|
|
Modern Hebrew’s Dilemmas
Norman Berdichevsky
|
First page of the Latinized
Hebrew weekly
Deror (Liberty),
published in Tel Aviv, 1933.
The
system of transliteration was
devised by Itamar Ben-Avi.
Click image to enlarge.
Apart from the political difficulties in trying to establish a Jewish state, many linguists (concerned observers in addition to the perennial cynics and pessimists), doubted that Hebrew, a language that had been “frozen” and endured almost entirely in written form, could meet the needs of a modern society. Hebrew grew in power and prestige due to territorial concentration through immigration (aliya) to Mandatory Palestine and was a better “fit” to achieve a national sense of identity for many immigrants from diverse cultural backgrounds than Yiddish or other languages.1 It is hard to imagine a more persuasive Zionist argument than that the Land of Israel "speaks" Hebrew through the countless inscriptions uncovered throughout its length and breadth on parchment, stone, clay, papyrus and wood. Nevertheless, the drawbacks involved in its transformation to become the vernacular of the State of Israel in the twentieth century were readily evident. They were (and continue to be):
--The need to develop a new vocabulary and appropriate word derivations and the resultant dilemma to base derivations on the indigenous “roots” of Hebrew that many speakers are unfamiliar with
--The difficulties of a Semitic-based grammar with unfamiliar constructions for speakers of European languages
--An alphabet that is unable to properly represent vowels, creating serious problems of reading comprehension
--The narrow range of vowel sounds and the paucity of vowel combinations (diphthongs), as well as the elimination of several guttural consonants have made the spoken language sound very monotone. The result is a poor match between speech and spelling.
In spite of the enormous success of Hebrew and its solid position as the “National Language” in the State of Israel, all of the above problems continue to present considerable barriers to literacy and the development of the language.2 Moreover, another threat intensifying the difficulties is the enormous appeal of English and its challenge to become an alternative language of communication in countries like Israel, whose languages have a small number of speakers and are spoken nowhere else.
The lack of vocabulary
The transition to a modern vocabulary was extremely difficult among the first generation of Hebrew-speaking children, especially those who attempted to adopt a natural, unstilted Hebrew to mirror their world. The American Yiddish poet Yoash visited one of the early Zionist settlements in 1913, and was impressed to hear teenage girls playing and making use only of Hebrew. However, when one was asked the name of a flower in her own garden, she replied, "Flowers don't have names."3 It would take another generation and the achievement of Israeli independence for Hebrew to catch up with the backlog of essential vocabulary. Consider, for example, all the diverse fields rich with terminology that one would need to have as part of his or her lexicon in order to become an educated speaker: flora, fauna, medicine, technology, art and science, just to name a few.
Hebrew's powerful word derivation mechanisms
The inherent mechanisms for word formation in the Hebrew language have played a brilliant role in enabling linguists to draw upon indigenous sources for the necessary vocabulary to modernize the language. This has been done in such a clever and convincing way that it would be no exaggeration to say that if we could resurrect some of the Biblical prophets and give them today's Hebrew newspapers, they would be able to discern the root concept and make a good guess at the meaning of many words which they had never seen before, and had not existed until modern times.4
The ability of Eliezer Ben-Yehuda and other linguists to coin new words from the scant vocabulary stock of the Bible and the Talmud derives from this basis and the use of prefixes, suffixes and infixes that still retain the original consonantal root letters. For example, how was the modern word for train derived? The word is rakevet, and the root letters R-K-V are found in the ancient verb "to ride" (RoCHeV), or the ancient word for chariot (meRKaVa). There are complicated rules of euphony that determine whether the middle letter is sounded as K or a guttural CH. In the Hebrew alphabet, the letters representing these different sounds are identical! How they are pronounced is determined by complicated rules of euphony.
Other modern languages, including French and German were also used as models for new words. For example, the modern Hebrew word for newspaper follows the German construction of zeitun--drawn from zeit (time). The new Hebrew vocabulary constructed "iton" from the root for time (et) and the common ending "on," used to indicate “a thing comprising the concept rendered in the noun." For example, from the word millah (word), Ben-Yehuda derived millon. This is the modern Hebrew word for dictionary, instead of the previous sefer-millim, (literally "a book of words"), an earlier attempt to create a compound word similar to the German Wörtberbuch. Similarly, Sha’on (watch) was coined from the root for the word meaning hour or time, sha’ah, and the ending is used to indicate a thing or object.
