english to german translations

2 Ekim 2012 Salı

The Yeshiva Bucha's Hall

To contact us Click HERE
I think you will agree that some way, some how, we must hear this record.

Unrelated, but you can download and hear an alleged Mrs. Yetta Bronstein's version of I Want To Hold Your Hand here.

As for Little Rita Carol, although this one made it to Billboard's July 15, 1955 issue, she seems to have also had a . . . something, called He Wasn't Just an Ordinary Panhandler back in 1953 - b-side, The Cowboy With the Lasso. The mini review there says she was a kid, part of a singing sister duo.

Even when the Italians are frowning on amor, they can't help being amorous

To contact us Click HERE
What a find! My thanks to Abe Ehrenfeld for showing me this rather unusual, probably unique, page in all of rabbinic literature, for it features a woodcut of exactly what it looks like: an amorous couple being, well, amorous (on the edge of a scorching sword, actually). (link)

Detail:

The Italian Jews particularly enjoyed the genre of chidos, enigmas, and the author (R. Immanuel Hai Ricchi [1688-1743], Aderet Eliyahu, Livorno 1742) included a few at the end of this, mainly halachic, work.

The riddle describes a thing "that can burn aflame in water, all the sinners do it in secret" and so on. The answer is - AMOR. Love. Ricchi has a good time punning on "Amor" and ×”×ž×•×¨, as in ×”×¨ ×”×ž×•×¨, a mount of spices, because both words sound alike (the Italian Jews, being Italian, did not pronounce the ×”). Ricchi even helpfully explains that one must not wonder at this Romance word being used to explain Hebrew, for the Torah was given in four languages - Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, and Latin - according to the Sifre. The full line reads "He does not do this, who feareth the Lord. He is on a Mountain of Myrrh, and not a Mountain of Rupture." (That was my attempt to preserve the rhyme. His point is that har hamor, indicates amor, love, while har bater, indicates the opposite of love).

Fourteen commonly asked American she'elot from 1922

To contact us Click HERE
Apparently so - these are representative questions which Rabbi Henry Pereira-Mendes included in his series called Orthodox Judaism - The Future in the section titled A Plan for Organization in the Jewish Forum.

As you can see, he advocated for the formation of a national bet din to deal with modern questions and to publish answers to them. These are the questions which "every modern Rabbi knows" (because they get asked them).

On a women's Korban Minchah siddur

To contact us Click HERE
Here's an interesting entry penciled on a Google Booked Korban Mincha siddur. The siddur was printed in Vilna in 1892, and the entry was written in 1910.
One of the great things about history, bibliography, bibliolatry, is that eventually the describers become interesting in their own right. So if you want to know what a Korban Mincha siddur was perceived as by a Harvard librarian in 1910, here it is.
Now, I know some will say "Well, that's what it is." But my point is that 100 years later it isn't really thought of as "a Chasidic prayerbook" per se, but as a woman's prayer book. And that is why Artscroll calls its women's siddur Korban Mincha in Hebrew (link).

The original R. Zalman Leib Teitelbaum's rabbinic contract from 1841 ("בתוך הדרשה קיינען ניכט מקלל צו זיין או מבזה צו זיין הן בכלל והן בפרט")

To contact us Click HERE
Here is a translation of the 1841 rabbinical contract given by the community of Ujhely, Hungary to Rabbi Zalman Leib Teitelbaum, (1808-1883), also known as the Yetev Lev and the grandfather of the Satmar Rav, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum. Apparently offered this seat at the time more out of respect for his grandfather then his own qualities (he was a young men then) this contract contains some interesting clauses (see, e.g, 4, 9 and 12).

From the article Rabbones Briefe by Rabbi Julius Rapoport in the April 11, 1914 issue of The Advocate: America's Jewish Journal (link). The article also included a translation of Rabbi Akiva Eger's rabbonus briefe from Posen, dated 100 years earlier.

At the end of this post is the original Hebrew, as well as its source and some discussion of it. Note how loose Rapoport felt he was entitled to play with this translation, renumbering, etc.

