Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A Guide to
Old Literary Yiddish
JEROLD C. FR AK ES
1
1
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, ox2 6dp,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Jerold C. Frakes 2017
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2017
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2016954564
ISBN 978–0–19–878502–6
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
Contents
Preface xi
Abbreviations xvii
Introduction 1
Initial orientation 1
Periodization in Yiddish 3
A brief survey of Old Literary Yiddish language and literature 5
Lesson One 11
The alphabet and grapho-phonemic system of Old Literary Yiddish 11
Modern Ashkenazic semi-cursive script 12
Final and non-final letters 14
Grapho-phonemes of Old Literary Yiddish 14
Suggested pronunciation of symbols 19
Masoretic punctation (vowel pointing) 22
Umlaut23
One further vowel shift 26
Word-final obstruent devoicing 26
Word accent 28
Lesson Two 29
“Joseph the Righteous” (ll. 1–4) 30
Grammar33
Grammatical gender 33
Grammatical case 34
Word order (syntax) 36
Lesson Three 39
“Joseph the Righteous” (ll. 5–11) 39
Grammar40
Personal pronouns 40
The definite article 41
Negation42
Lesson Four 45
“Joseph the Righteous” (ll. 12–28) 45
Grammar48
Dative of possession 48
Adjective inflections 48
vi contents
Lesson Five 51
“Joseph the Righteous” (ll. 29–40) 51
Grammar52
Familiar and polite mode of address 52
Possessive adjectives 53
Lesson Six 55
“Joseph the Righteous” (ll. 41–54) 55
Grammar57
The OLY verbal system 57
Strong and weak verbs 59
Adverb formation 61
Supplemental reading: Worms Maḥzor couplet 61
Lesson Seven 63
“Joseph the Righteous” (ll. 55–68) 63
Grammar65
Infinitive (present active) 65
Present active indicative 65
Relative pronouns 66
Indefinite article 66
Supplemental reading: “Whither am I to go?” 67
Lesson Eight 69
“Joseph the Righteous” (ll. 69–76) 69
Grammar70
Present tense, anomalous verb ‘to be’ 70
Noun declensions 71
Noun plurals 73
Supplemental reading: Riddle 74
Lesson Nine 77
“Briyo and Zimro” 77
Grammar80
Diminutives80
Demonstrative pronouns 81
Supplemental reading: “Traveler’s charm” 81
Lesson Ten 85
“Briyo and Zimro” 85
Grammar88
Comparative/superlative88
Preterite active indicative 89
Stem-changing strong verbs 90
Supplemental reading: Medical remedies 91
contentsvii
Lesson Eleven 95
Introduction95
Mashket script/font 96
“Briyo and Zimro” 97
Supplemental reading: Remedies 107
Grammar151
Formation of the subjunctive 151
Uses of the subjunctive 153
Supplemental reading: “Mighty is He” 154
Appendices:
Appendix 1. Hebrew Fonts and Scripts 251
Appendix 2. Old Literary Yiddish Verb Classes 253
Appendix 3. Facsimiles 263
Appendix 4. Additional Readings 271
1. Excerpt from Women’s Commandments (1504) 271
2. Excerpt from The Book of Virtues (1542) 273
3. “David and Goliath,” excerpt from The Book of Samuel (1544) 279
4. “Alexander and the Amazons,” excerpt from Yosifon (1546) 286
5. “The Binding of Isaac” (1579) 288
6. “Baking Matzah,” excerpt from Isaac Tyrnau, Customs (1593) 298
7. “Pumay” (c. 1600) 300
8. Rebecca b. Meir Tiktiner, “A Simḥas-Torah Song” (1650) 301
9. Genesis 1 from Jekuthiel b. Isaac Blitz (1676–9) 304
10. “Shabbatai Ṣevi,” excerpt from Glikl Hamil (1691) 305
Appendix 5. Further Reading 309
Glossary311
Permissions 367
Bibliography 369
Index 373
Preface
This volume addresses learners of the literary language of the Old and Middle
Yiddish period, which, for reasons explained below, will here be designated Old Lit-
erary Yiddish (hereinafter: OLY). It is anticipated that such learners may come from
a variety of academic or non-academic backgrounds and preparations, including
those who are starting at ground zero, i.e. without a knowledge of the Jewish/
Hebrew alphabet, and thus without a knowledge of Hebrew, Aramaic, or modern
East Yiddish (modEY), perhaps even without a knowledge of any language beyond
English. At the other extreme may be readers who know modEY, Hebrew, medieval
and/or modern German, and have training in historical linguistics. For this reason,
almost every reader of this volume will find some sections quite difficult and others
quite unnecessary: readers of modEY, Judeo-Aramaic, Ladino, Judeo-Arabic, Judeo-
Persian, or Hebrew will not need to learn the basics of the alphabet (although they
will need to pay close attention to the many ways in which OLY represents sounds,
especially vowels, that are not immediately apparent to those who use the Hebrew
alphabet for other languages). On the other hand, those who know Latin, Russian,
or classical Arabic, for instance, will not need the basic introduction to grammati-
cal gender, which will be essential for monolingual English speakers, or case, which
will be essential for bilingual Anglophone Hebrew speakers. Examples of the differ-
ent needs of the range of potential readers could be multiplied almost indefinitely.
Individual readers will then necessarily proceed at their own pace, whether in an
organized class or through independent study, devoting more or less attention to
individual sections, as their own situation dictates.
In general, an introduction to a currently spoken language has as its goal to pre-
sent to the student a series of progressively more difficult lessons, starting at the
level of the absolute beginner who has no knowledge of the target language, by
means of which the student will generally acquire the “four skills” (reading, writ-
ing, listening comprehension, speaking) of language proficiency. On the other
hand, an introduction to a language or to a period of a language that no longer has
any native speakers, native readers, or currently productive native writers obvi-
ously has in large part different goals and methods, since there is little demand or
practical use for learning to order pizza or write biology textbooks in, say, Gothic,
Old Irish, or in the present case, OLY. So it is with introductory textbooks of most
medieval languages.1
In the present case, the practical issues would become immediately apparent on
the first page of a (hypothetical) “four-skills” introduction to OLY: no one alive can
provide the idiomatic OLY equivalent of “See Spot. See Spot run” or: “Excuse me,
1 Although not so with Old Norse, since 21st-century Icelandic school children read medieval texts
written in Old Norse with facility. And the same could in general be maintained for classical Arabic,
which differs from modern standard Arabic essentially only in the vocabulary of material culture (no
“photocopy machines” or “oil tankers” in medieval Arabic texts, for instance).
xii preface
miss. Could we have another round of craft-brew IPAs, and the bill, when you have
a moment?” Nor is such knowledge in any way necessary: since the goal of such an
instructional manual is not to enable students to read texts about our contempo-
rary world or to participate actively in our world in the target language, the absence
of live native informants is generally less relevant. The goal of any user of an intro-
duction to OLY is obviously to learn to read documents written in that language
from the period 1100–1750 (although in this book the texts included date from the
period 1272–1699).
There are no readings in the book that have been invented by the textbook’s
author, i.e. no attempt on my part to compose anything in OLY,2 but rather I have
simply included authentic and extant texts from that period, and on the basis of
those texts provided the student with the grammatical, lexical, and (minimal) cul-
tural tools necessary to read and understand them. On the one hand, that should
be a comfort to the student: there are none of the awkwardly constructed (and often
parodied) sentences here that one finds in older language textbooks of dead lan-
guages (e.g. “the two elderly female dwarves danced vigorously on the stone floor
of the ancient mead-hall swept with rushes before the roaring fire of well-aged logs
that had been cut and carried from the nearby forest by the esteemed nobleman’s
enterprising foster-sons”), that try to cram as many examples of grammatical usage
and vocabulary as possible into a single sentence, the result being that the sentence
becomes a monster that no one who actually spoke the target language could ever
have imagined uttering. Rejoice in the absence of such artificial linguistic beasts.
On the other hand, however, since there are no extant authentic texts composed
in the overly simple style most appropriate for elementary readers, it means that
already in the first text the reader confronts not the semantically and syntactically
simplistic “See Spot. See Spot run” (with illustrations of a cute puppy) but rather
real, authentic, literary language as it was used by and for its native speakers. That
is, it is something akin to learning the Cyrillic alphabet in the first two lessons of a
beginning Russian course and on the third day being handed a copy of Tolstoy’s
Вoйна и мир and told to turn to page 175 and begin “reading,” i.e. not reading at all,
but slogging through the text, word by word, wearing out a reference grammar and
dictionary in the process. Except that OLY texts are, additionally, not a mere centu-
ry-and-a-half old, as is Tolstoy’s novel, but indeed four to seven centuries old. There
is, alas, no easy access point. But then again, the purpose of this textbook is to
obviate the difficulty of the slog itself by providing comprehensive grammatical
and lexical aid at each step of the way. That should again encourage the reader.
The reader should be forewarned, however: it is not possible to learn a “dead”
language without also studying its grammar, and it is not possible to study gram-
mar without making tactical use of grammatical or linguistic terminology. The
present volume is not a linguistic treatise, and every effort has been made to use
linguistic terminology pragmatically, that is, only when necessary, but then again
always when necessary, since that terminology makes both tactical and strategic
explanation possible. There is no point, for instance, in wasting a half-page in
2 There are, however, a couple of brief sentences that manipulate an extant OLY sentence to illustrate
distinctions in word order.
prefacexiii
3 On the essential distinction between stock language (e.g. multi-millennial Hebrew and Aramaic),
linguistic determinant (e.g. the specific dialect, vocabulary, syntax, etc. available at the time and place of
adoption into Yiddish), and linguistic component (e.g. that which was actually adapted into Yiddish
from the stock language), see Jacobs (2005: 20). While medieval Romance (primarily Old French and
Old Italian) is already present as a component in the early period of Yiddish, statistically its input is
minor; likewise modern Yiddish has Slavic as an additional (and very significant) component, which
was, however, generally absent, and in any case not yet significant in OLY.
xiv preface
every grammatical construction of the entire language, whether the simplest or the
most complex, may appear. Obviously if students did already know everything,
they would not take the present volume in hand at all. Since, as already noted, it is
not possible to begin with the absolutely simplest language use and progress toward
more difficult texts, detailing the grammatical structures progressively in the ped-
agogically most accessible manner, a strictly pragmatic compromise has been
adopted here: for the early lessons I have chosen texts that are as simple as any that
I know, while still being culturally, literarily, or historically significant (which con-
sideration of course immediately compromises the strict simplicity that one might
otherwise ideally desire).4 The grammatical presentations of each successive chap-
ter guide the reader through progressively more complex structures, aiming over
the course of the volume to present a systematic introduction to the literary lan-
guage. At the same time, however, the reader must be aware that this volume is not
a reference grammar, nor does it make any pretense to that level of comprehensive-
ness. Thus only the grammatical information necessary for the reader to navigate
the texts is presented here. When complex structures appear in the texts of a given
lesson before they have been formally presented in the grammatical sections of the
book, they will be treated in the glosses and notes on an ad hoc basis, so that the
student can cope with the text at hand. When necessary, there will at that point also
be a parenthetical reference to the later systematic treatment of the particular issue
in this volume.
The metalanguage of the volume is obviously English, and thus the linguistic
examples and illustrations will almost always be drawn from English and will be
oriented toward an Anglophone audience, even though it might sometimes seem
easier to draw examples from Yiddish’s nearer linguistic neighbor, German of one
period or another. But, again, the purposes of the present volume are strictly and
pragmatically focused on enabling readers to learn to read OLY texts; it is thus not
a veiled treatise on comparative German-Yiddish linguistics. Even at a much lower
lever of complexity, it would of course have been possible to increase the length of
the book by 25–50 percent simply by identifying idioms and/or syntactic usages in
Middle High German, modern standard German, dialectal German, or modern
Western or modern Eastern Yiddish that are analogous to OLY usage, which would
have struck a chord with those who had already recognized the parallel, i.e. it would
have taught them nothing new, and it would have remained opaque to all other
readers. Thus some readers can expect to catch themselves with some frequency
asking: “But why does he not point out the parallel usage in language X here?” As
often as that happens, I would suggest that the reader remember this paragraph.
Language learning is always a compromise, certainly and most definitively when
children learn their native languages, which only seems to be effortless and auto-
matic when one is not paying attention to the toil and frustration involved, or to
the very limited range of vocabulary and of grammatical and syntactic structures
4 Such texts must be interesting, since the surest guarantor of readers’ fatigue and abandonment of
the study of the language is forcing them to claw their way through beginning-level instruction that
teaches them to read uninteresting texts.
prefacexv
mastered.5 For adult learners of a language, especially a “dead language” like Latin,
Sumerian, or OLY, the toil and frustration is likewise ever present but much more
obvious to all concerned. The goal of this book is to enable the learner to avoid as
much of that frustration as possible.
Two of the most effective textbooks of ancient and medieval languages that I
have come across in my own studies have been Clyde Pharr’s Homeric Greek
(1925/1985) and William W. Kibler’s An Introduction to Old French (1984). Pharr’s
readings begin with the first line of book one of the Iliad, while Kibler begins with
the first line of Marie de France’s “Le Fresne”; they both then progress through
those texts, treating a passage in each successive chapter of their books; Pharr treats
the whole of Iliad I, while Kibler’s first fifteen chapters present Marie’s lai in its
entirety before moving on to other texts. The advantages are obvious: in completing
the textbook, the beginning student reads not a few hundred sentences in pseudo-
ancient Greek or pseudo-medieval French invented by a modern scholar, but
rather in each case one of the fundamental texts of the target language, gaining in
the process a thorough grounding in the grammar, vocabulary, and cultural milieu
of the focal texts, as well as an intimate knowledge of a core text of the literary
tradition.
That same method will be employed in the present volume, such that the student
will read the entirety of the Old Yiddish (OY) midrashic heroic lay “Yousef ha-
tsadik,” from the earliest extant manuscript collection of Yiddish literature (1382),
the entirety of the Middle Yiddish (MY) adventure tale “Briyo ve-Zimro,” from a
later collection (1585), and a full canto of the MY epic Pariz un Viene (1594), each
with full lesson-by-lesson glosses, notes to specific grammatical and cultural issues
in the passages, and a step-by-step introduction to the morphology, syntax, and
phonology (insofar as practicable) of OLY. In addition to these three focal texts,
beginning in lesson six, each lesson will include a second brief and, one might
hope, entertaining text at the end of the chapter as a reward for the reader’s indus-
trious study; some of these will be complete texts in themselves, including a bless-
ing, various charms, potion recipes, and incantational spells, the earliest love song
in Yiddish, a fable, a prison letter, a riddle, the final paragraph of the Passover song
“Khad-gadye,” and newspaper articles about Mongol emissaries at the czar’s court,
and Mediterranean pirates, among other things. All the texts are drawn from those
edited in my Early Yiddish Texts (Frakes 2004). Further supplementary texts are
added in Appendix 4, as are facsimile pages of manuscript or early print editions of
several selected texts, a table of strong verb classes and irregular verbs, a full end-
glossary, and an index of grammatical topics.
To learn to read OLY will be a challenge. The intent and guiding principle of the
present volume has been never to disguise or deny that challenge but instead to
make it as rewarding as possible at every stage.
In a sense this project has been under way since I first began my own studies of
OLY some decades ago. The general intellectual debts incurred along the way are
5 Those impressed by the 3-year-old who already speaks “perfect” Russian (or another language) are
either naïve or confused: it is after all only the Russian of a 3-year-old that the child has mastered, not
that of the complexity of a Tolstoy or Solzhenitsyn.
xvi preface
many and have been acknowledged at appropriate moments and in the relevant
prefaces and footnotes to other books that I have published. In terms of actually
writing and assembling the present volume, there have, however, again been col-
leagues whose advice and counsel have been of especial aid. Neil Jacobs encour-
aged the project from its inception. David Fertig has provided thorough and
enlightening answers to more than his fair share of my (often vaguely formulated)
questions about Germanic linguistics. Rafael Finkel generously provided the mash-
ket font. Gerrit Bos carried out enthusiastic spadework to identify various plants
that appear in the remedies and potions readings. The students in the OLY Reading
Course at the Summer School of the Vilnius Yiddish Institute in 2014 (enabled by
Professor Šarūnas Liekis, director of the Institute) were enthusiastic test subjects.
The Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study and the John Simon Guggenheim Foun-
dation inadvertently contributed much-needed support for this project, as well,
since the fellowships that they provided enabled the completion not just of the
specific fellowship project proposed and funded but also of this one. My thanks
to all. Finally, I am particularly grateful to the editors and production staff at
Oxford University Press—among them: Julia Steer, Vicki Sunter, Franziska Broeckl,
and Sarah Barrett—for the care, competence, and professionalism with which they
have produced what is typographically a very complex volume.
Abbreviations
g/gen genitive
geo geographical/place name
G German
Gmc Germanic
H whole Hebrew
H-A Hebrew-Aramaic
id idiom/idiomatic
imp imperative
impers impersonal
ind indicative
indecl indeclinable
indef indefinite
inf infinitive
inter interrogative
interj interjection
intpr interrogative pronoun
IPA International Phonetic
ir irregular
irv irregular verb
It Italian
JtR “Joseph the Righteous”
L Latin
lit literally
m/masc masculine
MHG Middle High German
mil military
modEY modern East Yiddish
mv modal verb
MY Middle Yiddish
n/nom nominative
neg negation/negative
NHG New High German (= modern standard German)
nt/n neuter
num numeral
obj object
OLY Old Literary Yiddish
OMY Old and/or Middle Yiddish
abbreviationsxix
ord ordinal
OY Old Yiddish
p/pl plural
PaV Pariz and Viene
per of person
plprf pluperfect
Port Portuguese
poss possessive pronoun
ppr personal pronoun
pr present tense
pred predicate
prf perfect
prn pronoun
prop proper
prp preposition
prt-pr preterite-present verb
prt preterite
prv periphrastic verb
ptprt past participle
pv passive voice
Rec medical/remedy recipes
refl reflexive
relpr relative pronoun
Rid “Riddle” (1554)
s strong
scv strong, stem-changing verb
sg/s singular
SM Seyfer Mides
stat stative
subj subjunctive
suprl superlative
spv separable prefix verb
sv strong verb
talm talmudic
TC “Traveler’s Charm”
temp temporal
th of thing
xx abbreviations
trans transitive
v verb
vul vulgar
w weak
Wh “Whither am I to go?”
wn weak noun
wv weak verb
YIVO Yiddish Scientific Institute
Yos Yosifon
Introduction
Initial orientation
Based on my readings in Old Literary Yiddish (OLY) over the course of the last
three decades, it seems to me reasonable to imagine that a (time-traveling) fluent
speaker of modEY could learn to comprehend the spoken language lurking behind
the Yiddish belles-lettres of sixteenth-century Ashkenaz in a matter of a month or
two, and become a reasonably fluent speaker (with a “charming” foreign accent, no
doubt) within a few more months. Old and modern Yiddish are far more closely
related than Middle and modern English, but more distant than Old Norse and
modern Icelandic, for instance. One might then reasonably ask why twenty-first-
century beginners in OLY, most of whom may well already know at least some
modEY, must be bothered by the niceties of OLY (i.e. Old West Yiddish) pronuncia-
tion as it differs from modern standard Yiddish (i.e. East Yiddish) pronunciation,
especially since those niceties and distinctions often seem all but impossible to
identify on the basis of the sparse and often conflicting phonological evidence that
can be gleaned from the extant texts. It is worth exploring this issue briefly, perhaps
first by gaining some perspective from beyond the bounds of OLY.