Other words were coined by the prefix “m” indicated by the Hebrew letter mem that adds a causative meaning to the root concept. For the modern word for camera, the Hebrew root TZ-L-M was chosen, meaning image, and thus we take photos (TZiLuMim) with a maTZLeMa; liTZaLeM is the verb “to photograph” and the reflexive lehiTZtaLeM (to be photographed). Many compound words were directly copied from French: pommes de terre (apples of the earth), duplicated in Hebrew by tapuĥei-adamah, and German Gan-Yeladim (Kindergarten), literally “Garden of the Children.” Many similar constructs provided the format, which Hebrew copied.
Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, the great pioneer linguist regarded as the "Father of Modern Hebrew," also knew Arabic and Persian. These languages had co-existed with Hebrew and Aramaic, and sometimes provided an essential root that could be transferred to Hebrew, and then serve as the basis for newly derived words. In modern Hebrew, close contact with Palestinian Arabic and the English of the Mandatory regime, as well as retention of many Yiddish expressions, provided Hebrew with a fertile source of slang, curse words and profanity.5
The slowing and reversal of Hebrew roots for new vocabulary
The trend to "Hebraize" new words was carried to an extreme by linguists and the official Academy of the Hebrew Language. They imitated Ben-Yehuda, who even proposed constructs derived from Hebrew roots for such widely accepted international words as radio and telephone. These never took hold and were removed from dictionaries after a decade or two but a surprising number have been accepted even if the essential consonantal root letters had to be expanded to four. In the end, it was always popular usage as determined by the majority of speakers, not decisions of the Academy that became integrated into the modern language. Israel was one of the first countries to make use of computers in the 1960s, when the word had not yet acquired international acceptance. It was named maĤSHeV, based on the root Ĥ-SH-V, “to think” that resulted in the words maĤSHaVa (thought), and ĤaSHiVut (importance). Recently, however, a reverse trend has become evident.
The twin sources: Native and Loazi (foreign origin)
Modern Hebrew has derived much of its contemporary vocabulary from two sources: the one indigenous to the ancient language based on existing recognizable three letter roots, such as RaKeVet for train, and the other a word that is part of the common vocabulary of most European languages, such as Televizia.6
The following word pairs of diverse origins are samples of this "dual vocabulary," and reveal the diverse heritage of modern Hebrew:
FOREIGN (LOAZI) / INDIGENOUS
aggresivi / tokpani
administratzia / minhal
situatzia / matzav
iluzia / ashlayah
immunizatzia / ĥisuna
adeptazia / histaglut
The latter group, immediately recognizable to a foreign audience is not really Hebrew based on authentic roots but represent “international sounding” equivalents that come to mind more easily than the Hebrew words in the dictionary for a large part of the population. The use of such words is slowly increasing.7 This is all the more ironic, since these words were in use before the pioneering work of Hebrew linguists who were able to coin new words based on indigenous roots. There are well over a thousand such word pairs commonly heard in spoken Hebrew today. During the early “renaissance” of Hebrew from the 1880s to World War II, new words of Hebrew (or Arabic or Persian as indigenous to the Middle East) origin were coined and the public encouraged to use them instead of the internationally recognized words that have German or Russian suffixes.
Today, many readers with a minimal grasp of the Hebrew language and not familiar at all with the written language can much more easily relate to the words of foreign origin. This explains their growing usage not only in the popular press, comic books and cheap novels but among politicians who cater to the "lowest common denominator" in their speeches. An irony of this situation is that many of these same words of foreign origin that sound so close to Russian, German and Yiddish and are recognizable to any English speaker were in use during the early period of Hebrew’s rebirth. The words most subject to this foreign trend are within the areas of medicine, the automobile, "teenage culture" and computers, where there are already substantial similarities in the vocabulary of most European languages. Many of them are spelled with a variety of weak consonant letters (aleph, heh and yod), functioning as vowels as in Yiddish. Their ungainly appearance is immediately recognized.
The great Hebrew spelling dilemma
Although Hebrew won the dual battle of transformation into a modern spoken language and recognition as the official language of The State of Israel, a serious problem remains, one that has resisted "modernization" and constitutes a growing barrier to literacy and comprehension. The transformation of Biblical Hebrew into a modern idiom remains unfinished as long as the language continues to use the traditional "holy" square Babylonian letters introduced in the fifth century B.C., which replaced the original Hebrew-Phoenician alphabet. The retention of the archaic Hebrew alphabet has made necessary the retention of three common spelling methods! The letters used in all of them are the same and represent consonants, but differ on the representation of the vowel sounds.
