Anybody translate this Yiddish word?
peteg12345
in "Ah baloney".
The word sounded something like "chalaymas"
TIA
toi...@my-deja.com
toichen
Micha Berger
> Dreams!
Agreed, but the pronunciation is an odd one for someome Hungarian born.
The /A/ sound for cholam is more Lithuanian than Hungarian. I would have
expected "chaloimes".
PS: In modern Israeli, the word is "chalomot", and in American accent,
"chalomos".
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger You cannot propel yourself forward
mi...@aishdas.org by patting yourself on the back.
http://www.aishdas.org -Anonymous
Fax: (270) 514-1507
bac...@vms.huji.ac.il
Yiddish pronunciation of Hebrew "chalomot" = "dreams".
Josh
> TIA
bac...@vms.huji.ac.il
> Dreams!
>
> toichen
Welcome back to SCJM !!!!!
Josh
Leon
"Micha Berger" <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote >
> PS: In modern Israeli, the word is "chalomot", and in American accent,
> "chalomos".
>
"American accent" is not "American". It is Eastern European Ashkenazi, and
is used almost exclusively by the Orthodox. I have questioned Orthodox
educators and have received different answers as to why they persist. The
most probable reason is the imprint of Yiddish on the Hebrew they have used
in the Galut (pronounced Galus by them).
"Ruth" is pronounced "Rus". The Kotel is the Kosel to them. I wear a tallit,
two or more of which are tallitot while they wear a tallis, two of which are
taleisim.
Emet is not, truly, emmis, but that's the way it comes out.
And at a recent wedding, I heard an elderly Hungarian-born rabbi commence a
bracha (called a brucha) "B'reech attoo ...."
"Sholem" to all.
Leon
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
What is your objection to this? Are you under the impression that the
pronunciation invented by the Zionists is somehow more authentic than
the Eastern European one?
GEK
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
> In article <0c966dd1-66b7-45a3-b7d8-cc307145f...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, peteg12345 <peter.grossin...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > My Hungarian-origin grandfather used this word to dismiss an idea, as
> > in "Ah baloney".
>
> > The word sounded something like "chalaymas"
>
> Yiddish pronunciation of Hebrew "chalomot" = "dreams".
You really think the Zionist "Chalomot" is Hevrew, while the European
Chalaymes or Chaloymes is Yiddish? In that case you too have fallen
for the Zionist brainwashing. I wish you good luck after next week's
electin, when the new Zionist government, whoever it is, expells you
from your home to make way for the paleostinian rocket launchers.
GEK
mm
<wordswor...@att.net> wrote:
>
>"Micha Berger" <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote >
>> PS: In modern Israeli, the word is "chalomot", and in American accent,
>> "chalomos".
>>
>
>"American accent" is not "American". It is Eastern European Ashkenazi, and
>is used almost exclusively by the Orthodox. I have questioned Orthodox
I was Reform for my first 10 years, and my Hebrew teacher was a Reform
rabbi from Danzig. So I learned the Ashkenazi pronumciation.
Then we moved and I went to a community Hebrew school, which I think
meant R and C. About a year after I got there, they announced that
Sephardi was the wave of the future. I think this was because they
had just hired some Israeli Hebrew teachers.
It took me 10 years to change my pronunciation, and then about 10
years after that, I learned that they had oversimplified the status of
Ashkenazi. I also have always that Ashkenazi is prettier. So I went
back to that, and that took another 10 years, and I still tend to mix
them, depending maybe on what pronunciation I was using when I learned
the word.
I know people who use Ashkenazi for prayer and study, but when they
speak Hebrww on the street in Israel, they use Sephardi. That's my
goal (It follows the goal of being able to speak Hebrew on the street
in Israel)
Despite those first 10 years, for me, Sephardi pronunciation in
America is very much associated with waning obsrevance. One more big
psychological separation from the world of our fathers and
grandfathers.
>educators and have received different answers as to why they persist. The
>most probable reason is the imprint of Yiddish on the Hebrew they have used
>in the Galut (pronounced Galus by them).