In a standard beginners’ textbook of Old Irish the author acknowledges (slightly
cantankerously) that “Old Irish can be read as a kind of cipher, the symbols being
phonetically meaningless. . . . They do not constitute a phonological much less a
phonetic description of the language” (Quin 1975: 1). OLY and its orthographic
conventions are obviously very different from Old Irish, but the difficulties of “real-
izing” the sounds of OLY based on the letters on the page are often even more
daunting. Another example, from another tradition of language pedagogy, might
also be relevant here: outside of Germany, few students of Old Icelandic/Old Norse
are ever taught anything but the pronunciation of the twenty-first-century resi-
dents of Reykjavík, even though the medieval pronunciation of Icelandic almost
certainly displayed (subtle though) distinct differences from its modern reflex. In
practice, as I have noticed at conferences over the years, the same must in general
be true of contemporary pedagogy in Italian studies (Dante’s Commedia is gener-
ally pronounced as if Dante were a contemporary of Silvio Berlusconi1), Middle
English studies (rare are the students and scholars who do more than gesture
toward a Middle English vowel or two), and in recent years by German-trained
scholars of medieval German, almost all of whom pronounce the poetry (and even
1 Who, one might speculate, may well still find a home in the eighth circle, fifth bolgia, of the Inferno,
boiling in pitch with the other corrupt politicians.
2 a guide to old literary yiddish
2 While most Anglophone Germanists in North America, on the other hand, interestingly, insist on
the reconstructed Middle High German pronunciation, almost as a badge of professional competence.
introduction3
And for the beginner in OLY, it is salutary to know: the pronunciation here sug-
gested for many recurring phonemes will undoubtedly raise objections from many
experts in the field. But then it should likewise be acknowledged that if any of those
experts were to attempt to provide phonetic transcriptions of several hundred OLY
words according to their own principles, there would, I dare say, be just as many
objections by just as many other experts in the field.
Some readers who know modEY will no doubt object that the spelling of OLY
and even the pronunciation suggested in this volume often seems more “German”
than “Yiddish.” Perhaps, in very non-analytical terms, they are right. To put it in
more linguistically precise terms: the OLY phonetic realization of its medieval Ger-
man component was indeed “closer” to its medieval German determinant than is
the modEY phonetic realization of that medieval German component. Co-temporal
German speakers (i.e. German-speakers during the OLY period) would thus have
likely been able to understand somewhat more OLY than modern German speak-
ers understand modEY, depending, as always, on context and the extent of the
Semitic (and Slavic) components employed.
In any case, let us dive into the sea of OLY, beginning with a very brief orienta-
tion in the history of the language and its earliest literary periods, followed (in
Lesson One) by an introduction to the sounds of the language (phonemes) and
their representation by the Hebrew alphabet (graphemes), i.e. the grapho-phonemic
system.
Periodization in Yiddish
The Yiddish language is now generally divided into three or four periods (see also
Jacobs 2005: 45):
period from to
[pre-Yiddish origin +/− 1250]
Old Yiddish origin \ +/− 1250 +/− 1500
Middle Yiddish +/− 1500 +/− 1700
Modern Yiddish +/− 1700 present
In the present volume, the term OY designates the language from its earliest begin-
nings up to the the onset of MY.
Overlaid on this chronology is a second, perhaps more important one in the
present context, which distinguishes two periods in the textual representation of
Yiddish. Max Weinreich designated them “ שרײַבשפּראַך אWritten Language 1” and
“ שרײַבשפּראַך בWritten Language 2,” while Dov-Ber Kerler designates them “Old
Literary Yiddish” and “Modern Literary Yiddish,” the first extending from the begin-
ning of written Yiddish up to the mid-eighteenth century, and the second extend-
ing from that point to the present (Weinreich 1973: vol. II, 389–92).3 While writing
3 In his translation of Weinreich’s magnum opus, Shlomo Noble opted for the strictly literal transla-
tion of the Yiddish designations of the two literary languages as “Written Language A” and “Written
4 a guide to old literary yiddish
systems rarely are unequivocal and transparent in their represention of the actual
pronunciation of a language,4 especially if the same system is employed over a long
period of time during which the spoken language changes, some systems—especially
alphabetical ones (as opposed to syllabaries or glyphs)—more easily reflect that
change than do others. OLY was probably never imagined as an accurate represen-
tation of the specific pronunciation of any dialect of Yiddish—at least not with the
precision that modern linguists might desire—and it almost certainly did not so
represent the language. Beginning in the fourteenth century and based naturally on
a supraregional form of what is now identified as Western Yiddish (since no other
form of Yiddish then existed), it represented the earliest connected texts in the
Rhineland, the Danube Valley, northern Italy, Cairo, Poland, and Amsterdam, over
the course of four centuries. Modern Literary Yiddish, on the other hand, seems to
have developed in large part precisely in order to represent more accurately the
actual phonetic realities of the co-temporal spoken language, especially of Eastern
Yiddish, which OLY of course never pretended to represent.
To gain some perspective, one should keep in mind that by the time Modern
Literary Yiddish developed, Yiddish had been spoken for some 800 years, and its
textual history had extended over at least 600 years (i.e. in the texts that are still
extant today). An analogy might be useful: while early seventeenth-century Eliza-
bethan orthography—in Shakespeare’s works and in the (unmodernized) King
James Bible—is not quite the same as the twenty-first-century English standard,
it is actually quite similar in the larger scheme of things; but behind it lurks a
sixteenth-century pronunciation that obviously differs radically from, for instance,
the twenty-first-century pronunciations of native English speakers in London,
Atlanta, Toronto, Delhi, Edinburgh, Johannesburg, Adelaide, Malibu, Hong Kong,
and Dublin. While the English and Yiddish situations are obviously different in
many ways, the analogy does indicate just how difficult would be the task of plot-
ting, for instance, late fourteenth-century Rhineland Yiddish pronunciation, as
opposed to late sixteenth-century Venetian pronunciation, based on written docu-
ments that employ essentially the same writing system.
Difficult, yes, but perhaps not always altogether impossible—for experts—to
find at least fragmentary evidence.5 In this volume, that level of expertise is not
expected, nor is it the pedagogical goal. It is the author’s hope that some users of the
volume will go on to such research, but at this point the task at hand is the acquisi-
Language B,” rather than their functional denotations in a chronological sequence (Weinreich and
Noble 1980). Dov-Ber Kerler’s characterization of the criteria of periodization is definitive: “For it is only
when the single, discrete, and isolated dialectalisms become collectively manifest in a sizeable body of
texts that one can start to speak of the beginning of a new era in the history of the literary language”
(Kerler 1999: 255–6). That manifestation occurred in the final three decades of the 18th century.
4 One might think here of one of the whimsical illustration of English orthography’s aberrations,
such as the spelling of the English equivalent of the zoological class pisces (finned/gilled swimming
creatures) as ghoti: /gh/ as in laugh, /o/ as in women, and /ti/ as in nation.
5 For there are indeed more than a few clues to pronunciation in some documents. The actual lin-
guistic distinctions between OY and MY, and thus the justification for their division, have to do with
grammatical and phonological changes that took place in the transitional period, and, additionally, with
the emergence of distinct dialects of Yiddish beginning in the MY period (see Jacobs 2005: 44–6).
introduction5
tion of a beginning-, an intermediate-, and by the end of the volume perhaps even
a low advanced-level reading knowledge of the language. In any case, there is no
attempt in this volume, on the basis of the documents at our disposal, to assign a
distinct and regular OY pronunciation and a distinct and regular MY pronuncia-
tion to the documents written before and after the fluid boundary between those
periods, c.1500–1550. Despite the fact that the texts represented in this volume
extend from the thirteenth to the seventeenth centuries, they are all written in OLY
(Written Language 1), and all the focal texts of the Lessons themselves (i.e. not
including the supplemental texts) hover within a century or century and a half of
the boundary between OY and MY (1382–1594), thus representing late OY and
early MY. As one of the many pragmatic compromises that introductory language
textbooks of dead languages must accept, a single artificial quasi-standard pronuncia-
tion of OLY is thus presented here, and that pragmatic compromise may well reflect,
at least in principle, just such a quasi-standard in OLY as a literary dialect itself.
6 What follows here is not intended as anything more than the briefest of surveys of the contours of
pre-modern Yiddish linguistic and literary history. The standard comprehensive surveys on the lan-
guage are: Max Weinreich, ( געשיכטע1973); see also the magisterial recent work by Neil G. Jacobs, already
cited multiple times: Yiddish: A Linguistic Introduction (2005); on the literature, see Jean Baumgarten
(1993; ed. and trans. Jerold C. Frakes, 2005); text anthology: Early Yiddish Texts, ed. Jerold C. Frakes
(2004). On the development of Yiddish as a pidgin or creole, see Jacobs (2005: 13). He also offers a
comprehensive summary of the current state of theorizations of the origin of Yiddish (pp. 9–22).
7 This theory is based primarily in the research of Max Weinreich, whose geographical designation
of the homeland of Yiddish as לותּירloter (the term is from medieval Hebrew) has unfortunately gener-
ally been glossed with its German or French reflexes (Lothringen and Lorraine, respectively), although
neither of them actually designates very precisely the territory of the middle Rhineland that is key to
Weinreich’s theory (Weinreich 1973: vol. 1, 3, with map, and pp. 334–53).
6 a guide to old literary yiddish
component that defined the departure point for its later development, as the
language spread farther east into Slavic territories, where it added the final, Slavic
component of Weinreich’s classic model of the Yiddish language development (the
western dialect of Yiddish—which includes OY and much MY—thus never had a
Slavic component as such, although there are rare Slavic borrowings). The primary
problems with this theory are the statistically insignificant Loez lexical and syntac-
tic elements in Yiddish and the dominance of the Bavarian/East Central German
dialect in the German component of Yiddish.
The second theory, proposing a Bavarian/East Central German origin for the
later development of Yiddish, then, accounts for precisely the evidence that troubles
Weinreich’s theory, especially the still less prominent Loez component in later vari-
eties of Yiddish.8 As a result, this theory has gained in prominence in recent years.
The third theory, i.e. that Yiddish originated on Slavic-language territory, is
rather surprising, given the conventional views of the spread of Jewish settlement
into central and eastern Europe just adumbrated.9 According to this scenario,
Judeo-Aramaic and Judeo-Greek speakers from the Middle East settled in Slavic-
language (specifically Sorbian) territory, and it was on the substrate of a Judeo-
Slavic language developed by that Jewish population that Yiddish developed by
means of the gradual eastward spread into that territory of (non-Jewish) German
as a spoken language and the consequent relexification (i.e. exchanging equivalent
words of one language for those of another language) of Judeo-Sorbian with Ger-
man words from the dominant language of the (non-Jewish) co-territorial culture.
Thereafter the speakers of this now Judeo-Sorbian-German (i.e. according to this
theory, Yiddish) language spread both west into contact with Rhineland Jews and
east into Poland, Lithuania, and the Ukraine. This theory accounts well for the
otherwise surprising uniformity in all varieties of western Yiddish (i.e. without
relation to the range of specific co-territorial German dialects), and the almost com-
plete absence of the Loez component in all but (early) Rhineland Yiddish. Particu-
larly because of this theory’s overt and adamant opposition (especially as argued by
Wexler) to the long-standing norms of Yiddish linguistic history, it has generated a
great deal of (sometimes all but apoplectic) controversy.10
There are many other variations on the three basic theories of origin, which need
not be of concern in this elementary survey. In any case, in all three scenarios, it is
proposed that Yiddish developed out of a fusion of multiple linguistic components,
the most prominent one coming from language contact with the co-territorial
8 The primary early proponents of this theory are Alice Faber and Robert King (1984: 393–425). This
theory of the origins of Yiddish does not deny either the existence or importance of early Jewish com-
munities in the Rhineland, but rather simply refutes the proposition that the language of those com-
munities could have become the direct ancestor of modern Yiddish: that “westernmost” Yiddish
remained outside the family tree of later varieties of Yiddish, including modern East Yiddish.
9 The theory’s primary proponent is Paul Wexler (1987); see the special journal issue devoted to the
topic: Yiddish: the Fifteenth Slavic Language (1991). More recently, see Wexler, The Ashkenazic Jews: A
Slavo-Turkic People in Search of a Jewish Identity (1993) and Jewish and Non-Jewish Creators of Jewish
Languages (2006).
10 The volume Yiddish: the Fifteenth Slavic Language includes critiques of Wexler’s proposal by other
scholars.
introduction7
erman dialects during the period of adoption. The three theories all agree that
G
Yiddish thus became the vernacular of Ashkenaz and spread to include Ashke-
nazim throughout Europe, the center and direction of that spread depending on
the theory of origin assumed.
While it cannot yet quite be reckoned as belles-lettres, the oldest now extant textual
evidence of the existence of Yiddish occurs in Rashi’s biblical and talmudic com-
mentaries, where some thirty Yiddish glosses (alongside thousands of Old Tsarfatic/
Judeo-French glosses) demonstrate the teaching method and at least the occasional
pedagogically tactical language use of Rashi, who had himself studied in the Rhine-
land.11 As this tradition of glossing religious texts developed, so did biblical transla-
tion, along a continuum from early word glosses to fifteenth-century literal, word-
for-word trots for those learning biblical and rabbinical Hebrew to fully realized
seventeenth-century versions in idiomatic Yiddish for readers of that language not
concerned, sentence by sentence, directly with the original Hebrew text, and on to the
צאינה וראינהTsene-rene (Hanau, 1622; EYT 98), which integrates traditional commen-
tary into the biblical paraphrase (not translation). That book quickly became quite
profoundly influential, and in the four centuries and 200 editions since its initial
publication, it has become the single most widely read Yiddish book in the history of
Yiddish and indeed of Ashkenazic culture. For those (men and women) who knew
too little Hebrew to read the original Scriptures, it functioned (and for many such
readers in some traditional communities still functions) simply as access to the Bible.
The impingement of Yiddish on the territory of the sacred text extended far beyond
glossing, paraphrase, and translation, however, to include poetic adaptation of bibli-
cal narrative and midrash, which developed early in Yiddish, including dozens of
texts, extending from the earliest Yiddish anthology (the codex from the Cairo
genizah, c.1382) through the entire OLY period, and including the great masterpiece
of the tradition, Moushe Esrim ve-Arba’s ]בוך-( ספֿר שמואל [שמואלBook of Samuel,
Augsburg, 1544; EYT 47; and below, Appendix 4, text 3), which stylistically and con-
ceptually combined both Jewish sacred and Germanic heroic traditions.
While the liturgy within the synagogue itself remained strictly the domain of
Hebrew-Aramaic, translations of the prayer book appeared by the fifteenth century,
making it comprehensible to those who knew too little Hebrew. Moreover, Yiddish
also fulfilled important liturgical functions in domestic ritual: bilingual Passover
hymns had appeared by the fifteenth century, אדיר הוא/“( אלמעכטיגר גוטMighty is He”;
EYT 25; and Lesson Seventeen) and “( חד גדיאSong of the Kid”; EYT 26; and Lesson
Twenty), and there were also many collections of ‘( תחינותpetitions’; EYT 124 and 127)
and ‘( סליחותpenitentials’; EYT 88), which constituted the most important domain
of Yiddish prayer. Like the synagogal liturgy, traditional legal textuality ()הלכה
remained staunchly Hebrew-Aramaic, although the Yiddish language frequently
appears as quoted testimony in rabbinical responses to legal queries, and it is in such
quotations that a glimpse is often afforded into a form of the language that may
have been closer to the actual spoken language of the time (EYT 37, 38, 56, 62).
Among the most important genres in Ashkenaz were מנהגיםbooks (‘customals’;
EYT 31, 72, 116) that taught proper conduct according to locally defined usage, and
11 For those glosses, see Early Yiddish Texts, text no. 1 (hereinafter abbreviated in the form: EYT 1).
8 a guide to old literary yiddish
מוסרbooks (EYT 32, 76, 93, 121, 129, 132), such as the ספר מדות12 (‘book of virtues’
1542, EYT 43, and Appendix 4, text 2) that emphasized proper morals and ethical
behavior. Such writings likely constitute the statistically most widespread genre of
OLY literature, characterized by illustrative narratives, parables, and legends. Typi-
cal of the genre is Isaac b. Eliakim of Posen’s ‘( ספר לבֿ טובֿbook of the good heart,’
Prague, 1620; EYT 97).