The first system used in older dictionaries show the "grammatical spelling" of the original consonants. This is the "bare bones" representing the skeleton of the word without vowels or even the weak consonants. In the second system, vowels, as in Arabic, are represented by a separate system of vowel signs (nikud) above, below or within certain letters. A third system (called by the Latin term plene or full) employs the weak consonants aleph (a), vav (o) and yod(y) to partially function as vowels, but does not use the special vowel signs. This is the system used nowadays for almost all books and newspapers read by adults; it's also the one that suffers most from possible misunderstandings. The Bible utilizes another method, employing full nikud but omitting some of the weak consonants. It also has additional signs to indicate how the words are to be chanted.
One can imagine the difficulties involved in any modern language that employs different spelling systems and requires the use of separate dictionaries!
Nikud is used in the Bible, prayer books, in children's works, as well as in poetry where meter is important. "Full spelling," known in Hebrew as HaKtiv HaMaleh, or by the Latin term plene, is now the standard in most dictionaries. A recent edition of a Hebrew-English dictionary, Milon Megiddo Ĥadish (Megiddo Publishing Company Ltd., Tel Aviv, 1990) explains that plene spelling is now in use in literature, science, newspapers, most books, the Press and general correspondence.
The use of the "vowel letters" aleph, vav and yod has the function of lengthening the preceding vowel to enable the reader to properly pronounce the word with "full vocalization" (sounding every syllable correctly). The lack of distinctive vowel letters creates considerable uncertainty regarding the identity of the word to be read. In Hebrew, there are many groups of homographs: words of two, three, four, five and more letters that even in plene spelling appear identical (like read and read) and can only be distinguished by full nikud. For example, the word mDBR without vowels may be miDBaR (a desert), miDaBeR (is speaking) or mehDaVaR (from a thing). Only by using nikud can the reader instantaneously (and correctly) read the word.
When the Hebrew reader sees a verb without nikud such as nMKR he must know immediately from the context whether the word is niMKoR (we will sell), or niMKar (it was sold). He cannot read the word correctly without nikud. Whereas in other languages there is simply one word for and, the grammatical rules in Hebrew require a different pronunciation (vih, veh, vah or uu), depending on the next proceeding letter. As there is no way of telling from the current spelling system without nikud which form is required, most speakers simply use the most common form.
Still "The People of the Book?"
The alphabet poses difficulties of legibility due to the square shape of most letters with none extending below or above the line. Tests have shown that whereas most readers can correctly read an English sentence that has been partially hidden by blocking out the top or bottom half of the line. This is impossible in Hebrew.8 The speed of reading also appears to be slower in a right to left than a left to right direction based on tests with Israelis fluent in a foreign language.9 The difficulties the alphabet poses for literacy extend beyond the new immigrant population and explain why many veteran residents in Israel who get along quite well in spoken Hebrew are unable to read a daily newspaper, let alone enjoy a work of serious literature. This comes as a shock to many foreign observers who still have an image of the Israelis (Jews) as “The People of the Book."
When an English reader comes across the word "read" for example there may be an initial doubt whether this verb is in the present or past tense but by the time the reader approaches the end of the sentence, the context will make it clear which tense is intended. The Hebrew reader is faced by hundreds if not thousands of such choices (distinguishing between “homographs”).10 Such “words” with multiple possibilities slow down reading considerably in the course of reading a Hebrew book! For example when the reader sees the three Hebrew letter samech-peh-resh, it may be variously read as sefer (a book), sfar (a border region), sapar (a barber), safar (the past tense masculine third person form for “he counted” or sippear (masculine third person intensive singular form meaning “he told”).
The difficulties are increased by the practice of "tacking on" prepositions and conjunctions (the words for "and," "by," "from," "to," "at," etc. all represented by a single letter) to the beginning of the next word. Since Hebrew has no upper case or lower case letters, these orthographic peculiarities make it difficult even for the fluent native-born speaker to immediately identify the word to be read. Printing everything in nikud is very expensive and slows down reading considerably.
To give the English reader an idea of the nature of the problem, try to make sense of the following sentence in which the vowels have been omitted and the prepositions attached to the following word.