>
>"Ruth" is pronounced "Rus". The Kotel is the Kosel to them. I wear a tallit,
>two or more of which are tallitot while they wear a tallis, two of which are
>taleisim.
>Emet is not, truly, emmis, but that's the way it comes out.
>
>And at a recent wedding, I heard an elderly Hungarian-born rabbi commence a
>bracha (called a brucha) "B'reech attoo ...."
Maybve that's a Hungarian accent. It's not the Ashkenazi I learned.
>"Sholem" to all.
And also to you.
And gut voch.
>Leon
Micha Berger
> "Micha Berger" <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote >
>> PS: In modern Israeli, the word is "chalomot", and in American accent,
>> "chalomos".
> "American accent" is not "American". It is Eastern European Ashkenazi, and
> is used almost exclusively by the Orthodox...
It's actually an American variation on the East European accent*s*.
The cholam is the US English /ow/ instead of /oy/ or /ay/.
The reish is the English /r/.
The qamatz is more of a /u/ as in nut than the vowel in "thought".
...
> "Ruth" is pronounced "Rus". The Kotel is the Kosel to them. I wear a tallit,
> two or more of which are tallitot while they wear a tallis, two of which are
> taleisim.
> Emet is not, truly, emmis, but that's the way it comes out.
"Talleisim" and "emmis" are Yiddish. In Hebrew, even in American accent,
the words would be "talisos" / "taliyos" and "emes".
> And at a recent wedding, I heard an elderly Hungarian-born rabbi commence a
> bracha (called a brucha) "B'reech attoo ...."
Which is perfectly find Galician accent.
Modern Israeli "least common denominator" pronuniation is inferior for
two reasons:
1- Not based in tradition, and thus halachically invalid. R' AY Kook,
Israel's first Chief Rabbi, ruled that the Israeli accent may only
be used for prayer or Torah reading if the person would otherwise
imperfectly follow his tradition, mixing in his usual habit, ad therefore
be inconsisten. Although I got to tell you, many chareidim in Israel
today have no problem keeping their "traditional Hebrew" and "modern
Hebrew" boxes separate, using each in their own venues, the way I do
when studying classical texts but speaking about them in English.
2- Too many needless homophones. As few distinct vowel sounds as
Sepharadim, as few distinct consonant sounds and Ashkenazim minus one --
the sav. More words sound alike than in any other Hebrew.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless
mi...@aishdas.org he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness.
http://www.aishdas.org Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive
Fax: (270) 514-1507 a spirit of purity. - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
> Leon <wordswordsNOS...@att.net> wrote:
>
> > And at a recent wedding, I heard an elderly Hungarian-born rabbi commence a
> > bracha (called a brucha) "B'reech attoo ...."
>
> Which is perfectly find Galician accent.
And that of Hungary (as noted by previous poster), and Ukraine
(including parts of what are actually Russia), Rumania, Poland,
Silesia, much of Austria, Moravia, Slovakia, and other places.
>
> Modern Israeli "least common denominator" pronuniation is inferior for
> two reasons:
>
> 2- Too many needless homophones. As few distinct vowel sounds as
> Sepharadim, as few distinct consonant sounds and Ashkenazim minus one --
> the sav. More words sound alike than in any other Hebrew.
I agree.
Giorgies
wishing good writing and sealing for tomorrow's Rosh Hashanna. Hannies
has still has ethrog preserves from last year's Sukkoth. It has been
kept refrigerated, so I imagine it has not turned mouldy, and will be
perfectly fine for tomorrow's fruit eating. I am still in doubt about
saying shehechiyanu (shehechiyoonee as some would prefer) over
selfsame jar over which it was said yesteryear.
peteg12345
Pete
On Feb 6, 6:35 am, bac...@vms.huji.ac.il wrote:
> In article <0c966dd1-66b7-45a3-b7d8-cc307145f...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, peteg12345 <peter.grossin...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > MyHungarian-origin grandfather used this word to dismiss an idea, as
Yisroel Markov
<kepip...@hotmail.com> said:
[snip]
>Giorgies
>wishing good writing and sealing for tomorrow's Rosh Hashanna. Hannies
>has still has ethrog preserves from last year's Sukkoth. It has been
>kept refrigerated, so I imagine it has not turned mouldy, and will be
>perfectly fine for tomorrow's fruit eating. I am still in doubt about
>saying shehechiyanu (shehechiyoonee as some would prefer) over
>selfsame jar over which it was said yesteryear.