Often neglected within the field of Yiddish studies or viewed simply as an irrele
vant fetish is the broad scope of quasi-secular literature in OLY. Due to its obvious
origins in the realm of Gentile literature, the quasi-secular epic or romance is quite
remarkable among popular OLY genres. The earliest such text dates to c.1349,
unearthed in a 2011 archeological excavation of a medieval synagogue destroyed by
antisemitic arson in the Rhineland city of Cologne: nineteen script lines of an OY
chivalric verse narrative are inscribed on each side of a single slate tablet (which is
broken into three fragments) (cf. Timm 2013: 417–43). Interesting as that find is, it
is another text fragment from another unexpected site that provides the oldest
integral view of OLY quasi-secular epic, the “( דוכוס הורנטDuke Horant,” 1382; EYT 9),
from the Cairo genizah, which narrates a royal wiving expedition (“bridal quest”),
such as was typical of a significant sub-genre of (particularly) Christian epic of the
High Middle Ages. Probably somewhat later in composition is the װידװילטVidvilt,
an Arthurian romance concerning the adventures of Sir Gawain’s son, Vidvilt. Both
of these texts were adapted from the medieval German epic tradition, and in the
latter case, the source text has been identified. The texts generally designated the
masterpieces of the genre are the rather conventional ]בוך-( בבֿא דאנטונא [בבֿאBovo of
Antona, famous as the Bove-bukh, composed in 1507, published in Isny 1541; EYT
33), adapted into Yiddish by Elias Levita (Elye Bokher), and the anonymous, con-
summate Renaissance epic ( פאריז אונ' װיענהPariz and Viene, Verona, 1594; EYT 74;
and Lessons Twenty-Two to Twenty-Five), both adapted from the late medieval
and early modern Italian epic tradition.
The early tradition of Yiddish literature did not possess a well-defined lyric
genre, although in fact many lyric modes did appear, the earliest example of which
is a rhymed blessing in the Worms Makhzor (1272; EYT 2; and Lesson Six), followed
by the aforementioned Passover hymns, rhymed penitential prayers, and including
Torah songs (some composed by women; EYT 92, 104), reflective philosophical
poems such as Isaac Wallich’s memento mori poem ווײל איך איצונדרט אן מיר ואר שטיא
(c.1600; EYT 87), playful philosophical disputations, such as Zalmen Soyfer’s
debate poem, ‘( מחלוקת ײן והמיםdebate between wine and water,’ 1516; EYT 36), and
biting quasi-Humanist satire, such as Elia Levita’s קוֹדש לְ חוֹלֶ ‘( ַה ַמ ְבֿ ִדיל ֵביןha-mavdil
song,’ 1514; EYT 35), a drinking song of yeshiva students, “( פומײא איר ליבן גיזעליןPumay,
you dear companions,” c.1600; EYT 86; and Appendix 4, text 6), and a brief and
hauntingly lyrical fourteenth- or fifteenth-century love song written on the flyleaf
of a manuscript of Rashi’s commentaries (“ װאו זאל איך היןWhither am I to go?”; EYT
14; and Lesson Seven).
12 While one would normally expect a rafe in the title of this text ()סֿפר, the edition cited is not so
printed; the same urge to “correct” the spelling of OLY titles as witnessed in OLY texts will be resisted
elsewhere in the present volume.
introduction9
While most narrative prose in Yiddish was translation from Hebrew, such as the
popular quasi-historical “( יוסיפוןYosifon/Josippon,” Zurich, 1546; EYT 50; and Appen-
dix 4, text 4), there were also genuine original masterpieces among Yiddish compo-
sitions, such as the “( ְב ִריעָ ה וזִ ְימ ָרהBriyo and Zimro,” ms., 1585; EYT 67; and Lessons
Nine to Twenty-One), a thriller of international intrigue and star-crossed lovers.
The moral tale/fable appeared in many forms, from an early lion fable (c.1382, EYT
7), to the often risqué ‘( קױא בוךbook of cows,’ Verona, 1595; EYT 75), to the masterful
בוך-“( איין שוין מעשהA fine book of tales” [Mayse-book], Basel, 1602; EYT 89), which is
an adaptive compilation of traditional Jewish and secular folktale sources that
became the period’s most influential tale collection. It was designed as a vernacular
quasi-aggadah to teach ethical principles through pious exempla. The untitled book
by Glikl bas Leyb Pinkerle (Glueckel of Hameln; written 1691–1719; EYT 131; and
Appendix 4, text 10) combines aspects of muser, minhogim, mayse, historiography,
and life-writing. In the corpus of OLY there are also treatises on hygiene, geography,
accounting, mathematics, and medical practice (including magical charms and
potions, see Lessons Ten to Sixteen) from the period, along with the first Yiddish
proto-newspaper, the ( דינשטאגישי קורנטין פרײטאגישי קורנטיןTuesday/Friday Courier;
EYT 115; see Lessons Twenty-One to Twenty-Five) which appeared in 1686–7 in
Amsterdam and reported on a broad range of international events.
Jewish drama arose from the holiday performance of Purim plays. There is evi-
dence that such plays had been performed for a lengthy period before the date of
the oldest extant texts, comprising fragments and brief scenes from the late six-
teenth century. Not until the end of the following century, however, is a full-scale
and complete play extant: the “Ahasuerus play” entitled ‘( אײן שײן פורים שפילa fine
Purim play,’ 1697; EYT 120), a bawdy burlesque based on the biblical Esther story.
Even from this earliest period, however, there are Purim plays extant that consti-
tute sophisticated Baroque dramas and, according to the descriptions on the title
pages, opera (!) with orchestral accompaniment, that also branch out to include
other biblical subjects besides the Esther tale. Yiddish drama did not, however,
venture beyond the genre of the Purim play until the period of the Haskole (Haska-
lah) in the eighteenth century, i.e. as the OLY period drew to a close.
Just as other European literary traditions of the period, Yiddish, too, pro
duced historical narrative in poetic form, often commemorating recent events
that affected the Jewish community, a sub-genre that Chone Shmeruk designated
‘ חידושיּם־לידערaccount-, report-, or event-poems’ (Shmeruk 1988: 93, n. 59). These
are poems that memorialized specific historical events, necessarily from the per-
spective of the affected Jewish community, such as Joseph b. Eliezer Lipman Ash-
kenazi’s ‘( קינה על גזירות הקהילות דק''ק אקרייניlamentation on the evil decrees in the
Ukrainian Jewish communities,’ Prague, 1648; EYT 99) on the Chmielnitzki mas-
sacres, Elkhonon Hellen’s ]‘( דברי השירה הזאת [מגילת װינץthe Vints-Hans song,’
Amsterdam, 1648; EYT 100), on the Fettmilch insurrection in Frankfurt am Main
in 1614–16, and Jacob Tousk’s (Taussig) ‘( אײן שױן נײא ליד פון משיחa fine new poem on
the Messiah,’ Amsterdam, 1666; EYT 108), which expresses a pious believer’s joy at
Shabbatai Ṣevi’s supposed fulfillment of messianic prophecy.
As this briefest of surveys indicates, Yiddish early became a full-fledged literary
language that did not, however, by any means replace Hebrew but rather complemented
10 a guide to old literary yiddish
it, and indeed continued to do so over the course of almost a millennium. It thus
became a participating member in the Jewish “intralinguistic polysystem,” in which
particular languages (e.g. rabbinical Hebrew, Judeo-Persian, Judeo-Greek, Judeo-
Aramaic, Yiddish, Polish, Venetian dialect, among others) in a variety of combina-
tions depending on time and place fulfilled distinct but sometimes overlapping
functions within the Jewish community, such as in sixteenth-century Venice:
Hebrew for prayer and the writing of a range of text types, Venetian dialect for
business dealings with Christians in the city outside the Ghetto, Tuscan for some
types of literary and historiographical compositions, Yiddish for intercourse with
other Ashkenazim and for the composition of some kinds of texts.
By the late Middle Ages, Yiddish literature included much the same range of
genres found in other European vernaculars of the period. Although a myth has
grown over the centuries that Yiddish was and is a “women’s literature” (whether in
a condescending, derogatory sense or not), one can see that few of the genres dis-
cussed above are inherently gender-specific, whether in terms of authorship or
audience, and there is clear evidence that the functional audience for OLY literature
comprised all of Yiddish-speaking Jewry, including the educated men who gener-
ally wrote, edited, published, distributed, sold, and indeed also bought OLY books.
As Chone Shmeruk has argued, during the late Middle Ages and early modern
period, the textual realm of Hebrew-Aramaic (“the holy language”) was the domi-
nant textual force in Ashkenazic society, which then left no more than a mere cul-
tural niche for Yiddish literature. Nonetheless, whether for lack of a Hebrew-lan-
guage audience or the absence of a canonical paradigm, this niche literature of the
interstices, as Shmeruk notes, was written in Yiddish (Shmeruk 1978: 22–3; 1988:
28–9). As David Neal Miller glosses Shmeruk’s “subversive maximalism”: “Yiddish
literature only fills the gap in the Jewish intralinguistic polysystem; that gap is Lit-
erature in any modern sense of the word” (Miller 1987: 101). To know Ashkenazic
culture in the period before the resurgence of Hebrew as a literary language in the
modern sense (during the period of the Haskole), it is essential that one know not
only Hebrew and Aramaic, but also OLY.
Lesson One
1 The concepts of “whole Hebrew” and “merged Hebrew” are discussed in Lesson Eighteen.
2 Appendix 3 provides sample facsimiles of manuscript and printed editions corresponding to texts
included in the present volume, and can serve as a very effective initial step into OLY paleography.
While a quick look at those pages may seem quite daunting, the reader should not despair but rather
keep in mind a comforting basic fact: compared with the myriad medieval and early modern English,
German, Arabic, or Latin manuscript hands, which can sometimes baffle even experts and which some-
times change drastically from century to century or even decade to decade or from one scriptorium to
another only a few dozen kilometers away, there are in fact relatively few script types in the entire length
of the Yiddish scribal tradition, and they are relatively quickly learned. Among online OLY treasures is
the extensive collection of the Frankfurt Universitätsbibliothek: http://sammlungen.ub.uni-frankfurt.
de/jd/?Sprache=eng&js=yes&Skript=Home.
Additionally, Dov-Ber Kerler’s site ! געֿפינט מען, אַז מע זוכטincludes a page with links to a selection of
OLY texts (listed in the bibliography to the present volume). There are many other relevant internet
12 a guide to old literary yiddish
At this point, the task is simply to begin grappling with the grapho-phonemic
systems of OLY, i.e. how the sounds of the language are represented in writing. The
larger issue is one familiar to students of Semitic languages, in that, while the rep-
resentation of consonants is fairly straightforward and there is a comprehensive
system of diacritics for representing the vowels and diphthongs most often, but not
exclusively, of Hebrew, that system is actually used only sporadically. That problem
is compounded by the fact that it is the—incomplete and inconsistent—textual
representation of OLY sounds that is, unfortunately, the only evidence available
about what those sounds in the language might have been, since after all there were
no recording devices in the sixteenth century, and there are of course no native
OLY informants alive today. Thus there is essentially no evidence external to the
texts themselves for the actual pronunciation of the language. To illustrate: if we—
as competent speakers of modern English, equipped with scores of relevant dic-
tionaries and millions of living native informants—came across a line in a contem-
porary Anglophone novelist’s (sloppily written) notebook, such as ‘a cntimporery
Anglephown novlists notbuk,’ we would not hesitate for a moment in automatically
correcting the author’s spelling, perhaps consulting various dictionaries, and in
confidently pronouncing the mangled words (in whatever dialect of twenty-first-
century English we happen to speak). In a fourteenth-century Yiddish text, on the
other hand, we lack precisely that native-speaker competence and the extra-textual
aids that inform our literacy and that would allow such a reconstruction of the text.
We are then reduced to the practice of the historical linguist, who uses information
such as loanwords into and from other languages, piecing together evidence from
contemporaneous German and from (much) later stages of Yiddish. But we will
often find that such “triangulated” evidence will lead us to a proposed pronuncia-
tion that may well (at least seem to) be contradicted by a recurrence of the same
word in the next line of the same text, spelled so differently that it cannot support
our earlier proposal. Even so, approximation is unfortunately our best course of
action.
sites. The “Yiddish Books on Microfiche” catalog (Zug: Inter Documentation Company, 1976), which
comprises hundreds of early Yiddish printed books (on thousands of microfiches), is now distributed by
the publishing house of E. J. Brill in Leiden.
lesson one13
poster). Thus the standard forms of modern Ashkenazic semi-cursive are provided
here, i.e. those forms that one would learn in a modEY language course.3 The gen-
eral practice of introductory language manuals, which include several pages of
practice exercises to drill the alphabet for beginners, is not followed here; begin-
ning students can approximate such exercises by copying the text passages from the
first several lessons. The Ashkenazic cursive forms are here lined up with the
square-script forms, followed by a second line of the cursive, showing the place-
ment of the letters on the line, and the direction and order of the pen strokes used
to write the letters.
נן מם ל ח ט י כך
נ ן מם ל כך י ט ח
The letters ךנ ןקextend below the line, while the letters לףץextend slightly above
the line.
The reading passages from Lessons Two and Three are presented here for the
purpose of providing a model for practice in writing the cursive script. After having
worked through those texts in Lessons Two and Three, return to this page and copy
the texts, according to this model, until the forms have been mastered (it is always
more effective to copy texts that one understands!).4
יוסף הצדיק
. איך וויל אוך וונדר זינגן וויר עש אוך ניכט צו לנק
: ווי דער גוטא יוסף דש חרצא זיך בטוונק
. בי אלא דען גציטן דש אין זין ורווא בט
3 There are several other Hebrew hands or script-types currently in use for writing Jewish languages,
including, for instance, the standard Israeli (school) script (which differs slightly from the form pre-
sented here). The reader who already knows such a script should use whichever script is more conve-
nient or comfortable. As noted, the Ashkenazic script is presented here for those who have not yet
learned Hebrew handwriting. The font presented here is the “Ktav Yad” font from the Open Siddur
Project (http://opensiddur.org/tools/fonts/).
4 Let the reader be aware: such a 14th-century text could of course never have been written during
that period in such a modern cursive script; here it is employed for strictly pedagogical purposes.
14 a guide to old literary yiddish
Diacritical marks such as rafe (superscript line, e.g. )ֿפ, vowel pointing (e.g. )פ,
ֵ
dagesh (e.g. )פּ, etc. are to be added as necessary; see below in this lesson, and espe-
cially the suggested pronunciation in the chapter glossaries on the use and phonetic
values of such marks.
in a single sentence. Even so, once a reader becomes accustomed to the general
practice of OLY orthography and to its patterns of variation by reading a few dozen
pages of texts from these centuries, then the not too infrequent deviations from
that quasi-norm stand out rather starkly, and, more importantly, can generally be
all but automatically accommodated by the reading eye.
But just as the modEY orthography of, for instance, a poem by Moyshe Kulbak
will be pronounced by twenty-first-century speakers of the Yiddish dialects gener-
ally designated as Polish Yiddish, Lithuanian Yiddish, Ukrainian Yiddish, Central
Yiddish, and Western Yiddish according to the realizations of (especially) the
vowel graphs as dictated by their home dialects, so too, in OLY, it is likely that the
vowel graphs were pronounced in a variety of ways, depending on the native dialect
of the given reader. During the OY period, the dialectal distinctions were almost
certainly less strong than they became in later periods, but it has been essentially
impossible for linguists to identify what those authentic thirteenth- to sixteenth-
century Yiddish pronunciations would have been in the Ashkenazic communities
of the Rhineland, the Danube Valley, Venice and Padua, Cairo, and Jerusalem.
What we have instead is the quasi-standard orthography of OLY that generally
seems indifferent to representing those dialectal differences in any systematic way.
For the advanced reader whose interest is not specifically in linguistic history, the
issue is in a practical sense perhaps less important, since the eye moves over the
words, understanding them in context. But for beginners, it is obviously quite
important in a very practical sense to know how to pronounce new vocabulary in
order to be able to learn and retain it more easily.
Interestingly, the issue of the pronunciation of OLY has not simply been one of
phonology, but indeed one of ideology. The long-term antagonism toward Yiddish
as a language in its own right, beginning with the first treatises on Yiddish by Gentile
scholars during the Humanistic period, and continuing through the anti-Yiddish
propaganda of the (Jewish) Haskalah, the (Jewish) Wissenschaft des Judentums, the
rabid anti-Yiddish ideology of (Jewish) Zionism, and the (Jewish and non-Jewish)
assimilationist movements of all varieties have more often than not attempted to
accomplish some part of their linguistic programs by characterizing Yiddish as
simply degraded German mixed with equally degraded Hebrew. Key to their
assumptions has generally been the tendency to transcribe OLY into the Roman
alphabet, by means of which Germanic-component OLY words are most often
magically transformed into pseudo-(Middle High) German words, and Semitic-
component OLY words are just as magically transformed via Roman-alphabet
transcription into approximations of the phonetic system that became Israeli
Hebrew (several centuries before that pronunciation existed). Voilà! The quasi-
evidence for Yiddish as a mixture of German and Hebrew is thus produced by
sleight-of-hand, and the pseudo-argument is complete!
While there is no question that 400 and 600 years ago, the Germanic compo-
nent of Yiddish was linguistically much closer to its German determinant (i.e. its
origins in the tenth- to twelfth-century MHG dialects of the Danube or Rhine val-
leys) than is the case with twentieth-first-century Yiddish in its relationship to
twentieth-first-century German—that is simply a fact of linguistic history, and
demonstrates an all but universal tendency in the development of daughter
16 a guide to old literary yiddish
l anguages progressively to diverge with the passage of time. But there is at the same
time no linguistic evidence that fourteenth- or sixteenth-century Yiddish was
pronounced like co-territorial, contemporaneous German. While there is some
evidence that some vowel phonemes had already shifted toward their realizations
in modern Western Yiddish, there is likewise no comprehensive evidence to that
effect for all vowels across the board, and of course no reason to imagine that the
broad range of modern Eastern Yiddish vowel shifts lurks behind the quasi-standard
OLY orthography.
Except in the rare cases of radical spelling reform, orthographical conventions
are generally quite conservative, with phonemes and words continuing to be spelled
as they have been spelled for generations and even centuries, even though they
have not actually been pronounced that way by native speakers sometimes for
generations and even centuries. That is a problem for all speakers of modern English,
and indeed also precisely the point of the eighteenth-century shift from OLY to
Modern Literary Yiddish (i.e. the written languages). Other such examples abound:
according to Roger Wright (1982), when documents written in the stage of Latin
designated “Vulgar Latin” (in late antiquity and the early Middle Ages) were read
aloud (especially in sermons) in Romance-language cultures, they were read not in
the classical pronunciation of Cicero (i.e. essentially the pronunciation taught in
modern classrooms in the Anglophone world), but rather in the dialects of proto-
Old Spanish, proto-Old Italian, or proto-Old French, etc., of the particular reader
and his/her particular audience. Thus one might imagine that the pronunciation of,
for instance, Cicero’s name by a reader from northern Gaul would already have
shifted from Cicero’s own family’s pronunciation [kikero] toward [siss(ə)ro], while
a reader from northern Italy may already have moved toward [čičero]. Wright sug-
gests that this same “local” pronunciation of Latin affected not just Cicero’s name
but every Latin word, so that reading a Latin text aloud was—from our point of
view—tantamount almost to translation into proto-French, proto-Italian, or proto-
Spanish, even though those readers likely imagined that they were simply reading
Latin and were indeed reading from identical texts, which, obviously, did not
reflect their diverging pronunciations.
