XPost: alt.conspiracy, ba.general, la.general 
 XPost: soc.culture.jewish 
 From: reniggade@anglicam.org 
  
 On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 19:18:17 +0000 (UTC), Merlin Dorfman 
  wrote: 
  
 >The Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe (reniggade@anglicam.org) wrote: 
 >: On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:37:28 +0000 (UTC), Merlin Dorfman 
 >:  wrote: 
 > 
 >... 
 > 
 >: >: >: The pariah state of 'Israel' has replaced yiddish as the unifying 
 >: >: >: factor.  I would have thought that was obvious. 
 >: >: > 
 >: >: >     And thus Yiddish is no longer needed as a unifying factor. 
 >: > 
 >: >: That is essentially correct.   It is still needed as a means of 
 >: >: communication for jews of different backgrounds. 
 >: > 
 >: >     Hee hee hee.  If "background" means Ashkenazic vs. Sephardic, 
 >: >this is 100% wrong as Sephardic don't speak Yiddish.  And fewer 
 >: >and fewer Ashkenazic do either. 
 > 
 >: How many times do I have to tell you?  They *all* speak yiddish. 
 > 
 >     You may blatantly assert as often as you wish.  It's still 
 >wrong.  And, more's the pity, you know it. 
  
 You only say it's wrong because you're ashamed of it.  Understandable, 
 I suppose. 
  
 >: >: >You have accidentally stumbled on a portion of the truth.  You 
 >: >: >must be as surprised as I.  And thus, for this and other reasons, 
 >: >: >such as intermarriage and the lessening of the threat of 
 >: >: >pogroms, expulsions, etc., 
 >: > 
 >: >: Eh?  The threat is growing not lessening.  Expulsions are increasing. 
 >: > 
 >: >     Yes, they have doubled, nay tripled.  (2 x 0 = 0; 3 x 0 = 0) 
 > 
 >: They have neither doubled or tripled.  The annual increase is in the 
 >: order of 15%  (figures for 2000 and 2001). 
 > 
 >     1.15 x 0 is also zero.  Though I would very much like to see 
 >the figures and, more important, where they came from. 
  
 These are estimates provided by various UK government departments for 
 statistical purposes.  They are based on the number of Home Office 
 expulsion orders issued and El Al's own passenger manifests. 
  
 >: >: > Yiddish is spoken by fewer and fewer 
 >: >: >and is in danger of dying out in another few generations. 
 >: > 
 >: >: Far from it!  As long as jews exist, yiddish will maintain its 
 >: >: position as their language of choice. 
 >: > 
 >: >     You are as entitled as anybody else to make a prediction, but 
 >: >this one is as off-base as that Jews will be expelled from the US, 
 >: >"Britain," etc. 
 > 
 >: England has been expelling jews for the last 800 years.  It is to the 
 >: everlasting credit of the US that they restrained themselves as long 
 >: as they did.  But even the patience of the US people was not 
 >: unlimited. 
 > 
 >     "England" expelled Jews 800 years ago, and for all I know 
 >continued throughout the Dark Ages. 
  
 You insist on using this term.  Don't you realise how racist it is to 
 equate "Dark" with "unenlightened"? 
  
  
 >(Though it raises the 
 >question: if they were all expelled 800 years ago, how did there 
 >get to be more to expel later?) 
  
 That's easily explained.  Jews have been entering the country in 
 various ways, most of them illegal.  It has always been said that if 
 you kick them (i.e. you) out the door they (i.e. you) will come back 
 in through the window, 
  
 > They have not "been expelling" 
 >Jews in modern times.  In fact with a little research I could 
 >probably find exactly when they were formally allowed back. 
  
 I'll save you the effort (I told you I was a gentleman):  Oliver 
 Cromwell invited the jews to return.  His blunder was reversed when 
 the English monarchy was restored. 
  