It would appear from Shulkhan Arukh OH 225:3 that if the contents of
the jar are the same as yesteryear, then such a brakha would be
inappropriate. Also, the contents have undergone a significant enough
transformation (to the point of taking she-hakol rather than ha-etz)
that a blessing intended for new fruits and vegetables would seem out
of place.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
> >wishing good writing and sealing for tomorrow's Rosh Hashanna. Hannies
> >has still hasethrogpreserves from last year's Sukkoth. It has been
> >kept refrigerated, so I imagine it has not turned mouldy, and will be
> >perfectly fine for tomorrow's fruit eating. I am still in doubt about
> >saying shehechiyanu (shehechiyoonee as some would prefer) over
> >selfsame jar over which it was said yesteryear.
>
> It would appear from Shulkhan Arukh OH 225:3 that if the contents of
> the jar are the same as yesteryear, then such a brakha would be
> inappropriate. Also, the contents have undergone a significant enough
> transformation (to the point of taking she-hakol rather than ha-etz)
> that a blessing intended for new fruits and vegetables would seem out
> of place.
I am looking at 225:3. I do not see where it says anything like that.
Jars are not mentioned there at all. In any case, the question has
been answered. Two different rabbanim have instructed me that if I
have not eaten ethrog for a whole year, I could say shehechiyanu again
regardless of whether it is in the same jar or a different jar.
Regarding the transformation: firstly, this is preserves, not jelly.
There are whole chunks of ethrog present in the preserves.
Furthermore, ethrog is not eaten in any other fashion except preserved
with sugar. If you have ever tasted raw ethrog, or even cooked ethrog
without copious quantities of sugar added, you will know what I mean.
Since this is the only way people eat this fruit (by people I mean
normal people, without regard to the occasional meshuggener who eats
raw ethrog, and about who we say batla daato), the bracha would be
haetz even of there were no whole chunks present.
About chocolate, there apppears to be controversy. It too is the way
the cocoa bean is eaten. Our rav has ruled that there are plausible
arguments for saying shehakol over chocolate, and for saying haetz. He
presonally feels the arguments for haetz outweigh the arguments for
shehakol, but not sufficiently so to overturn the accepted practice of
ama debar to say shehakol.
GEK
reporting that the preserves were indeed in perfect condition, with no
mould, and if memory serves, were even better than last year. We
enjoyed genrous dollops of the preserves spread over whole wheat matza.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
Interesting post, as usual. Thanks Giorgies.
> GEK
> reporting that the preserves were indeed in perfect condition, with no
> mould, and if memory serves, were even better than last year. We
> enjoyed genrous dollops of the preserves spread over whole wheat matza.
Hmm, if you ate the preserves spread over matza, perhaps you should
have made no brocho on them at all. The brocho for the matza would
cover them, no?
Moshe Schorr
It is a tremendous Mitzvah to always be happy! - Reb Nachman of Breslov
The home and family are the center of Judaism, *not* the synagogue.
May Eliezer Mordichai b. Chaya Sheina Rochel have a refuah shlaimah
btoch sha'ar cholei Yisroel.
Disclaimer: Nothing here necessarily reflects the opinion of Hebrew University
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
A good question, regarding the borei peri haetz. But we were
discussing shehechiyanu, which is said over a new fruit even if eaten
in the midlle of a seuda. You are correct that when consumed togather
with bread, as in this case where it was spread over the matza, no
beracha haetz is to be made. But when fruit is eaten in the middle of
the seuda, but not *together* with the bread, we get into a whole
discussion and differing opinions among acharonim regarding whether a
beracha is needed, and under what conditions. Some limit the confusion
to raw fruits, others apply it to any fruit, some to fruits eaten as
dessert, while others say even fruits eaten as appetiser. We thought
it best to avoid the question by spreading the ethrog over the matza.