For that matter, in order to realize the conservatism of orthographical systems,
one need only consider the standard US pronunciation of the graphematic combi-
nation /ou/ in the English words though (as in toe), through (as in true), rough (as in
ruffian), thought (as in taut), bough (as in cow). Closer to home in the present con-
text is the issue of the linguistic sound change called Umlaut by linguists, which
took place in the Old High German period, but was infrequently, irregularly, and
inconsistently represented in German texts for centuries after the change had with-
out question taken place in speech (on which see below).
As always, in the present volume, it comes down to a simple question: what to do
in a manual that seeks to present practical instruction for the beginner while at the
same time having as little impact as possible on the scholarly debate concerning
OLY vowel qualities? A conservative, compromise solution is proposed, based on
the reconstructive phonological research by Max Weinreich (1973), Eli Katz (1963),
and J. L. Haines (1979), as well as my own reading in OLY texts.
lesson one17
The problem of the representation of vowels in OLY is far more difficult than it
would initially appear, given the previous comments about dialect and obscured
stages of linguistic history. The most obstructive aspect of OLY orthography is that
its representation of vowels is inconsistent; that is, it is clear that many pronounced
vowels are not regularly represented by a graph, e.g. in the common spelling of the
OLY neuter nominative/accusative singular definite article דשor ‘ דאשthe.’ In the one
case, no vowel graph is actually written between the two consonant graphs, and in
the other there is an אas vowel graph, which in OLY sometimes represents [a],
sometimes [o] (among other possibilities). Short vowels are often unmarked in OLY;
so the likely pronunciations of this word as [das] or, perhaps more likely, already as
[dos] are plausible, based on these representations. This non-representation of some
vowels (especially short vowels), even when bearing the word accent, thus reflects in
a significant sense the orthographic practice of the primary tradition of Hebrew and,
more generally, Semitic orthography, which does not generally represent short vow-
els with dedicated graphs—a practice that has unfortunately come to be designated
in European languages with value-laden terms such as “defective,” derived from the
Christian-Latin term scriptio defectiva (cf. H ‘ כתיב חסר ניקודspelling lacking niqqud’),
as opposed to the rarely employed orthography that represents vowels via diacritics:
plene (< L scriptio plena; cf. H ‘ כתיב מלאfull or complete spelling’).
Thus while one might appropriately gesture toward the absence or inconsistency
of orthographic representation of short vowels in Hebrew as a model, OLY scribal
practice all but prevents a comprehensive understanding of the vowel system of any
given text, for the problem with the word just noted becomes more complicated:
the grapheme sequence דשrepresents, for instance, both the neuter nominative/
accusative singular of the definite article ‘the’ (modEY דאס, ָ NHG das) and the mas-
culine/neuter genitive singular of the definite article ‘of the’ (sometimes spelled
;דעשreplaced by a different grammatical structure in modEY, NHG des), and addi-
tionally the conjunction ‘that’ (modEY אז, NHG dass). Is any given appearance of
דשin an OLY text to be pronounced as [dos], [das], or [des]? Those who know
modEY will have already been objecting for some time that /ש/ is in fact the letter
shin and thus should be pronounced [š] ( = [sh]) and not [s], adding even another
layer of potential confusion. But in OLY שrepresents both [š] and [s], while both
[ שׁš] and [ שׂs] are quite rare (the former does not occur in the corpus included in
the present volume); native speakers would have simply pronounced [s] or [š] as
the given word required.
This particular problem with דשis not rare in OLY: it occurs twice already in the
first lines of the first reading selection in this volume (Lesson Two). What to do?
Obviously it is generally possible, based on semantic and syntactic context, to dis-
tinguish between the grammatical/syntactic usage of particular words, such that
one can distinguish a definite article from a conjunction, and a nominative from a
genitive. It is generally so. Cold comfort.
In any case, what I propose is a pragmatic compromise: OLY texts in this volume
will be printed as they occur in the manuscripts and printed editions of that period,
i.e. with all of the “authentic” problems inherent in that orthographical system. In
the glossaries to individual texts and in grammatical tables and explanations that
18 a guide to old literary yiddish
The abbreviations are explained in the table of abbreviations following the preface
to this volume.
For those who know modEY, much of this detail in the glossaries will be super-
fluous, e.g. when OLY איךis represented as [iχ], since the orthography, pronuncia-
tion, and in this case even meaning are identical in OLY and modEY. The practice
here is, however, as always, pragmatic and inclusive, so that all glossed OLY words
are provided with a suggested pronunciation. Thus there is no expectation that
readers will already know or need to know modEY, for which reason an OLY word
such as [ ֶמלֶ ךmeleχ], already provided in OLY with Masoretic vowel pointing and all
but identical in pronunciation in modEY [meyleχ], is here nonetheless provided
with a suggested pronunciation for the sake of the reader who comes to the study
of OLY without the (more advanced) knowledge of Hebrew or modEY that would
make the word familiar and transparent.
My use of the schwa /ə/5 in phonetic representations of final syllables before
־ן, ־ר, and ־לwill seem to some readers unnecessary, since such consonants can
themselves be syllabic. Thus in words such as [ זעלברzelbər] or [ זחןzeχən], there was
(probably) at most a severely reduced vowel [ə] in the speech of native speakers of
OMY (the spoken language Old and Middle Yiddish), and more likely no vowel at
all: [zelbr] / [zeχn]. That vowel is nonetheless included in the suggested pronuncia-
tions here—again, quite pragmatically—in order to make quite clear that those
final consonants are in fact syllabic, which has a practical pedagogical import for
the recognition of word-stress patterns, as will become clear later.
No approximate practice of phonetic representation is likely to satisfy any card-
carrying linguist, but then—let me again stress—this volume is not a treatise on
OMY phonology but an insistently pragmatic introduction to reading OLY texts.
Those with aspirations to analyze OLY linguistically (and I hope there are many of
you!) will therefore quickly progress beyond the compromise suggestions of this
volume to their own conclusions, as well they should.
I delayed attempting to write the present volume for a couple of decades for the
simple reason that doing so requires thousands of decisions regarding phonological
issues that are all but undecidable, and it seemed to me somehow dishonest to
make such decisions so blithely. The reader should not imagine that I have now
5 The phonetic symbol /ə/ represents the unstressed vowel represented as /a/ in about or woman.
lesson one19
6 As will become clear soon enough, it is not the case that I am “dumbing down” the issue of OMY
phonetics for readers or that I am presenting here less than is known about the issue; rather, I am not
pretending that the scholarly state of knowledge is greater than it actually is.
7 Suprasegmentals, (co-)articulation diacritics, release diacritics, phonation, and vowel length are
not marked.
8 Unless otherwise noted, based on a standard US pronunciation.
20 a guide to old literary yiddish
The exceptions to the IPA and YIVO systems are of two types: first, the compromise
symbols representing the process of Umlaut (on which see below), and then five
simple distinctions in symbols:
(1) /χ/ instead of IPA /x/ and YIVO /kh/ for the sound of khes/khof, as in /ch/ in
NHG Bach / Scottish loch
(2) /š/ instead of IPA /ʃ/ and YIVO /sh/ for the sound of /sh/ in modE shy
(3) /y/ instead of IPA /j/ for the sound of /y/ in modE yellow/boy
(4) /ay/ instead of IPA /ai/ for the sound of /i/ in modE fine
(5) /ey/ instead of IPA /ei/ for the sound of /ey/ in modE they
Herewith then the initial schema of pronunciation suggestions.
9 It seems likely that in the earliest period of OY, the consonant that in modEY is pronounced [v], as
in [ ווילןvíln] or [ געוועןgəvén], was pronounced as [w] just as it was in co-temporal German. It is all but
impossible to determine when the phonetic shift [w] > [v] occurred in Old Yiddish, although the use of
ו, וו, and בֿalmost interchangeably in many texts would suggest that the shift had already taken place,
since it is very unlikely that בֿwould ever have represented the sound [w]. The reader will thus notice that
the suggested pronunciation of all instances of this ambiguous phoneme are in this volume [v] for that
reason and for the sake of consistency. Issues of the precise timing of this phonetic shift are thus deferred
to the reader’s own subsequent research.
22 a guide to old literary yiddish
Umlaut
I pre-emptively apologize to the reader for the density and opacity of the following
paragraphs, but at some point most readers of the volume will wonder what justifi-
cation there is for the symbols /ï/ë/aÿ/, which have already appeared in the table of
suggested pronunciations. They depend on the problem of Umlaut. Because of the
complexities and peculiarities of its orthographic representation in OLY, Umlaut
must be explained in some detail even at this early stage. As a phonological phe-
nomenon, Umlaut is actually quite common and quite simple: the pronunciation of
one sound is influenced by the presence of a nearby sound. In this particular case,
by the late first millennium, from the Alps all the way through to Scandinavia and
England, all Germanic languages underwent i-mutation or Umlaut, such that,
under certain conditions, back vowels and diphthongs (i.e. vowels formed in the
back of the mouth, such as [a], [o], and [u]) underwent an assimilatory shift in
pronunciation, (generally) if they were directly followed by a syllable containing
24 a guide to old literary yiddish
the sound [i/y].10 Thus the plural of the Old English word mann ‘man,’ which in
pre-Old English was probably something like *manniz, lost its final consonant and
became manni, and then shifted by means of Umlaut to menni and seems almost
immediately to have reduced the final, unstressed syllable to zero,11 yielding menn;
the singular/plural distinction man/men remains in modern English, although
without anyone beyond the odd linguist noting that the plural form results from
Umlaut. In general, the causative [i/y] of the following syllable was reduced or lost
altogether in later sound shifts, but the Umlaut of the previous vowel remained.
The relevance of Umlaut to OLY is initially a matter of the phenomenon in the
German stock language, for the process had been completed before Yiddish devel-
oped; thus when Yiddish incorporated its German determinant, Umlaut was sim-
ply part of the phonological and morphological package that was adopted. In Old
High German (in slightly simplified terms), the shifts were as follows: [a] > [ä],
[o] > [ö/œ], [u] > [ü], [ou] > [öu (= eu)], [uo] > [üe]. Thus, for instance, the Old High
German word scôni [šoni] ‘fine’/ ‘beautiful’ shifted to scöni, which then (in a slightly
later orthography) reduced the final syllable and appeared as schön(e), which at
least by the MHG period had become schön. As earlier noted for general Germanic
Umlaut, here, too, the causative [i/y] of the following syllable was reduced or lost
altogether in later sound shifts, but the Umlaut of the previous vowel remained.
The phenomenon operated across grammatical categories: e.g. in nouns, adjec-
tives, adverbs, verbs, and even prepositions. Thus, to use OLY examples: the singular
noun [ הנטhand] ‘hand’ has the plural [ הינדאhendə]; the positive adjective/adverb אלט
[alt] has the comparative form [ עלטרeltər]; the strong verb (class 1) [ ליגןligən] has the
preterite [ לאגlag] from which is derived the present subjunctive form [ לעגאlegə],
which displays the effect of Umlaut ([a] > [e]). The shift also operates in word deriva-
tions, such that, for instance, [ גוולטgəvalt] ‘strength/violence’ undergoes Umlaut in
the derived adjective/adverb [ גווילטיקgəveltik] ‘strong/dominant.’ As must now have
become clear, Umlaut affected thousands of words and grammatical forms, and its
phonological and morphological effects are seen ubiquitously in the language.
Interestingly, however, in the German orthographical tradition, Umlaut was not
immediately and consistently marked: while there are frequently clear orthograph-
ical markers of the umlauted [a] > [ä] in eighth-century Old High German texts,
orthographical markers of [u] > [ü] only begin to appear sporadically (sometimes
two centuries) later, and the orthographical markers of [o] > [ö] do not appear for
another century or more after that. The range of spellings of this last sound—in
MHG texts, that is, long after the sound change was complete—demonstrate the
issue: schone, schoene, schüne, schene, and scheine (cf. Lexer 1872–8: vol. 2, col. 768).
Thus, while speakers of Old and Middle High German dialects must certainly have
been pronouncing the Umlaut sounds [ü]/[ö], the literate ones among them con-
tinued to represent those sounds in writing with /u/ and /o/ for centuries. The
native speaker/reader simply wrote and read /u/ and /o/ and pronounced [u] or [ü]
and [o] or [ö] as the context required (just as e.g. the competent reader/writer/
speaker of modern English does with the grapheme /ou/: ought/out).
10 There are naturally further complications which thankfully need not concern us here.
11 Perhaps in a multi-stage process: [i] > [e] > [ə] > [∅].
lesson one25
To complicate matters even more, sometime after Umlaut was complete in Ger-
man, another set of regional phonetic shifts began which unrounded, for instance,
[ü] > [i] and [ö] > [e], so that in many German dialects speakers began to pro-
nounce [i] and [e] which nonetheless continued to be written as /ü/ and /ö/ or even
still as /u/ and /o/. The unrounded pronunciation of [ö] > [e] seems, for instance,
clearly reflected in the MHG spellings noted above, schene and scheine.
That is the morass of difficulties with German, and the only reason to provide so
much detail on the phonetic and orthographical vicissitudes in German language
history is because it forms the prehistory and parallel history of OLY and gestures
toward the orthographical difficulties in the representation of Umlaut in OLY. The
OLY pronunciation of the umlauted vowels adopted from the German determinant
obviously depends on the German dialects adopted and the phonological state of
those dialects at the time of adoption, and thus the period of adoption. Unfortu-
nately there is precious little evidence concerning any of those matters. The problem
confronts us directly almost immediately in dealing with the OLY texts in the pres-
ent volume: in line 5 of “Joseph the Righteous” (Lesson Three), one encounters the
word ‘ ̌שוןbeautiful,’ paralleling the common contemporary MHG spelling schon,
neither of which offers any orthographical hint of Umlaut. In this OLY text, which
was likely copied in or around the year 1382, a half-millennium after Umlaut began
to operate in Germanic languages, it is impossible to imagine that the word was
pronounced as pre-umlauted [šon]. During the two centuries after this manuscript
was copied, that same word was also written שויןand שין, the former becoming more
or less the standard form, while the latter suggests the unrounded [e] that had
already appeared in some German dialects two centuries before this manuscript was
copied and that would represent an intermediate stage in the development of the
Yiddish reflexes of Umlaut: [o] > [ö] > [e] > [ey] (as in modEY [ שייןšeyn]).
It is unclear exactly which stage of pre-Umlaut, Umlaut, or unrounded post-
Umlaut vowels OY inherited from its German determinant, or if it inherited the
Umlaut vowels and thereafter, like co-temporal and co-territorial German,
unrounded them. While it seems unlikely to me that OLY ever had the rounded
vowels corresponding to German [ü] and [ö], there is no evidence for my hypoth-
esis in many of the early texts. Indeed there continues to be a distinction (in many
texts), for instance, between ~( וu) and ~( ויü) for centuries after there was (in other
texts) compelling evidence that [ ויü] had been unrounded to [i].12 Even so, already
very early in the OLY period—by the time of the fifteenth century “Song of the Kid”
(Lesson Twenty)—there is clear orthographical evidence of the unrounding of [ö]
> [e]: ~ ווער לעשןearly NHG verlöschen, [ü] > [i]: ~ הינטלײןMHG hündlîn, and /äu/
[oy] > [ay]: ~ מײזלײןearly NHG mäuslein; and in “Briyo and Zimro” (1585) there is
ample orthographical evidence of the unrounding of [ü] > [i]: ~ זיפפֿצאMHG siufze
and ~ קינשטליךMHG künstlich (cf. Lessons Fourteen and Seventeen).
Because the precise phonetic form of the OLY vowels resulting from Umlaut
(with the exception of the unambiguous [a] > [e]) are in any given text all but
indeterminable (at least until the spellings with יand עappear), no decision is made
12 Cf. Katz (1963: 43). One should also note that in OLY וoften represents not just [u] as opposed to
Umlaut [ ויü], here represented as [ï], but also [o] and its Umlaut [ö], here represented as [ë].
26 a guide to old literary yiddish
about the suggested pronunciation in the present volume. Instead, “dotted” sym-
bols indicate the ambiguous phonetic possibilities, as in the following chart, e.g. [ë]
suggests that a given symbol in the OLY text might have been pronounced as [ö] or [e].
The reader will notice that especially in MY texts included in this volume, one finds
unambiguous representations of the the unrounded vowels (i.e. those that become
the rule of modEY) with compelling frequency.13
13 Finally, one should note that Umlaut vowels are found in some positions in some dialects of mod-
ern Western Yiddish and even some dialects of Central Yiddish, whether those vowels have been
retained from the period of the formation of Old Yiddish or (re)introduced into those dialects, most
likely through the constant and direct contact with co-territorial non-Jewish German dialects, unlike
modern Eastern Yiddish, where such contact was lacking.
14 The distinction between voiced and voiceless consonants is easily explained. Many such conso-
nants come in pairs that are pronounced in the same location in the vocal apparatus, distinguished only
lesson one27
pedagogical move that requires some explanation. In OLY, the class of consonants
designated voiced obstruents (such as stops15 [b/d/g] and fricatives16 [v/z]) are
devoiced when they are word-final. Thus [b > p], [d > t], [g > k], [v > f], [z > s]. This
is a phenomenon that appears in many languages, including Russian (без /bez/
pronounced [bies] ‘without’) and modern standard German (Wand [vant] ‘wall,’
plural Wände [vendə].17 As such examples demonstrate, the actual pronunciation
of the final obstruent is not reflected in either the Russian orthography or the Ger-
man; speakers of Russian and German have simply internalized the rule of which
allophone (variant) ([s] or [z]) to use in which context. One may also reckon this
practice as a rule of OLY phonology. Let us consider the word לנק: in every form in
which the word occurs— לנגר, לנגש, לנגן,לנגא, and so on (with one exception)—it is
pronounced and spelled with גnot ק. In fact it is only when that consonant occurs
in word-final position that its pronunciation shifts from גto ק. Thus we could say
that the underlying (“actual”) form of the word is -לנג, which is shifted to לנקwhen
no (inflectional) ending follows. Sometimes that shift is, as in this case, actually
indicated in the orthography ()לנק, but that is quite inconsistent in OLY. In order
that the reader recognize that, for instance, לנגרand לנקare actually the same word,
the suggested pronunciation will reflect only the underlying form of the word, thus
[ לנקlang], [ ווייפvayb], and so on.18 The reader of this volume will need to learn to
apply this phonological rule consistently. I am not trying to be contrary here, but
rather to enable the reader to make correct pronunciation decisions for entire
classes of words. There are, for instance, many OLY words that actually end in /t/
that is pronounced as [t] and that is a t in all situations ( הייבט, מיט,)ניט, while the
pronounced [t] in הנטis simply an allophone (conditioned variant) of /d/. If the
reader knows and can apply the rule that any and every /d/, /b/, /g/, /z/, and /v/ is
devoiced in word-final position, then such words with organic /d/, /b/, etc. can be
represented as such without confusing them with organic /t/, /p/, etc.