 >: >: >: >     For the rest of the diaspora, e.g., the Sephardic, who did/do 
 >: >: >: >not speak Yiddish, it was never a factor.  Their lingua franca was 
 >: >: >: >Ladino, which was not nearly as universal among the Sephardic as 
 >: >: >: >Yiddish was among the Ashkenazi. 
 >: >: > 
 >: >: >: Ladino is simply one of several yiddish dialects. 
 >: >: > 
 >: >: >     Whereas Yiddish is mostly derived from and related to 
 >: >: >medieval German, Ladino is mostly derived from and related to 
 >: >: >the Latin-derived languages of Iberia.  This should be obvious 
 >: >: >from the name.  Yiddish and Ladino are no more closely related 
 >: >: >than German and Spanish. 
 >: > 
 >: >: What a load of cobblers.  That's like saying that Ashkenazi and 
 >: >: Sephardic jews are unrelated, whereas genetic studies show they are 
 >: >: genetically closer to each other (and to their Arab cousins)  than 
 >: >: they are to the native populations of their host countries. 
 >: > 
 >: >     What a load of cobblers.  It is absolutely unlike saying that 
 >: >Ashkenazim and Sephardim are genetically unrelated. 
 > 
 >: Two dialects of yiddish versus two branches of the jew race.  A 
 >: perfectly valid comparison. 
 > 
 >     Comparison--yes. 
  
 There you are then. 
  
 > Statement that related groups must speak 
 >a related language--no.  Language is not inherited, it must be 
 >taught, and it is often not taught.  Else how would languages 
 >become extinct? 
  
 People die.  Shit happens. 
  
 >: >: >     But I think we have found the pattern here: any language 
 >: >: >spoken by large numbers of Jews, especially if it is written in 
 >: >: >the Hebrew alphabet, is defined ("Rabbi Troll" is good at 
 >: >: >defining things) to be "Yiddish" or some dialect of it.  No 
 >: >: >matter if its grammar, syntax and vocabulary are completely 
 >: >: >different from some other "dialect," it's a matter of definition. 
 >: >: >This saves having to think, reason, or, heaven forbid, prove. 
 >: > 
 >: >: There is no need to prove this any more than there is a need to prove 
 >: >: the sun shines. 
 >: > 
 >: >     The difference is: it is possible to prove the sun shines, 
 > 
 >: Have you ever seen such a proof? 
 > 
 >     You stated it; it must then be true  :-) 
  
 No, *you* stated it. 
  
 >: > while 
 >: >it is not possible to prove that all languages written in the Hebrew 
 >: >alphabet are the same; in fact it is easy to prove the opposite. 
 > 
 >: How do you propose to do so? 
 > 
 >     By showing the different languages that are written in the Hebrew 
 >alphabet: specifically Hebrew and Yiddish being written in very 
 >similar but not identical alphabets, and showing that they are 
 >different languages because they have diferent vocabularies (e.g., 
 >the numbers 1 to 10), syntax, grammar, and structure. 
  
 This can't be proved simply because there is no difference between 
 yiddish and modern hebrew. 
  
 >: >     (BTW: can you name the only Semitic language written in the Latin 
 >: >alphabet?) 
 > 
 >: Yes.  Maltese.  The Malts are a funny lot:  part European, part 
 >: African, part semitic. 
 > 
 >     Correct.  And can you name the only group besides the Maltese 
 >who have been awarded the George Cross? 
  
 I believe it was The Order of The Knights of St John of Rhodes, 
 Jerusalem and Puerto Rico.  But please correct me if I'm wrong in this 
 instance. 
  
 >: >: >: >: >: The knowledge of Latin that most priests have is insufficient 
 even for 
 >: >: >: >: >: a basic conversation.  There are exceptions of course, but the 
 odds of 
 >: >: >: >: >: finding two such priests in the same place at any one time are 
 slight. 
 >: >: >: >: > 
 >: >: >: >: >     But it does happen.  Hence the language has not died out. 
 >: >: >: > 
  
 [continued in next message] 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)