The Hebrew below is from the periodical Hatzophe, as indicated above. However, I thought it might be nice to point out something. The citation is a incomplete and also makes a mistake. First of all, unless you happen to know what Hatzophe is you might well run into some trouble. The full title of this periodical was Hatzofeh Le-hokhmat Yisrael, and it was published in Budapest. However, in its first four issues it was called Hatzofeh Me-eretz Hagar. In any case, the author of the English translation somehow forgot to mention, oh, an article title. A page number. Who wrote it. Actually, he did write the name of the author, its right there at the end: Dr. Israel Goldberger, who was in fact "preacher" in Ujhely for a time. The problem is if you look in issue III from 1912 there is no such article. However, in #2 from 1911, there is the article Shtei Kitvei Rabbanut by Yisrael Goldberger, on pp. 132-138. This may seem like a small error, but of course it is just lucky that there were only a few years to look through, given that the Jewish Advocate piece was written in 1914. It is not fun to search through 50 years of a periodical's archive all because of a careless mistake, whoever made it.

1 Ekim 2012 Pazartesi

Comparing translations for fun, not profit

To contact us Click HERE
When I can't sleep, I think about Mishnah translations. Actually, translation itself, which is such an unspeakably interesting thing. Let us consider two basic approaches. One is to render the first language into the other as literally as possible. If there are 6 synonyms for a word in English, but only one term in Hebrew, then the translator will probably try to see one of them as the primary equivalent, let's say choosing "light" for "×�×•×¨" rather than "luminescence." The second basic approach is to transfer meaning, but not doing so literally or slavishly. Let us suppose that in the first method a back translation into the original language is more likely to produce the original than the second. And to anticipate someone pointing this out, Maimonides favored the second method in a letter to his personal translator Ibn Tibbon.

One of the things which I find interesting is that the languages evolve so that regardless of which approach a translator takes, even the more literal one, they cannot fail to produce different translations at different times.

Here are some examples taken from English translations of the Mishnah, ranging from the early 18th to the late 20th century. The Mishnah I have chosen is Shabbat 6:6.

To make things easier for casual reading, I will first give only the first line of the Mishnah, with the year, and then at the end post the entire Mishnah. I have also included only translations taken from sources which translated entire Massekhtot, or substantial portions; I have also included sources like Rodkinson and Soncino, which are really a Talmud translation, but of course they include the Mishnah.

1718. Women may go out with a Piece of Money ty'd to a Sore. (Wotton)
1843. Women may go out with a coin fastened on a swelling in their feet. (Raphall & de Sola)
1878. A woman may go out with a coin on a sore foot. (Barclay)
1896. Women may go out with a coin fastened to a swelling on their feet. (Rodkinson)
1927. One may go out [on the Sabbath] with a sela on a corn. (Oesterley)
1933. They may go out with the sela that is put on a bunion. (Danby)
1935ish. She may go forth with the sela on a zinith [callus]. (Soncino)
1963. A woman may go out with a sela upon a corn. (Blackman)
1982. She may go out with the sela that is on the wound [on the sole of her foot]. (Artscroll)
1991. She goes out with a sela coin on a bunion. (Neusner)
1996. [A woman] may go out on the Sabbath with a sela that is bound upon a tzinis. (Artscroll)
1999. A woman may go out with a Sela on a bunion. (Haberman)

I'm not sure how illuminating this is, but here you go. The Mishnah itself, of course, actually says:
×™×•×¦×�×” ×‘×¡×œ×¢ ×©×¢×œ ×”×¦×™× ×™×ª
We can see that some tried to be more literal. Literally it is in the singular, yet four chose to give it in the plural - capturing the correct meaning, but not what it says, and one of these ignored the feminine form altogether. Artscroll's second attempt (in its Talmud) is literally correct that it does not say "a woman," but has no way of indicating the feminine in English, so it included this information in the bracket, and in bold, to indicate that it is in the text. Eight chose not to translate "sela" - and all of them are in the 20th century. Only two did not try directly to translate ×¦×™× ×™×ª.; and as you can see, one of the times Artscroll called it a "wound [on the sole of her foot]." Many more differences and similarities as well as matters of language can be pointed out or deduced. Really, the best thing is to compare them all, a Mishnah Hexapla, or to choose let us say the 7 or 8 that are not in copyright, a Septapla.
Here are the complete translations:

1718. Women may go out with a Piece of Money ty'd to a Sore. Little Girls may go out with Neck-laces and round sticks in their Ears: The Arabian Women go abroad with little Bells ; the Medes with their Veils folded up ; and so [may] every Body. By which the Wise Men understand the present Usage of every Countrey. (William Wotton, Miscellaneous Discourses Relating to the Traditions and Usages of the Scribes and Pharisees in Our Blessed Saviour Jesus Christ's Time: In Two Volumes. The First, Containing, I. A Discourse of the Nature, Authority and Usefulness of the Misna. ... The Second, Containing, Shabbath. A Title of the Misna Concerning the Sabbath. Eruvin. A Title of the Misna, Concerning the Mixtures Practised by the Jews in Jesus Christ's Time ...)