Allied with this rule is the following variant: a voiced consonant that immedi-
ately precedes a voiceless consonant is devoiced: גזגטis to be pronounced [gəzokt],
but represented according to the convention of this volume as [gəzogt]. There are
other cases in which the devoiced former consonant is consistently represented by
the devoiced variant: פרויינטשפטwhich consistency is then taken into account in the
suggested pronunciation: [fraÿntšaft].
by the vibration or lack of vibration of the vocal cords, which one can feel by placing the fingers on the
throat while pronouncing voiced [z] vs. voiceless [s].
15 So designated because their pronunciation necessitates a momentary stoppage of air.
16 The pronunciation results from the friction of breath passing through a narrow opening, such as
between the lower lip and upper teeth [v].
17 In the German grammatical tradition (and some Anglophone linguistic usage), this phenomenon
is designated Auslautverhärtung.
18 Alas, as with most rules, there are exceptions, even in the restricted corpus of the present volume,
such as וויפא, even though the expected underlying form would be [vibə]. But in some cases, it seems that
OLY has developed along its own lines, such that where—on the basis of English and German reflexes—
one might have expected an underlying voiced sound, it is not found, even in those forms that generally
display the underlying form: English hound, German Hund, OLY הונט, feminine הונטין, diminutive
הינטליין.
28 a guide to old literary yiddish
Word accent
Issues of word stress/accent in OLY are more complicated even than they are in
modEY, and involve both component awareness and an ability to distinguish vari-
ous types of prefixes from word roots; even then, there are many exceptions to the
rules. In the absence of native informants, detailed treatment of these issues as they
relate to word accent is best postponed to a later stage of language study. Nonethe-
less, some basic rules apply in the old and middle periods of Germanic languages,
and they seem in large part applicable to OLY as well. In Germanic-component
words, monosyllables obviously receive the word accent insofar as those words
receive any accent at all (prepositions and articles, for instance, likely received word
accent only rarely). In polysyllabic words, word accent generally falls on the penul-
timate (next-to-last) syllable of the word’s root, not on some prefixes such as גע/גי־
[gə-], if that syllable were penultimate, as in [ גיטוןgətón]), while other verbal pre-
fixes do receive stress (see below on separable prefixes). But in general, polysyllabic
roots are stressed on the penultimate syllable. As usual in this volume, a pragmatic
approach is taken, such that the reader may assume that the penultimate syllable of
any given word is accented, unless another syllable is marked with an acute accent
/ ´/ in the bracketed suggested pronunciation. In some cases, where it seems likely
that in addition to that primary accent there was also a secondary accent, it is
marked with a grave accent / `/; the reduced vowel [ə] is never accented. Several
examples may illustrate the practice in the glosses:
[gute] גוטא
[mís(ə)tot] מישט(ו)ט
[bətváng] בטוונק
[bəzámnətə] בזמנטא
[óngəzèχən] אן גזחן
In the infrequent cases where confusion might possibly arise, the accented
penultimate is also marked with an acute accent.
Lesson Two
From this point forward, each lesson will be based on a focal OLY text. The lessons
are organized as follows: the reading selection will be followed by explanatory
notes (when necessary), a glossary of the words that appear for the first time in that
selection (or that appear in a sense distinct from a previously glossed occurrence),
a functional English translation of the reading selection, followed by a presentation
of grammatical issues.
The reader should note several things about the lesson glossaries: glossed words
are listed in their order of occurrence in the text; since words are generally glossed
only at their first appearance in the volume, the text-by-text glossaries should be
considered as vocabulary lists to be learned (the grammatical information included
in the glossaries should be learned along with the definitions). For those of us
unfortunates not endowed with a photographic memory, the best method of
imprinting new vocabulary is by repetition. Some studies have demonstrated that
it is more effective to make use of three modes of repetition: oral, written, and read,
such that one (1) says the word and its definition (along with any attendant gram-
matical data) aloud, proceeding through the entire list of each lesson, (2) writes
each word and its definition and attending data (perhaps first on flash cards, then
later by copying the entire text, while recalling the meaning of each individual
word), and (3) rereads each lesson’s text multiple times until the words in context
are thoroughly known. It is, not incidentally, this last method that is most useful for
learning both vocabulary and grammar, for it is contextualized knowledge that is
most relevant in subsequent encounters with vocabulary and grammatical struc-
tures. In terms of hours actually spent on learning a language, more time must
obviously be spent on review and repetition than on the initial pass through any
lesson, which effectively functions only to alert the student to the contents of the
lesson.
The study of any given lesson should always begin with the thorough review at
least of the previous lesson, but most effectively by reviewing the previous several
lessons. If one were to divide the volume into five-lesson units then the reader
would do well after the completion of each unit to take the time to review all lessons
completed up to that point, beginning with Lesson One. By the time readers fol-
lowing this procedure have finished working through the entire book, most will
find that without any focused attempt to do so, they will have essentially memo-
rized the texts, especially those from the earlier chapters. That imprinted vocabu-
lary, morphology, and syntax, learned in context, will stand them in good stead in
any future encounter with an unfamiliar text.
Furthermore, the glossing of Lessons One to Ten is based on words in the exact
inflected form that appears in the text (e.g. horses or horse’s, not the base form horse
that one would, for instance, find in a dictionary). Beginning in Lesson Eleven, a
different format will be used (and explained there). To be specific with a Yiddish
30 a guide to old literary yiddish
example: in the early chapters, the word אווגןoccurring in the text will be listed in
the glossary and glossed as
The reader should refer to the list of abbreviations at the end of the Preface. Gram-
matical information provided in the glosses includes, for declinable parts of speech:
gender/case/number, in that order; thus here: ntnp = neuter, nominative, plural.
Plural pronouns, definite articles, and adjectives do not differentiate gender and are
thus not so marked here. Remember, too, that /óu/ represents a diphthong: two
vowels [o] + [u] pronounced together, as in o ͡oops. Some glosses will provide infor-
mation that many readers will likely not yet be able to interpret, such as indicators
that a given noun is a weak noun (marked wn) or that a verb belongs to strong verb
class 7 (sv7). That information is provided already at this stage, since those gram-
matical categories will be introduced in due course, and the diligent student who
continues to review earlier lessons will soon profit from the inclusion of that infor-
mation in the glosses to those lessons.
And now, finally, let us begin with the task at hand!
1 The poem has been edited multiple times: Fuks (1957: vols I and II, 68–72 (facsimile)); Katz (1963:
113–15); Shmeruk (1977: 67–81); EYT 6.
lesson two31
2יוסף הצדיק
· איך וויל אוך וונדר זינגן וויר עש אוך ניכט צו לנק
: ווי דער גוטא יוסף דש חרצא זיך בטוונק
· בי אלא דען גציטן דש אין זין ורווא בט
: דש ער בי איר לעגא אונ' בגינג' מישטט
Glossary
Notes
Abbreviation/apocope: with some frequency in this manuscript, words seem to be
apocopated, i.e. the final syllable is elided, which is then indicated in the manu-
script by an apostrophe: '[ בגינגbəging] ‘would commit’ (presumably) for the regular
form [ בגינגאbəgingə], which would display the prescribed inflectional ending of
the subjunctive verb (cf. Lesson Seventeen); that same subjunctive verb inflection
is found in the same clause in the parallel verb [ לעגאlegə], but without apocopation
of the final syllable. It seems that apocopation is sometimes due to metrical consid-
erations, but it may sometimes simply be orthographic practice; thus it is some-
times difficult to decide between the pronunciation with or without the final vowel.
The conjunction that joins those two verbs—'—לעגא אונ' בגינגconventionally in
OLY also carries a final apostrophe, which has generally been explained as an
orthographical transfer from the common scribal practice in (Roman-alphabet)
MHG texts of abbreviating the cognate word und as un’ (which was nonetheless
pronounced in MHG as [unt]). It is unclear, however, whether the Yiddish word,
which is written as אוןin modEY and pronounced [un], was not already so pro-
nounced by the time that “Joseph the Righteous” was composed in the fourteenth
century. If so, then the apostrophe does not mark an abbreviation at all but is strictly
an orthographical convention for an underlying [un]. The spelling with the apos-
trophe '[ אונun] ‘and’ is thus conveniently distinguished from the spelling without
the apostrophe [ אוןon] ‘without.’3
Translation
I would like to [lit. will] sing marvels for you—if it were not too tedious for you—
how good Joseph tamed his heart in all the situations when his master’s wife
requested that he lie with her and commit a transgression.
3 Modern Western Yiddish seems in general to have the same form as modern Eastern Yiddish, i.e.
אוןwithout apostrophe; cf. Birnbaum (1979: 164–6 (texts 24–9)).
lesson two33
Grammar
Grammatical gender
Many languages have a grammatical feature—affecting primarily nouns, pronouns,
and adjectives—that has unfortunately come to be called “gender.”4 In some few
instances, that term makes sense, for example in distinguishing in English between
‘a man’ = he (masculine), ‘a woman’ = she (feminine), and ‘a table’ = it (neuter), but
such gender distinctions only obtain in the singular, since we do without it in the
plural, where they (common gender) suffices for masculine, feminine, and neuter
(‘men,’ ‘women,’ ‘tables’), whether in isolation or in a mixed gender group (e.g. ‘the
men and the women’ = they, or ‘the women and the tables’ = they); furthermore,
with first person (I/we) and second person (you, whether singular or plural), Eng-
lish does not distinguish gender (‘a woman and I’ (male or female) = we; ‘a woman/a
man/a woman and a man’ = you).
But the gender specification of English pronouns, although incomplete and
arbitrary as just indicated, is still somehow felt by native English speakers to be
“natural”—since he designates someone of masculine gender, and she someone of
feminine gender—and is generally (rather imprecisely) called “natural gender” or
“biological gender.” The primary issue concerning us here, however, is grammatical
gender, which is quite different and, thankfully, altogether absent in modern Eng-
lish.5 There are of course few nouns in any language—relative to the full number of
nouns in the language—that designate actually identifiable male and female crea-
tures, i.e. “biologically” gendered nouns: beyond the few dozen like man/woman,
boy/girl, grandfather/grandmother, steward/stewardess, lion/lioness, ram/ewe, etc.,
there are the other 100,000 nouns in English (estimate by the Oxford English Dic-
tionary) like book, automobile, idea, carrot, typewriter, helium, and so on, that have
no “natural” gender.
In standard modEY (as in German, Russian, French, Old English, etc.), however,
all nouns have grammatical gender, which in many instances determines their own
morphology (inflectional endings) and that of other words, such as the definite
article and adjectives, grammatically related to them. While modEY [ לערערlerər]
‘male teacher’ is both “naturally” and grammatically masculine, and [ לערעריןlerərn]
‘female teacher’ is both “naturally” and grammatically feminine, [ טישtiš] ‘table’ and
[ װאַנטvant] ‘wall’ obviously have no “natural” gender, although the former is gram-
matically masculine, while the latter is grammatically feminine, and [ ײנגלyingəl]
‘boy’ is “naturally” masculine and grammatically neuter, while [ װײַבלvaybəl] ‘young
4 Those readers who already know such a language may wish to skip or skim the following para-
graphs, which are designed to introduce the concept of grammatical gender to those readers to whom it
is unfamiliar. The same is true of the subsequent section on grammatical case: readers already familiar
with the concept may wish to skip or skim.
5 Even the few distinctions in gender that we take for granted in English are by no means universal,
of course: in Persian, interestingly, there is indeed no distinction in the 3rd person singular: he, she, and
it are all expressed by [ اوo], which as one might imagine, makes for culturally very interesting interpre-
tive gestures in medieval Arabic adaptations of medieval Persian erotic poetry, since Arabic can and
indeed must distinguish the “natural” genders of the 3rd-person singular pronouns.
34 a guide to old literary yiddish
Grammatical case
Many languages, such as Ancient Greek and modern Russian, have well-developed
systems of grammatical case, i.e. a set of inflectional modifications of nouns, adjec-
tives, and pronouns whose purpose is to indicate their grammatical function in any
given sentence. While Old English had a still robust but already weakening system
of case a millennium ago, modern English has at best scattered remnants. OLY
could be plotted somewhere in the middle: its case system was already further
eroded than that of Old English, but preserved more of a case system than has
modern English or modEY.
For the sake of readers for whom the grammatical category of case seems a for-
eign concept, a few examples of how it functions may illustrate. In modern English,
for instance, we can still distinguish he from him, the former functioning as the
subject of verbs (the performer of the action), the latter as the object (who suffers
the action); the same is true for she and her, and they and them. These distinctions
in the word form that indicate word function are generally designated “case” by
linguists. For this reason, after hearing the sentence She hit him, we know that he,
not she, has the bruise. Likewise, if we change the case forms of the two individuals
involved in this action without changing the word order, we do not recognize the
string *Her hit he as expressing the same idea or even as being an acceptable English
sentence. It is case (and, to a certain extent, word order) that makes clear to us who
is doing what to whom. There are also remnants of an indirect object case among
English pronouns, illustrated, for instance, in the colloquial, non-standard She gave
me it (standard: She gave it to me). Here we have the same subject as before, she, but
in addition we have both a direct object (what is being given) and an indirect object
6 In each case, these latter two nouns are neuter because of the diminutive suffix ()־ל, which is always
neuter in modern standard Yiddish. Dialectal usage in modEY varies: Lithuanian Yiddish has no neuter
gender, and thus דער ײנגלand די ווײַבל.
lesson two35
(the person to whom something is given). We can again check how it is specific case
forms that convey this information by changing the case forms of the three entities
involved, while preserving the word order of the utterance: *Her gave I it, which
scrambles the whole into quasi-Yoda-like nonsense.
In addition to the subjective, direct objective, and indirect objective case forms,
there is also more than a remnant of a possessive case in English, where it exists not
just—as in the subject, direct object, and indirect objects already discussed—in
pronouns (i.e. her career (hers)/his career (his)), but also in the ending ’s for nouns,
e.g. Jane’s career.
In the traditional linguistic terminology that will be used in this volume, the
subject case (she/he) will be designated the nominative case, the direct object case
(her/him) will be designated the accusative case, the indirect object case (her/him)
will be designated the dative case, and the possessive case (her (hers)/his, Jane’s) will
be designated the genitive case. As will soon become clear, each of these cases also
has functions beyond those just named.
A full case system would specifically designate the full range of functions of all
nouns, adjectives, and pronouns (Russian, for instance, has six cases, while Finnish
has fifteen). With the exception of the possessive /’s/ preserved in nouns, however,
modern English retains case distinctions essentially only in pronouns. If we were to
assign nouns to the grammatical slots of the initial example sentence—The woman
hit the man—no case information is present, so that if the nouns are reversed—The
man hit the woman—the sentence still makes perfect sense, but obviously the loca-
tion of the bruise and thus the sense is quite different. The reader will recall that
when we tried this reversal earlier with pronouns—which do show case—there was
no reversal of who did what to whom, but rather just nonsense. In modern English
pronouns, case still functions to show grammatical function (with an assist from
word order), while with modern English nouns, which have lost case inflection,
word order has assumed the place of case in expressing grammatical function. In
OLY, the case system, compromised as it already was, still functioned to a far greater
degree than it does in modern English, and thus enabled word order to remain
rather flexible.
Like modern English, OLY has only the barest remnants of the case system in
nouns, but has retained a fuller system for adjectives, and a relatively complete
system for pronouns and, most importantly, for the definite article, which, when
necessary, appears in connection with nouns and thereby shows their case func-
tion. Thus the ability to recognize the case forms of pronouns and the definite
article will be key in understanding who is doing what to or for whom in OLY; but
as in other languages, like English, that have a reduced case system, the word order
of the various elements also often plays a vital role in making sense of an OLY
sentence.
Let us consider the first sentence of the passage in this lesson as an example of
both case usage and word order: ‘ איך וויל אוך וונדר זינגןI would like to sing marvels for
you.’ The first word ‘ איךI’ is the nominative singular (common gender, i.e. it functions
for all genders), which functions as the subject of the sentence and is, as common7
There are exceptions to this rule of word order, especially in poetry (please pardon
the Poirot-like English syntax, employed here to mirror the Yiddish):
‘the noble, lady lovely’ (JtR11) די אידלא ורווא וול גטן
‘the warrior most magnificent’ (JtR28) דען דעגן אלזו ציר
Adjectives can also be substantivized, i.e. used as nouns: ( די ̌שונשטןJtR 43) ‘the fin-
est,’ which in this particular context must mean ‘the finest knives,’ since that is the
issue at hand. Or: ( די ווערדא די קלוגא וול גנינדאJtR50) ‘the worthy, [the] noble and most
bold [lady].’
Proceeding to the next level of complexity: the sentence. The syntax of the first
sentence of this lesson’s reading passage ( )איך וויל אוך וונדר זינגןcould be diagrammed
(in an ad hoc mode useful in the present context) as follows: Subject–Verb–Indirect
Object–Direct Object–Infinitive, which linguists would generally classify more
simply as SVO (Subject–Verb–Object). That shorthand will be useful to keep in
mind, since this perfectly standard word order in OLY is complemented by other
contrasting structures that are at least as common. They are encountered already in
this first reading selection but will be explicitly addressed later.
While basic OLY syntax (word order) is reasonably similar to that of modern
English, there is more permissible syntactic variation in OLY precisely because (as
noted earlier) the case system (generally) makes clear the function of nouns, pro-
nouns, adjectives, and definite articles no matter what their position in the sen-
tence. Thus the reader must pay attention to learning to recognize case forms as
they occur, in addition to noting the standard word order of OLY and the frequent
variations on that order.
Lesson Three
Glossary
Notes
As noted in the introduction, orthographical variation—spelling the same word in
various ways—is not uncommon in early periods of many languages’ textual his-
tory, including English (even until the nineteenth century) and certainly including
OLY. The first example of orthographical variation in this volume appears in JtR
4, 6, and 8: מישטטand מישטוט, the former rhyming with [ בטbat]. While, as noted
earlier, there is a surprising uniformity in Yiddish orthography of the period, the
reader will need to become accustomed to variations even at this juncture, and
particularly to recognizing which similar letter combinations represent variants of
the same word and which represent different words. Obviously the lessons in this
volume will provide those explanations for readers at the beginning stages.
The rhyme of מוכטאand ' אנטוכטmust have been inexact, due to the distinction in
the vowels of the penultimate syllables.
Translation
Graciously Joseph answered his beautiful mistress: “How might I bear this trans-
gression for ever more? I would do everything that I could to do your will, except
for allowing this transgression to burden my soul.” Then she went away and very
boldly/foolishly assembled all the worthy ladies who attended her. How graciously
the noble and lovely lady said:
Grammar
Personal pronouns
The first four lines of “Joseph the Righteous” (from Lesson Two) already include
seven of the forms of the personal pronoun, of all three “persons”—first person =
‘I’ (sg)/‘we’ (pl), second person = ‘you’ (sg + pl), and third person = ‘he/she/it’
(sg)/‘they’ (pl)—all three genders (masculine, feminine, neuter), both numbers
(singular and plural), and three of the four cases (nominative, dative, accusative):
Using the example of modern English, pronoun paradigms are generally presented
in charts in language textbooks:
singular plural
subjective objective possessive subjective objective possessive
The chart indicates the pronouns used as the subject of sentences: I walk, she walks,
they walk; as objects: Jane saw him, Jane saw us (direct object), Jane gave him the
book (indirect object), Jane spoke to me (object of a preposition); and as possessive
pronouns: That book is hers.
OLY has a more complex system of pronouns:
singular
acc dat gen nom
plural
acc dat gen nom
Familiarize yourself with these forms now and refer back to this chart frequently in
your constant review of past lessons, so that soon you will have inadvertently
memorized it. In learning the forms, make use of the similarities between the Eng-
lish and the OLY pronouns whenever possible: I–me–mine / איך–מיך–מי(י)ן.
modEY). Here is another chart that will seem aggravatingly complex. There is no
need to memorize it now—it is another chart that you will memorize by constant
reference to it as you progress through the lessons.
plural singular
n f m
Two types of variation are represented in this chart, the first grapho-phonemic (i.e.
a letter that is pronounced if present), the second orthographical (i.e. a letter that
does not affect the pronunciation whether present or absent):
(1) Final ־אin the masculine and neuter dative singular is a relatively infrequent
variation, but was likely pronounced (as [ə]) when present [demə]; the final
־אin the feminine and plural was just as likely not pronounced (i.e. [di] not
*[diə]).
(2) The non-final graphs /א/ and /ע/ are used relatively consistently in some
texts and not so consistently (or not at all) in others. Thus, while charts such
as this one imply consistency and uniformity in the forms, it should be noted
even now that there are variations, which will be identified as they occur in
the readings. For now, it is practically useful to learn these quasi-standard
forms.
Negation
There are two basic forms of negation in OLY: the negative indefinite article קייןand
the general negative ניכֿט/ניט. The negative indefinite article is used only (1) in place
of the singular indefinite article and (2) preceding negative indefinite plural nouns:
‘ דש דו קיין אנדר מן נעמשטthat you take no other husband’ (BZ14); קיין אנדר ווייפא צו נעמן
‘to take no other wife’ (BZ14). The standard usage of modEY, in which negation
requires both negative components, is also found, although infrequently, and gen-
erally not before the MY period: ‘ דיא הטן גאר קײני הױבטר ניטthey had no heads at all’
(Yos, Appendix 4, text 4).
The general negative may be used in two ways:
(1) to negate a whole clause, in which case, the negative follows the finite verb:
)Wh5( פרילך ווערןֵ איך קוינש ניט
lesson three43
איך הן דען אלר ליבשטן קנעכט דען קײן ורווא אי גוון :
זין אווגן אלז' דער שטערנ' זין הור אלזום אײן גולט .
דש אישט אימא מין חרצא ויל אושר מושן הולט :
חר גליכט אײמ' קונגא מיט זימא אן גזיכטא · 15
אונ' מיט זינן וורטן אלזא ער אײן לנט ̌שולדא בריכט' :
טוגנט אונ' ווערדקײט בֿולגט אימא צו אלן ציטן ·
טוגנט צו דער רעכטן הנט ווערדקײט צו דער לינקן זיטן :
יא בט איך אין דש ער אין מינן וורצא גרטן ·
וולדא בי מיר שלופֿן איך וולדא זין דינא וורטן : 20
כײנן וויש מוכטא מיר דש ני ג̌שחן ·
דש איך זין ליפליך אנטליץ רעכט מוכטא אן גזחן :
לווטר אונ' קלור זינט אימא די אווגן זין ·
ליכט אלזא דער מורגן שטערנ' ̌שונא אלזא דער זונן ̌שין :
מין חרצא ליט אין ברונשטן אונ' [ ] 25
אלזא הוט דער הילט גוט בטוונגן מיר [ ]לט
נו וול חר איר ורוון אונ' בֿולגט אלא מיר
איך וו[יל] אוך לושן ̌שוון דען דעגן אלזו ציר :
Glossary
]have 1s.pr.ind.irv [hon הן
]of all gen.pl [alər אלר
]dearest suprl.mas [libstən ליבשטן
]servant mas [kneχt קנעכט
]whom rel.pr.mas [den דען
]any/no (f)ns [keyn קײן
]ever adv [e אי
]gained/obtained 3s.prt.ind.sv5 [gəván גוון
]eyes ntnp [óugən אווגן
]as/like adv [alz/alzom אלז'/אלזום
])star mns [štern(ə שטערנ(א)
]hair ntns [hor הור
]a indef.art.ntns [eyn אײן
](piece of) gold ntns [gold גולט
]is 3s.pres.ind.irv [ist אישט
46 a guide to old literary yiddish
illegible in manuscript ][
hero mns [held] הילט
has 3s.pr.ind.irv [hot] הוט
well adv [gut] גוט
tamed/coerced/captured pr.prt.sv5 [bətvungən] בטוונגן
now adv [nu] נו
come on!/let’s go! interj [vol χér] וול חר
allow/permit inf.sv10 [losən] לושן
behold/view inf [šóuən] ̌שוון
hero/warrior mas [degən] דעגן
magnificent mas [tsir] ציר
Notes
There are two occurences of the form חרin this passage where one would not gener-
ally expect the letter ח: for expected ער/‘ הרhe’ (JtR15) and ‘ הרhither’ (JtR 27). In the
first instance, the substitution may be a matter of deliberate deformation of the
word for the sake of the alphabetical acrostic carried by the first line of each couplet
(100A). But it seems just as likely that in both cases (as elsewhere in this manu-
script) the forms with חare simply variants ‘ חר ־ הר ־ ערhe’ and ‘ חר ־ הרhither,’ paral-
leling the pronunciation of the cognate words in contemporaneous Low and
Central German dialects.
The rhyme of the couplet JtR15–16 ' בריכט/ אנגיזיכטאpresents an interesting
problem. The first word is a neuter, singular noun, while the second must be the
infinitive with an apparently apocopated ending, eliding what would seem the
mandatory final ן- of the infinitive marker [-ən]. But it would also seem here that
there can be no full rhyme, unless (1) the final ־אof אנגיזיכטאis not pronounced,
or (2) the marker of apocope /'/ following ' בריכטrepresents [-ə] not [-ən] (which
is a typical feature of some southwestern dialects of modern German, for
instance). Or perhaps full rhyme is not necessary here, the rhyme being borne by
[ ־יכט־-iχt-].
In l. 17, subject–verb agreement is lacking after the compound subject (one
would expect )בֿולגן.
Translation
I have the most genial servant whom any lady ever obtained: his eyes [are] like
stars, his hair like gold, so that my heart loves him beyond all measure. He is like a
king in his face, and with his dignities like one who should be the ruler of a land.
Virtue and dignity follow him at all times: virtue at the right hand, and dignity at
the left. Indeed I entreated him to sleep with me in my herb garden; I wanted to wait
for him there. I was quite incapable of bringing it about that I might gaze at his
lovely face. Bright and clear are his eyes: brilliant as the morning star and beautiful
as the rays of the sun. My heart had been set aflame and [ . . . ] Thus had the good
hero overcome my [ . . . ]. Now gather around, ladies, and come, all of you, and follow
me. I want to let you look at this magnificent warrior.
48 a guide to old literary yiddish
Grammar
Dative of possession
While possession is generally expressed by means of the genitive, e.g. ‘his eyes /
their hands / that is hers,’ Yiddish may also make use of the dative in some restricted
situations to indicate possession: ( לווטר אונ' קלור זינט אימא די אווגן זיןJtR23) *‘Bright and
clear are to him the eyes his’ = ‘His eyes are bright and clear,’ and: בֿור שניטן אונ' בֿור
( וונדט וורדן אין די הינדאJtR49) *‘carved up and lacerated became to them the hands’ =
‘Their hands became carved up and lacerated.’ In the first example, pleonastically,
both the genitive and the dative possessive are present. This usage is quite simple
and straightforward, and once recognized as a grammatical possibility, it should
never cause a problem in reading comprehension.
Adjective inflections
Adjectives have two distinct syntactic functions: as attributives (‘the intelligent
woman . . . ’) and as predicates (‘the woman is intelligent’). Attributive adjectives
directly modify a noun and in OLY generally precede that noun (an exception has
already been noted in an earlier lesson), and theoretically always agree with it in
gender, number, and case (even though inflections do not always display that
agreement). Predicate adjectives are generally uninflected and thus display no
agreement with the noun in gender, number, or case; they are generally placed on
the side of the copula (the verb ‘to be’) opposite the subject.
Attributive adjective:
( די גבֿלדנן שטױלאJtR34) ‘the folding chairs’
Predicate adjective:
( לווטר אונ' קלור זינט אימא די אווגן זיןJtR23) ‘His eyes are bright and clear’
( וויר עש אוך ניכט צו לנקJtR1) ‘if it were not too tedious for you’
( זיא ווש זער דעמױטיגBZ 11) ‘she was very modest’
There was a general duality of inflections for attributive adjectives in early West
Germanic languages, including OLY (which disappeared from English after the
Old English period but has persisted through the history of Yiddish and German),
depending on whether or not the adjective followed a determiner (i.e. a definite
article or demonstrative) that itself clearly indicated gender, number, and case. If
preceded by such a “strong” marker, then the adjective did not duplicate that
marker and took a “weak” ending. If the adjective occurred without such a “strong”
determiner, then the adjective itself assumed the “strong” marker. Thus there are
two adjective inflections, generally designated “strong” and “weak.”1 The inflec-
tional endings of the strong and weak adjectives are:
1 Although the preceding description seeks to make the traditional 19th-century philological termi-
nology, “strong” and “weak,” somehow relevant to the adjective endings, the reader should be aware that
the terms signify nothing more than that there are two types of adjective endings, one set that follows a
determiner and one set that does not follow a determiner. They could just as easily have been designated
“type A” and “type B” or “blue” and “green” adjective endings.
lesson four49
Examples of strong adjectives: ( פילילינא קושןJtR33) ‘silk pillows’; ̌שונא רוטא או̌פל
(JtR41) ‘beautiful red apples’; ( קלורן וויןJtR57) ‘pure wine’; ( בֿור גרושר ליבאJtR65) ‘for/
because of great love’; ( היפשי רענטנישRid) ‘fine riddles’; ( מיט ורױליכֿם מוטRec11) ‘in
good spirits’; ( ור גרושר ליפאBZ11) ‘of/from great love.’ The reader should nonetheless
be aware that uninflected strong adjective forms are encountered with some fre-
quency: ‘ ליב זוןdear son’ (BZ12), ‘ גרוש ָממוֹןgreat wealth’ (BZ13).
Examples of weak adjectives: ( די גבֿלדנן שטױלאJtR34) ‘the folding chairs’; די הירא די
( טוגנטהֿפט די ריכאJtR36) ‘the exalted one [mistress], the noble and lordly one’;
( דיזא ̌שונן ורווןJtR38) ‘these beautiful ladies’; ( מיט דינר שני ווישן הנטJtR56) ‘with your
snow-white hand.’ Weak nominative singular forms are generally without ending:
‘ דא זגט דער אלטthen the old man said’; ‘ דש הייש וושרthe hot water.’ Other weak case
forms are occasionally also without ending (‘ דיא שױן ְב ִריעָ הthe beautiful Briyo,’ femi-
nine singular accusative). It is a question whether in JtR36 the word טוגנטהֿפטcan
really lack the expected inflectional [ə] that is represented in the adjectives before
and after it in the series by the letter ־א. It seems likely that OLY sometimes omitted
graphic representation of the unstressed final vowel [ə] (as will be seen in other
instances as well). One must also bear in mind that the rhythm and rhyme of poetic
form often cause the omission or deformation of expected endings.
A subset of the weak declension is the so-called “mixed declension,” which fol-
lows the indefinite article and related words ( קיין,)איין. This declension differs from
the weak declension in three instances only, where the strong inflections appear:
masculine nominative singular ([ ־ר-ər]) and neuter nominative/accusative singu-
lar ([ ־ש-əs]): ( דיר גצעמ' וול אײן הירש קוניק ריכאJtR68) ‘it would be proper for you to rule
a noble kingdom.’
Lesson Five
Glossary
Translation
“Keep silent about this matter!” shouted the ladies. “How might a little Jew delight
us so?! He simply must be put on display,” said the ladies then.
All together they arose and went away with her. She ordered silk pillows and
folding chairs well inlaid with gold to be brought in. Demurely the ladies sat, all
together. Then the mistress, the noble and lordly one, spoke: “Joseph, my servant,”
said the lady then, “Come here and stand with courtliness before these beautiful
ladies.” Quickly he sped to do her bidding. O how courtly did the hero stride forth.
Grammar
Familiar and polite mode of address
As is the case in many languages, including modEY, OLY classifies interlocutors
into one of two groups with respect to the level of the familiarity of the relationship.
Modern language textbooks often include a description such as: one addresses
familiarly family members, intimate friends, children, God, and animals, while all
others are addressed formally. In OLY literature, especially in those genres adapted
from the courtly culture of aristocratic Christian society, the domain of formality is
often even more expansively plotted, including family members and sometimes
even spouses.
This linguistic practice affects both the pronouns and verbs employed. In modEY,
for instance, one would address someone familiarly with ?וואס מאַכסטו ָ and formally
with ?וואס מאַכט איר,
ָ in each meaning ‘How are you?’ The same is true in OLY, where,
as in modEY, the second person singular form of both verbs and pronouns are used
for familiar address, while the second person plural forms are used for formal
address. Thus in JtR29, the Egyptian ladies address Potiphar’s wife (singular) with
what is ostensibly the second plural form ‘ שוויגטbe silent,’ but here used as the for-
mal mode of address for a singular addressee.
Possessive adjectives
Modern Yiddish has all but lost the category of the possessive adjective, retaining
only the uninflected genitive possessive pronoun for all cases of the singular, while
generally adding an adjectival ־עinflection to mark the plural. OLY seems already
to have tended in that direction away from the inflected possessive adjective. Thus
while it is certainly possible to find inflected forms of the possessive (i.e. an adjec-
tival form), it is at this point difficult to say with certainty whether the uninflected
form of the possessive (i.e. a genitive pronominal form) is statistically more com-
mon. The base forms of the possessive adjectives are:
plural singular
[unzər] אונזר [min/mayn] מי(י)ן 1
[ïər/aÿər] אייאר/אוור [din/dayn] די(י)ן 2
[zin/zayn] זי(י)ן m
[ir] איר common [ir] איר f 3
[zin/zayn] זי(י)ן n
Theoretically, the possessive adjective declined as did the OLY indefinite article איין
and the negative indefinite ( קייןsee Lesson Seven), but in practice, the inflections
were quite inconsistently applied. To illustrate the variety of usage, consider the
following examples:
Inflected:
JtR15 ‘ מיט זימא אן גזיכטאwith respect to his face’ (masc.dat.sg.)
JtR16 ‘ אונ' מיט זינן וורטןand with respect to his values’ (nt.dat.pl.)
JtR48 ‘ זי ̌שילטן אירא או̌פלאthey peeled their apples’ (masc.acc.pl.)2
JtR63 ‘ אירא ליכטא וארוואtheir bright color [complexion]’ (fem.nom.sg.)
JtR64 ‘ אין אירן הינדןin their hands’ (fem.dat.pl.)
BZ9 ‘ נוך זײנום עלטר ואטרafter his grandfather’ (masc.dat.sg.)
BZ10 ‘ אן זיינום שטולon his chair/throne’ (masc.dat.sg.)
2 But see the previous line of the poem (listed under “uninflected”).
54 a guide to old literary yiddish
Uninflected:
JtR47 ‘ ̌שילט אוור או̌פלאpeel your apples’ (masc.acc.pl.)
JtR52 ‘ אוור וינגראyour fingers’ (masc.acc.pl.)
BZ9 ‘ אל זײן דינרall his servants’ (masc.acc.pl.)
BZ13 ‘ מיין טוכטרmy daughter’ (fem.acc.sg.)
Rec14 ‾מה
‾( שרײב איר אן איר רעכטי ברושט אfem.acc.sg.) ‘write on her right
breast ima’
Notes
While the the verbal prefix ג(י)־is generally identified as the prefix that marks the
past participle, it frequently also appears with other forms of verbs—almost as if an
optional prefix—seemingly without either altering the meaning of the unprefixed
form or marking a particular grammatical form. Here, for instance, the infinitive
( ג̌שילןJtR44) ‘peel’ and the preterite indicative ( גנםJtR46) ‘took’ bear the prefix with
no alteration of the meaning that would be expressed by the unprefixed forms ̌שילן
and נם. Later in this text, the sense of the infinitive ‘ אן גזחןlook at’ is unaffected by
the prefix: ( זי מוכטן אין בֿור גרושר ליבא ניכט מיר אן גזחןJtR65) ‘because of their great love,
they could no longer look at him.’ Further examples will be encountered in later
reading passages.
In the phrase ( ̌שווט ווערדן ורווןJtR51) ‘look, worthy ladies,’ it seems that a vocative
(direct address) plural case form (ending in ־ן-en) distinct from the nominative
(e.g. )ווערדאappears. One might imagine this usage as a scribal error, except that it
recurs with some frequency: ‘ דורך ג' ליבן לױטא הי קיזט בילדא ביfor God’s sake, dear
people, take this as your model’ (JtR73); ‘ פומײא איר ליבן גיזעליןPumay, you dear com-
panions’ (Pum1, Appendix 4, text 6), below. This apparent quasi-weak adjective
ending as vocative case in OLY requires further scholarly attention.
OLY makes use of impersonal constructions to a greater extent than does mod-
ern English, which has a few expressions such as ‘it is raining/snowing,’ but lacks
the broad range of such constructions that one finds in many other languages. Thus
two expressions encountered in this lesson’s passage may seem to the English
reader somehow “incomplete”: ( זי ווישטן ניכט זעלבר ווי אין ווש ג̌שחןJtR54), literally:
*‘they themselves knew not how to them had happened,’ which means in idiomatic
English: ‘they themselves did not quite understand what had happened to them.’
Unlike in the sentence ‘it is raining,’ this impersonal construction lacks even the
lesson six57
expression of the expletive (“dummy”) subject it, and it seems not even a matter of
what but rather how might have happened to them. Puzzled readers need only
acknowledge that the structure is unfamiliar, realize that it and others like it are
normal and idiomatic in OLY, and take comfort in the fact that they will be identi-
fied as they occur in this volume, by the completion of which such structures will
have become quite familiar.
On the quasi-passive construction of the sentence ̌שונא רוטא או̌פל היש זי חר בֿורא טרגן
(JtR41) ‘she ordered beautiful red apples brought forth,’ see the discussion of the
passive voice in Lesson Fourteen.
The normal word order for the partitive genitive (which specifies a part of a whole)
in modern English and OLY is: head noun (the part) + genitive (the whole), e.g. ‘some
+ of the group’ or ‘three + of my friends.’ In JtR46, the order of elements is reversed:
‘ דער מעשר אײנשof the knives + one’ = ‘one of the knives.’ In this particular form, the
order may initially seem strange. Perhaps it would help here if one were to think of
the normal syntax of a possessive genitive, in which the order genitive + head noun is
quite normal: ‘Jane’s and Sally’s diplomas,’ ‘their diplomas,’ ‘the women’s diplomas.’
Translation
She had beautiful red apples brought forth that would give the worthy ladies much
delight. “Bring forth the knives—you should choose the finest ones—so that these
worthy ladies can peel their apples with them.” The servant came quickly with the
knives. Each of the ladies took one of the knives. “Peel your apples,” said the lady then.
They peeled their apples and gazed at Joseph: their hands became lacerated and
wounded. Then the worthy, noble and most bold lady said: “Now look, worthy ladies,
how you are all so inflamed that you have cut your fingers most exceedingly.”
They were quite embarrassed and began to glance around. They themselves did
not quite understand what had happened to them.
Grammar
The OLY verbal system
The OLY verbal system presents no conceptual surprises to the Anglophone reader,
although it retains fuller systems of some forms than does modern English. The OLY
system comprises the following significant forms (illustrative examples in English):
Mood:
infinitive: (to) eat
imperative: eat!
indicative: he eats
subjunctive: if he ate less . . .
Tense:
present: he eats
preterite: he ate
present perfect: he has eaten
58 a guide to old literary yiddish
There is no need to panic at the sight of this verbal system (the contents of which
are after all familiar to all readers of English). The OLY verbal system—which dif-
fers in significant respects—will be presented gradually over the course of this
volume, such that readers become familiar with the more frequent forms earlier,
but eventually gain a comprehensive sense of the entire system. As the system’s
components are gradually introduced, readers may return to this chart and enter
OLY examples of the categories, thus conceptually reinforcing their mastery of the
system.
The system of English verb inflections is actually slightly more complex than
what was just outlined,1 although even in this abstracted form it may already seem
complex enough to some students of the language. Even so, it is not as daunting as,
for instance, the ancient Greek verb, which has full systems of indicative, subjunc-
tive, and optative in a full range of tenses, voices (active, passive, and middle), and
numbers (singular, plural, and dual). In comparison to that Greek verb system, and
indeed even compared to the modern English verb, the OLY system might indeed
seem rather rudimentary (good news for learners of OLY). As was the case with
other early Germanic languages (Old English, OHG, etc.), the OLY verb essentially
had only two tenses: past and “not-past” (although other compound forms devel-
oped relatively early). The “not-past” was commonly used for the present, as well as
the future.2
In addition to the infinitive (‘to eat’), imperative (which expresses a command:
‘eat!’), and indicative (which expresses the sense of the verb as factual: ‘I eat’)
moods, OLY also had a subjunctive mood, which expressed the sense of the verb as
doubtful or potential (‘If he ate . . . ’), in addition to other functions that will be
introduced later. While Old English had an extensive system of subjunctive forms,
modern English retains only vestiges: ‘If I were [present subjunctive] a rich man . . . ’
as opposed to ‘I am [present indicative] a rich man.’
Today she walks to the library. Yesterday she walked . . . Over the years she has walked . . .
Today she sleeps all day. Yesterday she slept all day . . . Over the years she has slept . . .
Strong verbs, on the other hand, form the past tense and past participle by altering
the root vowel of the present tense. The principal parts of (one class of) strong verbs
may be illustrated as follows:
Today the ship sinks. Yesterday the ship sank. Over the years many ships have sunk.
Today she swims well. Yesterday she swam well. Over the years she has swum well.
“Strong” verbs now form what seems an exceptional category in modern English
and are often designated “irregular verbs,” but in the earliest periods of Germanic
language prehistory, they probably far outnumbered the “weak” verbs, and in fact
there are still many of them remaining in modern English besides sink and swim,
like drive, lead, stick, show, go, choose, bind, bear, give, whose three principal parts
native and non-native learners of English are often encouraged to chant in order to
imprint them in the memory. In any case, they are not really irregular, insofar as
they are in fact rule-governed and belong to identifiable classes.
In early Germanic languages (such as Old English and MHG) there was a fourth
distinct principal part, for the preterite plural (as distinct from the preterite singu-
lar). That system was reduced in the history of English and German, such that there
is now a maximum of three forms.4 In OLY there are generally also three principal
parts.5 In modEY the system has been reduced further, since the preterite as a tense
3 The distinction “strong” vs. “weak” in verbs has nothing to do with the “strong”/“weak” distinction
in adjectives, except insofar as in each case one might imagine that the “strong” forms are more distinc-
tively (“strongly”) marked, while the “weak” forms are somehow less distinctively (“weakly”) marked—
a very tenuous distinction. One should keep in mind that the classification as “strong” or “weak” with
respect to verbs is inherent in the individual verbs themselves, i.e. give is always strong with the preterite
form gave, while walk is always weak with the preterite form walked. On the other hand, the classifica-
tion as “strong” or “weak” when applied to adjectives merely describes a particular instance, since any
OLY adjective may be declined as “strong” or “weak” depending on whether it is preceded by a deter-
miner or not.
4 For historical reasons, some verbs in modern English no longer have three distinct vowels in their
prinicipal parts: ‘Today I hold the reins’ / ‘Yesterday I held . . . ’ / ‘For a long time I have held . . . ’
5 Although there sometimes seems to be at least at least ambiguous orthographical indication that
there is a distinction between the preterite singular and plural root in some few verbs. There may be
60 a guide to old literary yiddish
has been eliminated altogether (in both strong and weak verbs). The OLY preterite
appears, for instance, in the expression . . . ( זי בט איןJtR3) ‘she bade / asked / requested
him to . . . ,’ employing the preterite of a strong verb, which can be expressed in
modEY only with a present perfect form, as . . . האט אים געבעטן ָ זי.
The existence of the preterite tense in OLY causes perhaps the greatest conster-
nation of any grammatical category for speakers of modEY when they encounter
OLY texts, for in narrative texts (which generally use the preterite tense) they sud-
denly find unfamiliar forms of otherwise familiar verbs in practically every sen-
tence. Such readers must, therefore, pay close attention to learning preterite forms
of otherwise familiar forms at their first appearance in the texts and glossaries.6
On the basis of reconstructed proto-Germanic evidence, linguists have classified
Germanic strong verbs into seven distinct classes (in addition to various sub-
classes) and all modern Germanic languages, including Yiddish, preserve vestiges
of that class system, although enough modification of them has taken place over
the course of the two millennia since the proto-Germanic period that it makes little
practical sense to preserve that sevenfold proto-Germanic classification in linguis-
tic descriptions of modEY; indeed, already for OLY that classification system is
irrelevant, since it does not correspond to the forms of the verbs extant in the texts.
Furthermore, since the present volume is not a comprehensive reference grammar
of OLY but an introductory textbook, the only practical value of a system of clas-
sification for strong verbs would be if it aided in the learning of the forms. Just as a
familiarity with the patterns of the succession of vowels (G Ablautreihen) in strong
verbs aids in learning them (e.g. drink–drank–drunk, weave–wove–woven, strike–
struck–stricken), it will be useful to the reader to recognize patterns in OLY strong
verbs. For that reason alone, a pragmatic (re)classification of the patterns of OLY
strong verbs has been made for this volume, so that whenever a reader comes
across an indicator such as “sv5” (strong verb, class 5) in the gloss of the word זינגןor
“scv2” (stem-changing strong verb, class 2) in the gloss on the word שטערבן, refer-
ence may be made to Appendix 2, where there is a list of all OLY strong verbs (as
well as modal, anomalous, and irregular weak verbs) found in this volume, includ-
ing those principal parts of each verb that actually occur in the readings, along with
an indication of the pattern of vowels characteristic of the particular classes. Thus
the reader finds in Appendix 2 that זינגן, as a class 5 strong verb, displays the pattern
i–a–u in its present, preterite, and past participle— —זינגן ־ זנג ־ גזונגןjust as does the
cognate English verb: sing–sang–sung. The reader is encouraged to make use of
Appendix 2 as frequently as necessary in order to recognize verb forms and begin
to imprint the patterns in memory.
remnants of the double preterite principal parts (sg. + pl.) in such forms as [ שפרך שפרוכןšpraχ / šproχən
~ MHG sprâchen] in this earliest codex of the OY period. But it seems likely that the two forms collapse
into a single one rather soon in the history of OLY.
6 In southern German dialects, the preterite declined in favor of the present perfect as the vehicle of
the past tense as early as the 14th century (Paul 1975: ¶153). Likewise, on the basis of oral testimony of
Zimlin of Ulm recorded in the early 15th century, Jacobs (2005: 44) suggests that already in the OMY
period, spoken Yiddish generally employed the present perfect tense, not the preterite, to express the
past; that text is transcribed in Birnbaum (1979: 153, text 9) (caveat lector: in a world in which Roman-
alphabet transcriptions from Yiddish are routinely quite bizarre, Birnbaum’s system is all but
otherworldly).
lesson six61
Adverb formation
While many OLY adjectives in their uninflected forms may be used as adverbs, there
are also various other means of forming adverbs. One common method is to suffix
[ ־ן-ən] to the base of an adjective: ‘ אינדליכןquickly,’ ‘ גרינגןeasily,’ ‘ רי̌שליכןspeedily,’
‘ גצוגנליכןcourtly.’ Another method is to add ־אto the adjectival base: ‘ דרוטאswiftly.’
Glossary
Translation
Blessed be he who carries this maḥzor into the synagogue.
Or: May a good day dawn/happen for whoever carries this maḥzor into the
synagogue.
Or: A good day to him, whoever it might be, who carries this maḥzor into the
synagogue.
Note
The indefinite relative pronoun ְשוַ ירis a compound of the generalizing prefix ש־
‘-ever’ and the relative pronoun ווֵ ר/‘ ווערwho/which’ (~ MHG swer ‘whoever’).
Lesson Seven
Glossary
Note
The representation of ‘ גוטGod’ by '( גJtR60) may seem a simple abbreviation, but in
ancient Jewish cultural tradition (and thence also in early Jewish-Christian and
thence Christian) usage, the divine name and the words used to designate the
Hebrew God were tabuized early, such that written representations of the names
were deliberately distorted. Just as the personal name of the deity represented by
the unvoweled יהוהin the Torah was provided with the vowel pointing of ֲאדֹנָ י
(H ‘lord’) to indicate that that word should be substituted for the name when spo-
ken aloud,1 so were there further stages of distortion to prevent the inadvertent
pronunciation of the name or designation that might constitute the use of the name
“in vain.” In OLY texts that practice is also quite widespread, such that the word גוט
is often overlined ()̅ג̅ו̅ט, or its initial letter is overlined or followed by an apostrophe-
like mark (' ג/ ;)̅גthis practice is continued in contemporary pious Anglophone
usage in the orthographic convention G-d.
Translation
“Joseph, my servant,” said the lady quickly then, “now serve these ladies drinks
with your snow-white hands.” He poured them mead and pure wine, which he
offered to them there. He was very embarrassed and blushed from shame. He
served the ladies drinks with his white hands. The ladies gazed at his eyes; his
heart he had sent up to God. He was serving drinks to the ladies at this same
moment. They all gazed at Joseph while holding their goblets to their lips. Their
1 This practice led to the later Protestant misconstrual of the consonants of יהוהwith the vowels of ֲאדֹנָ י
as the actual name of God, thus “inventing” the widespread Protestant designation ‘Jehovah.’
lesson seven65
bright complexions had gone quite pale, and the golden goblets in their hands
sank slowly downward. Because of their great love, they could no longer look at
him. They had to tell the whole truth to his mistress. They stood up, all together,
and kissed him on the head. They said: “It would be proper for you to rule a noble
kingdom.”
Grammar
Infinitive (present active)
The characteristic mark of the Yiddish infinitive is a final ־ןadded to the verb stem:
The OLY infinitive, as the English infinitive, generally occurs with a preposition: צו
‘ זיא היבט אן צו זינגן — זינגןshe begins to sing.’ As a class, the modal verbs (Lesson
Twenty) are in this respect exceptional: ‘ זיא קן זינגןshe can sing.’ In some other verbs,
which will be noted as necessary, the preposition is also lacking.
plural singular
[-ən] ־ן [-(ə)] )־(א 1
[-(ə)t] ־ט [-(ə)st] ־שט 2
[-ən] ־ן [-t] ־ט 3
plural singular
[zingən] זינגן [zing(ə)] )זינג(א 1
[zing(ə)t] זינגט [zing(ə)st] זינגשט 2
[zingən] זינגן [zingt] זינגט 3
2 Verb paradigms in this volume are always presented in the following format (with right-to-left
reversal for Yiddish paradigms):
singular plural
Relative pronouns
While the relative pronoun in modern English is quite simple—who (subjective),
whose (possessive), and whom (objective) for humans and substituting which/that
for both subjective and objective for non-humans3—and modEY is even simpler in
its universal use of וואס,
ָ the relative pronoun in OLY is inflected for case, number,
and gender, as the example in JtR10 may serve to illustrate: אל די ווערדן ורוון די בי איר
‘ וורן גזעשןall the worthy ladies who attended her,’ where the relative pronoun (refer-
ring to females) is common gender, nominative, plural. Before any readers suffer
too severely from the expectation of yet another full paradigm of forms to be
learned, let them take comfort in the fact that the forms of the relative pronoun in
OLY are identical to those of the definite article (see Lesson Three), which, by now,
the diligent reader has already almost committed to memory.4
There is, however, just as in modEY, an alternative form: וועלכ־, which is inflected
as a strong adjective:
plural singular
n f m
[velχə] וועלכא [velχ(ə)s] )[ וועלכ(שvelχ(ə)] )[ וועלכ(אvelχ(ə)r] ) וועלכ(רnom
[velχər] וועלכר [velχəs[ [ וועלכשvelχər] וועלכר [velχəs] וועלכשgen
[velχən] וועלכן [velχəm[ [ וועלכםvelχər] [ וועלכרvelχəm] וועלכםdat
[velkχə] וועלכא [velχəs] וועלכש ]velχə[ וועלכא [velχən] וועלכןacc
These forms are quite rare until the late MY period. Final -ə and -s are often represented
by the spelling variants ־יand ( ־זhere and in the other inflectional endings). And,
as always, one must reckon with routine simplification, i.e. omission of inflections.
Indefinite article
The indefinite article a (a knife, a lady) is inflected in Yiddish for gender and case.
It logically occurs only in the singular, but there are plural forms for other so-called
איין-words, such as the negative indefinite קיין, which is used here to complete the
paradigm:
plural singular
n f m
[keynə] קיינא [eyn] [ אייןeynə] איינא [eyn] אייןnom
[keynər] [ קיינרeyn(ə)s] [ איינשeynər] [ איינרeyn(ə)s] איינשgen
[keynə(n)] קיינן/[ קיינאeymə] [ איימאeynər] [ איינרeymə] 5 איימאdat
[keynə] קיינא [eyn] [ אייןeynə] איינא [eynən] איינןacc
3 This distinction between human and non-human has disappeared in many dialects of modern
English around the world, both formal and informal; it seems on the decline even in strictly formal
usage in the US, where it is still regularly found as a characteristic of formal style.
4 There is no direct use of the genitive (‘whose’) as a relative pronoun in OLY.
5 The form אמייאresults from an earlier form that assimilated an [m] and [n] brought together by
syncope of an unstressed medial syllable: [eynəmə > eynmə < eymə].
lesson seven67
As the attentive reader will have already noticed from usage in the reading pas-
sages, the inflectional endings of the indefinite article, while not exactly optional,
are likewise not consistently present.6
Glossary
6 Further examples of uninflected forms from earlier and later readings: ‘ קיין ורוואnot any woman’
(JtR12); ‘ אײן גרושי חכמהa great piece of wit’ (Rid); ‘ אונ' [זי] הטן אײן צנקand [they] had a quarrel’ (BZ10); אין
‘ אײן קנטin a jug’ (BZ10); ‘ מן זול דיר אױך אײן ֵחלֶ ק געבןone ought also to give you a single share’ (BZ10); אײן
‘ ֹרוצֵ ַֿח דער אײן דר הר‾ג‾טa murderer who kills (some)one . . .’ (Rec11); ‘ נאם ער זיך אײן קרנקהײט אןhe became ill’
[or: ‘he feigned an illness’] (BZ12); ‘ איין שנדa disgrace’ (BZ13); ‘ איין אנדריanother [bride]’ (BZ13); דש דו קיין
‘ אנדר מן נעמשטthat you take no other husband’ (BZ14); ‘ קיין אנדר ווייפא צו נעמןto take no other wife’ (BZ14).