“thwnd nhs sl ws d tthbttr trp”
Does this mean...?
a. The wind in his soul was due to the bitter trip.
b. The wound in his seal was due to the better trap.
c. The wand in his soil was due to the butter troop.
The "purists" argue that any distortion of the alphabet would obscure the word-building skeletal structure of the language that enables readers to recognize the essential root letters. As the modern Hebrew vocabulary has grown in complexity with maturity, this antiquated alphabet and its ambiguities create occasional uncertainty and slow down reading comprehension. There is no escape from this dilemma except a major reform of the orthography such as "Latinization or the addition of new "true vowel" letters. There have been well over a hundred reform proposals for new alphabets and new letters.11 These have even included Deror, a Latinized Hebrew newspaper begun in 1933 and edited by Itamar Ben-Avi, the son of Eliezer Ben-Yehuda. All such proposals ran into the determined and rabid opposition of traditionalists and the ultra-Orthodox who view it as further tampering with the "Holy Tongue" and an abomination.
The claims that Israelis are still "The People of the Book" and read more books per capita than anyone else are misleading.12 Finland, with approximately the same population as Israel can boast of a recent bestseller The Unknown Soldier by Vainő Linna dealing with the Russo-Finnish Winter War of 1940 that has sold more than 600,000 copies! By comparison, the best selling Hebrew novel in Israel, Black Box by Amos Oz, and Meir Shalev's The Blue Mountain have only sold about 80,000 each!
Pronunciation
The relatively small number of phonemes (distinctive sounds represented by consonants, vowels and diphthongs) in modern Hebrew using the Sephardi pronunciation common in Israel creates serious difficulties in comprehension of the spoken language. Whereas English and French have approximately fifty such phonemes, and German and Russian about forty, modern Hebrew makes due with only twenty-five! This makes the language sound quite undifferentiated, “boring” and causes confusion because many words sound quite similar. This is accentuated due to the failure of most Israelis today to pronounce the guttural “Semitic” letters. The result is even greater confusion due to the spelling system in use and its lack of correspondence with the way most people (particularly the population of East European origin) pronounce words.
The distortion of Hebrew grammar
Although even young school children can read the Bible in a language written two thousand years ago, there are some necessary adjustments involving quite different grammatical concepts employed in ancient Hebrew (and other Semitic languages). The first and most apparent is the lack of tenses based on time and the employment of a grammatical device knows as “consecutive vav." This has become totally obsolete in modern Hebrew which like the Indo-European languages, has an exact structure to express actions according to time--past, present and future as well as complex compound times and conditional tenses. Students of modern Hebrew who read the Bible confuse the present and the past tenses because they originally represented a different functional aspect--whether an action had been completed or was still in progress. No one can say that this aspect of the language is missed.
Much more significant is the growing loss and probably eventual disappearance of the gender distinctive conjugation of verbs! The Semitic languages are notoriously concerned about sex--the sex of the speaker or subject of a sentence. This applies to the second person pronoun “you” which is distinguished four ways (by gender, single and plural). Nouns, verbs and even adjectives must “agree” and all require this four-way division (masculine singular, masculine-plural, feminine singular, and feminine plural). It even applies to the command forms of the verbs. To give any command one must recognize this four-way distinction regarding whom is being ordered to do something! Such “extra baggage” is falling by the wayside as more and more Hebrew speakers, even veteran natives are following the trend to do away with this. The plural feminine form is now considered totally obsolete (a song like Tzenah, tzenah, tzenah utilizing the command for girls to “go out” seems remote and archaic). Many speakers today have even eliminated the feminine “you” (at) pronouns entirely instead of the masculine form (atah).
Gone too is the formal use of the grammatical marker word “et” to indicate a definitive direct object even though this principle used to be stressed in grammar books and dozens of numerous advisory bulletins issued by the Academy of the Hebrew Language. It was very useful in allowing the speaker to begin a sentence with the direct object. The lack of this facility is forcing expression to follow an unchanging word order pattern (subject--verb--object). Since this word has “no translation” in modern European languages, many Hebrew speakers in Israel have abandoned it. Its disappearance has converted the grammatical construct yesh (there is) into the verb “to have” although it does not require the four way distinction originally required of all verbs based on number and gender.