1843. Women may go out with a coin fastened on a swelling in their feet ; little girls may go out with laces on, and even with wires in their ears ; Arabian women may go out in their large veiles, and Median women in their mantillas: so [indeed] may any one ; but the sages adduce their instances from existing [and known objects]. (M. J. Raphall and D. A. de Sola, Eighteen Treatises From the Mishnah)

1878. A woman may go out with a coin on a sore foot. Little girls may go out with plaits and even splinters in their ears. Arab women go out veiled, and Median women with mantillas; and so may any one, but, as the Sages have said, " according to their custom." (Joseph Barclay, The Talmud)

1896. Women may go out with a coin fastened to a swelling on their feet; little girls may go out with laces on and even with screws in their ears. Arabians may go out in their long veils and Medians in their mantillas; so may even all women go out, but the sages spoke of existing customs. She may fold her mantilla around a stone, nut, or a coin (used as buttons), provided she does it not especially on the Sabbath. (Rodkinson, New edition of the Babylonian Talmud)

1927. One may go out [on the Sabbath] with a sela on a corn ; girls may go with ribbons [on the Sabbath], even with threads in their, ears; Arab women veiled, and Median women with head-kerchiefs; and [so, indeed, may everyone], only the wise men [when speaking of these things] speak of that which is customary. (W. O. E. Oesterley, Tractate Shabbath Mishnah)

1933. They may go out with the sela that is put on a bunion; small girls may go out with threads or even chips in their ears; women of Arabia may go out veiled and women of Media with their cloaks looped up over their shoulders; and so may any one, but the Sages spoke only of actual custom. (Herbert Danby, The Mishnah)

1935 or so. She may go forth with the sela on a zinith [callus]. Young girls may go out with threads, and even with chips in their ears. Arabian women may go forth veiled, and Median women may go forth with their cloaks thrown over their shoulders. Indeed, all people [may do likewise]. But that the Sages spoke of normal usage. A woman may weight [her cloak] with a stone, nut, or coin, providing that she does not attach the weight in the first place on the Sabbath. (Soncino; The Babylonian Talmud; I don't recall who translated Shabb., which is the 1st volume of Mo'ed, and the second volume which appeared.)

1963. A woman may go out with a sela upon a corn ; little girls may go out with threads or even with chips in their ears; Arabian women and Median women with cloaks thrown over their shoulders; and so may every one, but the Sages spoke just of actual custom. (Philip Blackman, Mishnayoth)

1982. She may go out with the sela that is on the wound [on the sole of her foot]. Young girls may go out with the threads or even with the slivers that are in their ears. Arabian women may go out veiled, and Median women [may go out] with their cloaks fastened over their shoulders. [Indeed] all people [may do so], but the Sages spoke of the actual custom. (Artscroll, The Mishnah, Tractate Shabbos)

1991. She goes out with a sela coin on a bunion. Little girls go out with threads and even ships [sic?] in their ears. Arabian women go out veiled. Median women go out with cloaks looped up over their shoulders. And [so is the rule] for any person, but sages spoke concerning prevailing conditions. (Jacob Neusner, The Mishnah: A New Translation)

1996. [A woman] may go out on the Sabbath with a sela that is bound upon a tzinis. The young girls may go out on the Sabbath with threads, and even with splinters, that are passed through holes in their ears. Arabian women may go out on the Sabbath wrapped in headcloths, and Median women with their cloaks fastened on stones or nuts. And this is actually true of any person, however, the Sages spoke in regard to the prevalent custom. (Artscroll, The Gemara, The Schottenstein Edition)

1999. A woman may go out with a Sela on a bunion. Young girls may go out with the threads or even with the slivers that are [placed] in their ear lobes. Arabian women may go out veiled; Median [may go out] with their cloaks fastened over the shoulder; and so, too, may any person: the Sages were speaking in terms of what was common practice. (Daniel Haberman, Illustrated Mishnayoth Shabbath)