XPost: alt.conspiracy, ba.general, la.general
XPost: soc.culture.jewish
From: reniggade@anglicam.org
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:37:28 +0000 (UTC), Merlin Dorfman
wrote:
>The Revd Terence Fformby-Smythe (reniggade@anglicam.org) wrote:
>: On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 22:39:45 +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 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).
>: > 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.
>: >: > 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.
>: > 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?
> 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?
> (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.
>: >: >: >: 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.
>: >: >
>: >: >: If it ever happens, the laws of the Roman Catholic Church do not
allow
>: >: >: priests to speak to each other in Latin. This is simply a
(reasonable
>: >: >: enough) precaution against accusations of conspiracy and the like.
>: >: >
>: >: > Cite?
>: >
>: >: It's an unwritten law.
>: >
>: > LOL! Can you find an unwritten reference to this unwritten
>: >law?
>
>: Yes, but because it's unwritten I can't give it to you.
>
> In other words, it is a lie
No it isn't. You just don't understand, do you? Don't you have
unwritten laws in your host country?
> just like:
>- Jews are being expelled from the US and "Britain"
>- Hebrew and Yiddish are the same language
>- Airlines refuse to give reservations to Jews
>- El Al beats passengers for asking for a second cup of coffee
>- ICAO requires airlines to serve coffee to passengers
> In all these cases, "Rabbi Troll" can offer no proof--for the
>very good reason that they are lies--so he says it's "obvious,"
>it's "received knowledge," or it's an "unwritten law" or "unwritten
>practice."
Please do not refer to me as a "rabbi". This is offensive to jews.
>: > It's an unwritten law that you are an idiot and all your
>: >claims of Jewish congenital criminality are false.
>
>: You're just an uneducated moron who doesn't understand unwritten laws.
>
> I understand them perfectly. And as such I know that there are
>references to them other than your fevered imagination.
See above.
>...
>
>: >: >: But I've already explained that yiddish and hebrew are the same.
>: >
>: >: > I think you just explained that they are different.
>: >
>: >: No. You have misunderstood again. Probably deliberately.
>: >
>: > OK, show me the error of my ways:
>
>: Your biggest mistake was being born jewish. Sadly, there's not much
>: that can be done about that.
>
> Your biggest mistake is trying to pretend that there is any
>logic behind your beliefs or statements.
There is no pretense. You may deny them until you're blue in the
face. It changes nothing.
>: >"Ancient Hebrew no longer exists. It was replaced as a liturgical
>: >language by Yiddish."
>: >"As ancient Hebrew began to die out, Yiddish assumed its position
>: >as Judaism's liturgical language."
>: > This seems to state...I almost said imply but it is not an
>: >implication, it is a clear statement...that they are two separate
>: >languages, which co-existed only for a brief period but yet are as
>: >distinct as (extinct) Sanskrit and (modern) Hungarian. Of course
>: >the "die out" part is false, but that is very secondary here.
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