The same applies to the “construct state “ (smichoot) or dependence, the way in which nouns and their qualifiers are expressed. The “correct way” of expressing a concept such as The City’s Garden was in the form of Garden-the-city (Gan HaIr). This is often replaced by the much more cumbersome use of all articles and prepositions (HaGan shel Ha’Ir = The Garden of the City). An expression with two levels of dependence such as My mother’s friend’s garden in elegant correct Hebrew is Gan Haver-Immi whereas in colloquial Hebrew with its formal “translation” of every preposition becomes “HaGan shel haHaver shel HaImma sheli” (literally this is …the garden of the friend of my mother). Talking this way (or listening) can easily become an arduous task. Even to those listeners not familiar with the Hebrew language, such frequent speech constructions with the many pronouns sound awkward and akin to “baby language."
The irony of Hebrew pronunciation and prejudice towards Arabic
The relationship between the two peoples and language is an asymmetrical one. Arabs distinguish between the social necessity and desirability of communicating in Hebrew for many practical purposes even though their relationship to Jews and the State of Israel may be hostile whereas most Jews have a negative attitude towards Arabic as a result of the two people’s mutual hostility. This is apparent even among the children of Jews who are native Arabic speakers and were expelled from the Arab countries in 1947-50, and whose property was confiscated during and after the hostilities od the Israeli War of Independence when anti-Jewish disturbances occurred in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Libya and Yemen following the defeat of the invading Arab armies.
Ironically, “correct” Hebrew pronunciation was modeled after Arabic by prominent linguists in the formative period of the Hebrew revival, including Ben-Yehuda. The distinct pronunciation of the “guttural” letters of the Hebrew alphabet, “’ayin” and “ĥ et” were originally used to function as a guide for correct spelling. These letters originally had the same pronunciation as the corresponding letters in Arabic. What was once considered “correct Hebrew pronunciation” is now largely regarded by the Jewish majority as a marker of lower-class origin and Arab or “Eastern-Oriental Jewish” identity. Another irony of this situation is that failure to pronounce these letters correctly leads to frequent spelling errors by the “upper class” and largely Ashkenazi (European origin) Jewish majority. It also gives the language very little variety in terms of distinctive sounds. In the view of Haim B. Rosen, one of the foremost Israeli authorities on linguistics and the Hebrew language, the European Jewish majority has considerably altered Hebrew in the direction of an Indo-European language in terms of grammar and syntax and noticeably in pronunciation.13
One amusing anecdote of this situation is the solution found to the Hebrew translation of the great musical and film My Fair Lady. How would the translators deal with Eliza Higgens’s lower class Cockney accent and dialect and her struggle to learn “proper” (upper-class) English? The first attempt was ridiculous because a proper pronunciation of Hebrew in the “ears” of the purists meant imitating the “lower-class” pronunciation of Hebrew employed by most Arabs and many Oriental Jews!14 In spite of this prejudicial view, Arabic has made a significant contribution to Hebrew in both the classical Golden Age of Medieval Spain and in modern Israel.
Arabic, indeed was a favorite source for new Hebrew words. As well as being an aid in explaining obscure Biblical terms for which reason, Ben-Yehuda and his colleagues made a close study of the language.15
Hebrew's success and its questionable future: Diglossia or worse?
Hebrew's success was a matter of unique circumstances that other peoples have been unable to repeat.16 Jews migrating to Palestine had no common language and no other argument could so successfully establish Jewish attachment to Israel. Nevertheless, The massive intrusion of English with its real importance in world trade, diplomacy, science and technology, higher education and tourism are regarded by many Israelis as a key element in achieving success in their career. It is amazing that no Israeli statesman has ever spoken Hebrew at an international meeting or conference.