Giorgies
reporting that Hannies placed the jar, sans lid, into the microwave,
and heated the contents for several minutes. She then removed the jar,
replaced the lid tightly, and waited for the contents to cool, thus
sealing the lid with vacuum. In this manner, she hopes it will remain
intact until next year haba aleinu may we all live and be well and
greet Mashiach Tzikqeinu, when we will once again enjoy the ethrog.
Hamisha Asar Beshevat falls on Shabbath next year
Yisroel Markov
<kepip...@hotmail.com> said:
>On Feb 9, 2:39 pm, Yisroel Markov <ey.mar...@MUNGiname.com> wrote:
>
>> >wishing good writing and sealing for tomorrow's Rosh Hashanna. Hannies
>> >has still hasethrogpreserves from last year's Sukkoth. It has been
>> >kept refrigerated, so I imagine it has not turned mouldy, and will be
>> >perfectly fine for tomorrow's fruit eating. I am still in doubt about
>> >saying shehechiyanu (shehechiyoonee as some would prefer) over
>> >selfsame jar over which it was said yesteryear.
>>
>> It would appear from Shulkhan Arukh OH 225:3 that if the contents of
>> the jar are the same as yesteryear, then such a brakha would be
>> inappropriate. Also, the contents have undergone a significant enough
>> transformation (to the point of taking she-hakol rather than ha-etz)
>> that a blessing intended for new fruits and vegetables would seem out
>> of place.
>
>I am looking at 225:3. I do not see where it says anything like that.
>Jars are not mentioned there at all. In any case, the question has
>been answered. Two different rabbanim have instructed me that if I
>have not eaten ethrog for a whole year, I could say shehechiyanu again
>regardless of whether it is in the same jar or a different jar.
The siman describes the blessing made on a *new* fruit which has a
distinct growing season - "renewed from year to year" - once you
encounter a sample of such fruit even in the hand of a friend, or
while it's still on the tree. ISTM that this implies a really new
fruit, that is, from the most recent harvest. I wonder what additional
information these two rabbonim possess, or what their logic is, to
allow the blessing on an old fruit, however preserved?
>Regarding the transformation: firstly, this is preserves, not jelly.
>There are whole chunks of ethrog present in the preserves.
>Furthermore, ethrog is not eaten in any other fashion except preserved
>with sugar. If you have ever tasted raw ethrog, or even cooked ethrog
>without copious quantities of sugar added, you will know what I mean.
>Since this is the only way people eat this fruit (by people I mean
>normal people, without regard to the occasional meshuggener who eats
>raw ethrog, and about who we say batla daato), the bracha would be
>haetz even of there were no whole chunks present.
I stand corrected - indeed, either of these two factors is enough to
preserve "ha-etz."
[snip]
Micha Berger
>>Regarding the transformation: firstly, this is preserves, not jelly.
>>There are whole chunks of ethrog present in the preserves.
>>Furthermore, ethrog is not eaten in any other fashion except preserved
>>with sugar. If you have ever tasted raw ethrog, or even cooked ethrog
>>without copious quantities of sugar added, you will know what I mean.
>>Since this is the only way people eat this fruit (by people I mean
>>normal people, without regard to the occasional meshuggener who eats
>>raw ethrog, and about who we say batla daato), the bracha would be
>>haetz even of there were no whole chunks present.
> I stand corrected - indeed, either of these two factors is enough to
> preserve "ha-etz."
In addition, due to the signficance of the esrog, we would rule its
ha'eitz wherever there are the slightest grounds to, even in cases
where for other fruit we would decide for the more generic ha'adamah
or shehakol. (Similarly the 7 fruit for which Israel is blessed.)
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the
mi...@aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first
http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now!
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning