yashrus then men? Probably, what they really mean to say is, Melitzas Yosher.
Torah: I’m not perfect in dikduk either- what annoyed me is just someone correcting other people who himself is completely wrong.
HaLeiVi: That probably just means they don’t know what melitz yosher means. It’s the same thing with “she was nifteres” or really “he was niftar”- which is why I wish I knew more dikduk than I do.
Nifterah is a passive verb. She died. Nifteres is a noun meaning she is the deceased.
Writersoul, I wasn’t referring to you. 🙂
Yeah I wasn’t sure you were- I was just making the point that I don’t exactly consider myself Grammar Girl (well, English grammar maybe- Hebrew grammar NO WAY). Don’t worry about it 🙂
HaLeiVi: Now I feel ridiculous, but is it possible that melitz yosher could be melitza yeshara? I’m just very confused and I’d love to know how it really works.
See, it’s either a melitzas yosher, someone who’s an advocate for yosher, or a melitza yeshara, who is an advocate who is yeshara. It depends on what melitz yosher means. I should not have posted what I did in my above post, as I’m personally apparently pretty fuzzy on it myself.
The poster is complaining about pronounciation, nor grammar. As written, there is no issue.
Living langauges continuously evolve. It is the nature of humans. It’s how Ha-Shem made us.
What would happen if you tried to speak correct English similar to Shakespeare, Chaucer or the author of Beowulf?
If you want a language with a standard pronounciation, stick to languages such as Latin, Sumerian or Ancient Egyptian. Dead cultures pose no such problems.
The word dikduk means grammar.
In no type of Hebrew is oheves Yisrael not a correct term.
This is not language evolving, but rather language being incorrectly used.
Sure. In my dikduk class we learned about Paul Bunyan.
OK poel & binyan)
Writer, if the intent would be that the person should be a straight Meilitz, then for a male we would say Meilitz Yashar, not Yosher. Anyhow, once a person’s life is over it’s too late to straighten them out.
That said, I better get going…
Golem that was outright hilarious thanks for the laugh.
That’s funny, I was sure the Shulchan Aruch’s language in ??? was, “??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ?? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ????? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ??????”
I see twice that it says Seudah Shlishis. So it’s wonderful that you have “seforim” that give you lots of different inyonim to think about, but I highly doubt any of them reject the title “Seuda Shlishis”. The term Seudah Shlishis is also mentioned in the Rambam where he writes, “???? ????? ?????? ?? ????” if you want a rishon.
As far as your pronunciation quip re: Chazon Ish; Rav Elyashiv zt”l gave a psak that unless a person has a mesora to pronounce the cholam “oy” from previous generations it is incorrect to do so. While there are those that are cholek, I don’t think that leaves you any room to attack someone who doesn’t pronounce it “choilam”.
Gramatically, Oheves Yisroel is correct. In Yiddish/Hebrified English, it became acceptable to ignore grammar once a term is borrowed. To have complaints re: people who are makpid about grammar would be incorrect on your part – but it would be in line with the minhag, if you will, of many Americans.
You are correct, however, that in the context you mentioned, “nifteres” would be incorrect.
Edit: Ahh, my mistake. The Rambam and R’ Yosef Karo were Sefardim. Seudah Shlishit(h). Not Seudah Shlishis. Silly, silly me.
ShalomToYou: How about, instead of telling me that my corrections are not “legitimate,” telling me WHY they’re not?
HaLeiVi: Ohhh…. makes sense now. Thanks!
nifterah – she died
nifteres – a deceased female
When you say she was nifteres, you are actually saying she was/became a deceased female person.
The word niftar applies both the jmeaning , he died, and a deceased male. In nekaiva, there are two separate words for these things.
I always wondered about the expression “bigdei Esav, b’nah hagadol, hachamudos” (Breishis (Toldos) Perek 27, Passuk 15). Beged is loshon zochor, and chamudos, which refers apparently to the clothing, is loshon nekaiva. If anyone has an explanation, or if chamudos refers to some esoteric idea that is being hinted at, I would love to hear about it.
I have a similar question on the dikduk of
” kol melacha lo yay-aseh bohem.” (Semos (Parshas Bo Perek 12, Passuk 16). Melacha is loshon nekaiva, and yay-aseh (not ya-aseh)which means “it will not be done,” is loshon zochor.
My Rov did not have an answer for me about this.
Sometimes the adjective goes by the word and sometimes it goes by the item. Begged can be a Zachar word, but items in general are female.
Haleivi, thank you for your comment, what about the second part of my post regarding melacha? Any ideas?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.