In this regard, it is noteworthy that many Jews in the Diaspora are unable to read or speak modern Hebrew whereas many of Israel's male Arab citizens are fluent and more literate in Hebrew than in Arabic. If educated Israelis are to make a name for themselves in their chosen professions, they must know and work in English. There is a continual diet of English language films and news programs that intensify the process.17 Americanization has affected Israel to an extent that could not be foreseen at the dawn of independence. The popularity of the Hebrew language and the quality of instruction throughout the Diaspora are the subject of much criticism. For most Jews outside Israel the language is still perceived only as the language of liturgy and ceremonial rituals. During the pre-statehood period, Jews in the Diaspora sympathetic to Zionism regarded it as the most productive part of the new and dynamic largely secular Hebrew culture being created by the generation of pioneers. Today by and large, it lacks even the attraction and fascination for Diaspora Jews that it held for many Christian theologians and clergymen who felt the power of the language they believed God first used to speak to man. This feeling of reverence and power was beautifully expressed by the great German writer Hermann Hesse writing in his largely autobiographical novel Beneath the Wheel:Hebrew kept all of them on their toes. The peculiar ancient language of Jehovah, an uncouth, withered and yet secretly living tree took on an alien, gnarled and puzzling from before the boys’ eyes, catching their attention through unusual linkages and astonishing them with remarkably colored and fragrant blossoms. In its branches, hollows and roots lived friendly or gruesome thousand-year old ghosts; fantastically fearsome dragons, lovely naïve girls and wrinkled sages next to handsome boys and calm-eyed girls or quarrelsome women. What had sounded remote and dreamlike in the Lutheran Bible was now lent blood in its true coarse character, as well as a voice of an old cumbersome but tenacious and ominous life.18 When David Levy, then Foreign Minister was assigned to attend the Madrid Peace Conference in 1991, there was concern in Israeli circles that the Minister would speak in Hebrew or French and he was ultimately replaced by then Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir whose heavy Yiddish accented English was felt to be more adequate to bring Israel's view to the English speaking Diaspora and world. Hebrew has a small number of speakers and a distinctiveness that makes it very vulnerable. There is a legitimate fear in Israel that the national language is being transformed into a two-tier system (diglossia) of low-caste usage for the home and workplace and that English is increasingly acquiring the status of a "high-caste" language for official use in an international setting at conferences, seminars, and major entertainment events such as the "Eurovision" song contest.
The outlook for the future
In spite of the oft-repeated view by many observers and the mistaken impression of journalists that “everyone speaks English," the informational and social gap between Israel and the Diaspora continues to grow. This tendency is aggravated by the media which often selects fluent English-speaking Israelis to interview. No interpreter is necessary and Hebrew monoglots are ignored as if they did not exist. This frequently leads to a distortion of what the “average Israeli” thinks. This is more than unfortunate. By 2030 or even earlier, it is probable that fifty percent of the world’s Jews will be Hebrew speakers concentrated in Israel. The preference for Israeli political figures to speak English at all international gatherings sends the wrong political message that elegant and correct Hebrew speech is unimportant.19
The growing Anglicization of Hebrew is one linguistic aspect of a weakening of the language’s historical connections with Judaism and Jewish folkways.20 This is not necessarily directly connected with a decline in formal religious belief but symptomatic of the old cosmopolitan Jewish preference for the “Great Cultural Languages” and a place on the world stage. It is hardly ironic that it was an Israeli who made this comment about the English language that could very well apply to Hebrew and its speakers, as well as all those who wish to understand modern Israel:Writing the English language well does not assure democratic values, but the general collapse of literary skills will sooner or later bring on political degeneracy. The English language becomes ugly and inaccurate because we have foolish thoughts, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier to have foolish thoughts.21
NOTES
1. Berdichevsky, Norman. “Hebrew vs. Yiddish: The Worldwide Rivalry” Midstream, July-August, 2002. See also Even-Zohar, Itamar 1996. "The Emergence of a Native Hebrew Culture in Palestine 1882-1948." Essential Papers on Zionism, Reinharz, Jehuda & Shapira, Anita eds. (New York & London: New York University Press), pp. 727-744; and “Who is Afraid of the Hebrew Language?” in Differently: Essays on Matters of Past, Present and Future. Aharon Amir, Amir Or & Guy Maayan eds. Jerusalem: Karmel, pp. 38-50.
|
Members of the early Hebrew
language committee.
Eliezer Ben-Yahuda (far right)
is the individual most
responsible for reviving Hebrew
and adapting it to modern
needs.
Click image to enlarge.
2. Bernard Spolsky and Elana Shohamy for a discussion of the State’s role in fostering Hebrew and its policies on language. 1999. Language in Israeli Society and Education. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 137: 93-114.
3. Benjamin Harshav, Language in a Time of Revolution, University of California Press. 1993. Los Angeles. p. 109.
4. For a through analysis of how Hebrew was adapted to modern twentieth-century needs, see “Hebrew: The Eternal Language” by William Chomsky, pp.154-205. The Jewish Publication Society of Ameica. Philadelphia. 1957
5. For a more thorough treatment of the changes in grammatical structure that characterize modern Hebrew as distinct from the ancient language, see ”Israeli Hebrew” by David Tene in ARIEL, no., 25, 1969. opus cit.
6. Berdichevsky, Norman. “Hebrew vs. Yiddish: The Worldwide Rivalry." Midstream, July-August, 2002. op. cit.
7. Silvan, Reuben “Lexikon LeShipur HaLashon," (Better Hebrew Usage). Sifriat Karni. Tel-Aviv 1969, Silvan lists close to 700 such pairs of words of diverse origin. Today the number has probably increased to twice that.
8. Reuben Alberg, "Kriyah yeilah biIvrit; HaKativ vehaKatav--haim hem dai tovim?" (Efficient Reading in Hebrew, Spelling and the Alphabet--are they good enough?), pamphlet. Dfus Telegraf, Bnei-Brak, 1991. 69 pages.
9. Alberg, op.cit. pp. 32-45
10. For an analysis and discussion of this problem in depth see Moshe Atar, “Ivrit Safah Ĥayah (Hebrew, A Living Langauge). S. Friedman Publishing. 1989. Israel. pp. 95-124. Ivan Ben Pele, “Ktav Oz; Ha Ktav Ha Latino-Ivri” pp. 23-31. Jerusalem 1990. HaTnua lima’an Ktav Ivri ĥad-Mashma’i; see also Reuven Alberg, op. cit. 1991.
11. Werner Weinberg, "Tikun HaKtiv HaIvri; Habaiya vehaNisyonot liftora" (The Orthographic Reform Hebrew; The Problem and the Attempts to Solve It). The Hebrew University. Jerusalem.1971
12. "A Movable Feast" by Hillel Halkin in the weekly magazine Jerusalem Report, April 22, 1993.
13. Haim B. Rosen. “Israel Language Policy, Teaching and Linguistics” in Ariel, No. 25. 1969; pp. 92-112. Op. cit.
14. Dan Almagor, “Barad yarad bidrom sfarad--How the Rain fell in Eretz-Yisrael” in Ariel. No. 104. Jerusalem. 1997. pp. 38-46.
15. Reuven Sivan, “Ben-Yehuda and the Revival of Hebrew Speech” in Ariel, No. 25. 1969; pp. 35-39.op. cit.
16. Norman Berdichevsky “The Search for a 'National Language': The Examples of Hebrew, Irish and Norwegian in Midstream." January 2002. pp. 17-21; see also Norman Berdichevsky, “Nations, Language and Citizenship." McFarland & Company, Inc. Jefferson, North Carolina, 2004. Chapter 22, Israel’s Hebrew-Speaking Arab Citizens, and Even-Zohar, Itamar 1981. "The Emergence of a Native Hebrew Culture in Palestine 1882-1948." Studies in Zionism 4, pp. 167-184.
17. David Gold, “ An Introduction to English in Israel” Language Problems and Language Planning. Vol.5, No.1, Spring, 1991. pp. 12-56.
18. Hermann Hesse, “Beneath the Wheel” in English translation from the German by Michael Roloff. Bantam Books. New York. 1968. pp.90-91
19. Spolsky, B. 1998. "The Role of English as a Language of Maximum Access in Israeli Language Practices and Policies." In J. Fisiak (ed.), Festschift for Kari Sajavaara. Poznan: Poland. 377-397.
20. David Gold, “An Introduction to English in Israel: Language Problems and Language Planning." Vol. 5. No. 1, Spring, 1981. pp. 11-56. , see esp. pp. 49-52 “Summary and Conclusions."
21. Bernard Avishai, “Orwell and the English Language.” Chapter 4 in 1984 Revisited, edited by Irving Howe. Perennial Library: Harper & Rowe. New York. 1983.
Norman Berdichevsky is a native New Yorker who lives in
Ocala,
Florida. He holds a Ph.D. in Human Geography from the
University of Wisconsin-Madison (1974) and is the author of
The Danish-German Border Dispute (Academica Press,
2002), Nations, Language and Citizenship (McFarland &
Co., Inc., 2004) and Spanish Vignettes: An Offbeat Look
into Spain's Culture, Society & History (Santana Books,
Malaga, Spain. 2004). He is the author of more than 175
articles and book reviews that have appeared in a variety of
American, British, Danish, Israeli and Spanish periodicals.
Dr. Berdichevsky teaches Literature, English, Geography,
History and Creative Writing at the Central Florida Community
College in Ocala, and he writes a regular monthly column for
the online publication New English Review.
|
|
|
|