7 Unlike the situation of most contemporaneous Roman-alphabet texts, it is not generally possible to
date Ashkenazic Hebrew-alphabet texts during the late medieval and early modern periods strictly on
the basis of paleographical analysis.
68 a guide to old literary yiddish
Notes
Parallel to the archaic (Shakespearean) usage—‘I must away,’ OLY may delete a verb
of motion after a modal verb, in contexts in which that particular sense is clear: וואו
וואו זאל איך הער/ ‘ זאל איך היןTo where should I [go]? From where should I [come]?’
The suffixed ־שin ll. 2, 3, and 5 is an adverbial marker, perhaps an originally geni-
tive דש, here meaning ‘of that, for that reason.’
The interpretation of דא שֿפטof l. 6 is troubled. The all-but-invisible text is at
precisely this point even less visibly distinct than elsewhere, and previous scholars
have more or less plausibly read the second word as: ‘ שפיטpeek/peer/peep,’ שפּייט
‘mock,’ and ‘ שפּירטfeel/perceive.’ Under ultraviolet light, it seems most likely שֿפט.
One might interpret דא שֿפטas a degeminating spelling of דאש שֿפט, a peculiar and
speculative interpretation at best, but to my mind an improvement on the no less
speculative interpretations of my predecessors: ‘the most darling beloved whom
I have on this earth causes that.’ Most convincing, however, would be to construe
the verb שפןin the sense ‘command/order,’ commonly found in contemporaneous
German (cf. Lexer and Grimm), which would then eliminate the speculative
degemination.8
Since the definite article preceding the adjectival form דיא הערץ אליר ליבשט מייןis
feminine, one would expect ליבשטalso to bear a feminine inflection, and in a strict
sense so should מיין, although, as has already been seen seen, possessive adjectives
often lack expected inflections, especially if postposed (i.e. following the modified
noun).
Translation
Whither am I to go [from here]? Whence am I to come [to here]? Where am I to
turn? I am inflamed. My heart is ablaze. I can find no peace. Here rules the most
darling beloved whom I have on this earth.
Glossary
now adv [nu] נו
consider/ponder/attend imp.pl [prïvt] פרױבֿט
great adv [miχl] מיכל
was successful 3s.prt.ind.sv5 + dat [gəláng] גלנק
the hero succeeded [dem(ə) heldə gəláng] דעם(א) הילדא גלנק
only, by no other means than adv [nivan] נוון
soon adv [kïrtsləχ] קורצליך
thereafter adv [dernóχ] דר נוך
won/gained 3s.prt.ind.sv5 [gəván] גוון
power mas [gəvált] גוולט
over prp [ïbər] אובר
Egyptian prop.adj [yiptən] ײפטן
lands nta[d?]p [landən] לנדן
manifold/diverse pred.adj [mánigfalt] מניק ואלט
dear mnp [libən] ליבן
people pl. only mnp [laÿtə] לױטא
herewith/from this adv [hi . . . bi] בי. . . הי
choose imp.pl.sv8 [kizt] קיזט
example/symbol ntas [bildə] בילדא
bodies mnp [libə] ליבא
chaste pred.adj [kušə/këšə] קו̌שא
be inf [zi] זי = זין
be 3s.subj.ir.sv [vest] וועזט
is [=will be] granted/bestowed 3s.pr.ind.scv3 [virt tsu teylə] ווירט צו טײלא
70 a guide to old literary yiddish
Note
There seem to be multiple issues in the syntax of l. 74: דש איר אוור ליבא ̌שולט קו̌שא זי.
The first issue is the ambiguity of the word ליבא, which could conceivably be the
plural of ליבthe masculine noun for ‘body’ or the singular of the feminine noun ליבא
‘love.’ The second issue is what the subject of the finite verb ̌שולטmight be; the verb
itself might be third person singular or second person plural. If the former, then the
subject must be ‘ ליבאlove’ but not ‘ ליבאbodies.’ If the latter, then the subject can only
be איר. In the former case, the sense would thus have to be something like ‘so that
your love ought to be chaste with respect to her/itself ’ (construing אירeither as
the dative, feminine singular pronoun, referring to an unidentified female, or as the
reflexive of ‘ ליבאlove’). In the latter case, the sense would have to be something like:
‘so that you ought to be chaste/pure/modest toward (or: with respect to) your bod-
ies’ (construing אוור ליבאas a dative plural), or ‘so that you ought to be chaste with
respect to your love.’ The problem could of course be solved by simply declaring איר
a scribal error and excising it, producing: ‘that your bodies ought to be chaste,’ but
such emendation of the text should not be undertaken lightly. There is a minor
additional problem, however, in that, following the modal verb ̌שולט, an infinitive is
to be expected, thus זיןnot זי. As has already been observed, the OLY infinitive form
may omit its final ־ןfor the sake of rhyme (here with ביof the previous line). The
moralistic intent of these final lines is clear, and thus the fact that the syntax, and
therefore precise meaning, of this line cannot be specifically construed, is perhaps
more troublesome than it would be otherwise.
Translation
Now attend to this great marvel, how this hero—only through his heart, which he
had mastered—soon thereafter took control over all the lands of Egypt. His virtues
were manifold. For God’s sake, dear people, take this as your model, that you keep
your bodies chaste. Now, if your love be altogether chaste, then you will be granted
the holy kingdom of Heaven.
The End.
Grammar
Present tense, anomalous verb ‘to be ’
The verb ‘to be’ is frequently irregular in Indo-European languages, as witnessed,
for instance, in the present active indicative paradigm of English verb, in which no
forms can be predicted, based on the rules for regular verb formation:
lesson eight71
Be
singular plural
1 am are
2 are are
3 is are
The past participle, which has a range of uses (as will be gradually introduced here-
after) appears in a variety of forms: גיוועזט/ גיווען/ גיוועזן. The present subjunctive (to
be treated later) appears in multiple forms: וועשט/[ זייzay/vest]) (relatively rare) and
[ ווירver] (all third singular) and [ ווירןverən]) (1st/3rd pl).
Noun declensions
The inflectional system of Germanic nouns found in Gothic or even Old English is
complex, including not simply a full noun paradigm with distinct inflections for
number, gender, and case, but indeed multiple such paradigms for various classes
of masculine, feminine, and neuter strong nouns, weak nouns, and consonant-
stem nouns, among others. As has already become clear for other categories of
grammatical inflections, the OLY system is significantly reduced from that earlier
Germanic system. In the earliest texts (such as “Joseph the Righteous”), the catego-
ries of strong and weak, and consonant stems are often still distinguishable, but the
systemic distinction in the former range of noun classes as expressed through the
inflections has been all but lost:
(1) Consonant stems are distinguished by the fact that they have no inflections
in the singular and an ־ןsuffix in the plural.
(2) The weak declension of all genders is characterized by the ending ־ןin all
cases and numbers except the nominative singular and the neuter, accusa-
tive singular, which have no inflection. Examples: ( זינר ̌שונן ורווןJtR 5) ‘(to) his
72 a guide to old literary yiddish
beautiful mistress (= fem. slave owner)’; ( מיט זײנר פֿרױאןCou24) ‘with his wife,’
fem.dat.sg; ( ווילןJtR 7) masc.acc.sg. of ( דז ער מיך געב דיר צו אײנם ווייבן ;ווילאPaV
284, 6) ‘so that he give me to you in marriage (as a wife)’; ( ערדןWh7) fem.dat.
sg. of ערדא: ‘ אױף דיזר עֵ רדןon this earth; ( בֿון וועגן דער ליבןBZ11) ‘because of love.’
The reader should note that there is some inconsistency in OLY in the use of
weak nouns, in that they may have a weak inflection in some occurrences
and not others.
Weak noun declension (‘ הערlord’)
plural singular
[herən] הערן [her] הער nom
[herən] הערן [herən] הערן gen
[herən] הערן [herən] הערן dat
[herən] הערן [herən] הערן acc
1 Examples: אײמ' קונגאJtR15 ‘(to) a king) mds; מיט זימא אן גזיכטאJtR15 ‘in/with respect to his face’ ntds;
מיט גולדאJtR34 ‘with gold’ ntds; אן דעמ' מונדאJtR62 ‘to the mouth’ mds; דעמ' הילדאJtR69 ‘to the hero’ mds;
היימאTC ‘[to] home’ ntds; צום ווײפאBZ12 ‘as a wife/bride’ ntds.
lesson eight73
Noun plurals
A surprising range of inflections mark the plural of English nouns:
cat cat-s
kiss kiss-es
cherry cherr-ies
ox ox-en
foot feet
cow kine (archaic)
knife knives
child child-ren
sheep sheep
Plural inflections of OLY nouns that derive from the Germanic component display
an even broader range of forms than are found in English. It is generally impossible
to predict the plural form based on the structure of the singular: [ הנד הינדאhand
hendə] but [ לנד לענדרland lendər]. Most such inflections comprise endings,
although in some cases the root vowel of the singular form may shift to indicate the
plural (Umlaut), with or without an additional inflectional ending. Most noun
plurals are accounted for with the following endings:
[ ־ר-ər] (often with Umlaut of the root vowel):
קליידר/ [ קליידkleyd kleyder], לענדר/ [ לנדland lendər]
[ ־ן-ən]:
ורוואן/ [ ורוואfrouə frouən]
[ ־א-ə] (often with Umlaut of the root vowel):
הינדא/ [ הנדhand hendə]
[ ־ים-im] (Semitic component, with shifted vowel/accent):
כֹהנִ ים/ [ כֹהןko(h)ən kóənim/kəhánim]
[ ־ות-əs] (Semitic component, with shifted vowel/accent):
ֵשמות/ [ ֵשםšem š(ə)mós]
74 a guide to old literary yiddish
[ ־ך-əχ] (diminutive):
עניקליך/ [ עניקלéynikəl éynikləχ]
∅ (either with no ending [as sheep] or mass noun without plural):
מעשר/ [ מעשרmesər mesər] (also מעשראJtR43)
Umlaut only:
[ טוג טעגtog / teg]
Semitic-component words in OLY with relatively few exceptions retain the plu-
ral inflections of their Hebrew and Aramaic source languages. The general rule for
Hebrew nouns is that masculine nouns add the plural inflection [ ־ים-im], while
feminine nouns that end in [ ־ה-ə] drop that ending and add [ ־ות-əs], although the
example employed above, שם, demonstrates that this rule is not without exceptions
(Hebrew and Aramaic have no category of neuter nouns). The reader is counseled
to make a note of each new form of plural inflection encountered (they will be
provided as necessary in the glossaries).
Proper names—male and female—frequently (but inconsistently) take inflec-
tional endings:
וויל איך דיר שרײבן היפשי רענטניש אונ' די תירוצי' וויל איך אך שרײבן ור די לנג ווײל2דו
'נוך אײן נרהײט עז גינג אײן פױאר אונ' זײן טוכטר אונ' אײן מינך מיט זײנר קױכין שלצן אונ
ואנדן דרײ איפפל אונ' טײלטן זי מיט אננדר אונ' דז איקליכן קאם אײן גנצר אפפל נון טרכט
וויא טעטן זי דז איקליכן אײן גנצר קאם דז איז אײן גרושי חכמה צו טרכטן דעש פױאר
· טוכטר ווז דעש מינכן קױכין דו ווארן נױארט דרײא דו הט איקליכר אײן גנצן
Glossary
Notes
The expression ור די לנג ווײלseems to imply that supplying the answers along with the
riddles will stave off boredom, or perhaps that the answers are here provided before
boredom might set in.
The syntactic construction with a redundant impersonal subject preceding the
finite verb whose logical subject follows later, as in ‘* עז גינג איין פויארit went a farmer’ =
‘a farmer went,’ is a common marker of the opening of a traditional tale, and thus
the word ‘once’ is added to the translation here, since in the English narrative tradi-
tion, such tales often open with the phrase, ‘once upon a time (a farmer went . . .’).3
In the phrase ‘ דעש פױאר טוכטרthe farmer’s daughter,’ one would expect the mas-
culine genitive singular form ‘ פױארשfarmer’s.’ In the parallel phrase דעש מינכן קױכין
‘the monk’s cook,’ the noun designating the masculine singular ‘possessor’ is indeed
3 Cf. the similar usage in ( עש קאם אײן אלטר אין די עלטר צימליך הנײןFF1) ‘An old man made his way rather
deeply into old age’ (see Lesson Nineteen).
76 a guide to old literary yiddish
in the genitive case, albeit without the characteristics ־שinflection, since מינךis a
weak noun that takes ־ןin the oblique cases.4
The clause דז איקליכן קאם אײן גנצר אפפל, literally *‘that to each one (dative) came a
whole apple,’ i.e. ‘that each one received a whole apple,’ only seems, initially, obscure,
due to the word order and the dative construction.
Translation
Here I want to write fine riddles for you, and I want to write the solutions also, for
the sake of preventing tedium. Another folly: a farmer, his daughter, and a monk
with his cook went for a stroll and found three apples and shared them with each
other, so that each one got a whole apple. Now consider how they did that so that
each got a whole. That is a great piece of wit to think about: the farmer’s daughter
was the monk’s cook. There were only three (of them); there each one had a whole
(apple).
4 See Jacobs (2005: 161–2) on oblique case marking in modern Yiddish, which is the modern reflex of
the function of weak noun declension.
Lesson Nine
1 Generally, I represent vowels in unstressed and thus reduced final syllables as [ə]. In the names
Briyo and Zimro, I retain the full vowels, since they are rather consistently punctated with kametz. It is
nonetheless difficult to know whether they were actually pronounced with full or reduced final vowels.
2 The manuscript text is found in Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cod. hebr. 100, fos. 67r–73v;
online facsimile of a later printed edition (Prague, 1620–60): http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/
0003/bsb00036332/images/index.html?id=00036332&fip=fsdryztsxdsydensdaseayaenweayayztsyzts&no
=1&seite=1; extant: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 8° 1100. Published editions of the text include Erik
(1926: 147–78) and EYT 67.
78 a guide to old literary yiddish
Despite the range of analogs and cultural motifs from Gentile traditions, the tale
nonetheless remains quintessentially Jewish in content. Although it lacks a biblical
or Talmudic source, this tale tempers its quasi-secularism by drawing on midrashic
sources. One should note the range of anachronistic plot motifs—typical for the
fantasized antiquity of European narratives during this period—including the set-
ting in a Jewish monarchy with a king named Hurk(e)nis (suggesting a late Mac-
cabean setting) and a high priest in Jerusalem (and thus prior to the destruction of
the Second Temple), but simultaneously a pope in Rome, despite the fact that the
bishop of Rome did not function as the recognized leader of Western Christendom
until, arguably, some five centuries after the destruction of the Temple. The narra-
tive’s conflation of religious and temporal sovereignty in the papacy is likewise
altogether ahistorical. Such historical implausibilities and anachronisms are cer-
tainly more disturbing to twenty-first-century readers than they were to the text’s
contemporaries who, however, regardless of their conceptions of historiography,
recognized that it was a fantasy adventure tale. As such, it parallels the anachronis-
tic practice in most other early modern European literary and artistic representa-
tions of the distant past (in Renaissance paintings that depict ancient Greece,
Rome, or Israel, for instance, the figures wear sixteenth-century clothing and
inhabit sixteenth-century architectural structures). Interestingly, the conventional
post-courtly motif of the status-defined suitability of marriage partners dovetails
neatly with the traditional Jewish ײחוס-motif
ִ in such arrangements.
On the basis of the other early versions of the tale and in general of the relation-
ship of the characters in the tale as a whole, it seems that the Munich manuscript
(Cod. hebr. 100, which is the basis of the edition here) garbles the characters’ intro-
duction in the initial sentences. The confusion can be remedied by two emenda-
tions of the text, which are here overtly marked as such.3 The reader should note
that the ink in the manuscript’s vowel punctation is sometimes quite faint and
sometimes seems either inconsistent with other instances of a given word or simply
inaccurate. Rather than such instances being editorially corrected to an imposed
standard, they are here left for the reader’s contemplation.
דער אם5 אײנר היש ָטבֿת: איז גישעהן אײני היז ְב ִריעָ ה אונ' אײנר היז זִ ְימ ָרה4ַמעְ ֶשׂה
' וואר · אונ' וואר גר וואל גיהלטן אונטר דען יוֻ דן · אונ6][הורקנִ יש
ְ נעשן בײא דעם ֶמלֶ ך
אונ' זִ ְימ ָרה זון ָטבֿת וואר גר שױן אונ' אײן גרושר ָחכָ ם: אײן בֿױרשט אונטר דעם ואלק
אונ' אײן לערנר · אונ' דער ֶמלֶ ך הט אין ליבר דען אל זײן דינר · אונ' ער וואר אױברשטר
אן דעש קױניגיש הוף · אונ' ער היז אין זִ ְימ ָרה נוך זײנום עלטר ואטר · אונ' דער קױניג
3 Cf. the printed text: Prague 1620–60, noted above. Since BZ is a prose text, it consequently has no
line markers, and thus cross-references in the present volume will be to BZ + the lesson number,
e.g. BZ9.
4 Facsimile 3 (Appendix 3) begins here.
5 The manuscript here has ;הורקנִ יש
ְ as noted earlier, I have here emended the reading for the sake of
narrative cogency. The spelling of the name of Zimro’s father is inconsistent in the manuscripts: some-
times טובת, טבֿת,ָ ֹטובת,
ַ and טוּבֿת,
ַ the first three of which are consistent with the pronunciation Tovas,
while the last must be Tuvas.
6 The name הורקנִ יש
ְ is lacking at this point in the manuscript.
lesson nine79
תוֹרה · אונ' דער מלך גב אים ָ מכֿט אין ריכֿטר אױבר אל זײן ואלק ישראל צו לערנן זיא
רושלַ יִ ם אונ' בײא הױזר דער כ ְֹהנִ ים ווען ער וואר אײן
ָ ְ צו י. אײן הױז · בײא זײנום שלוס
'ריכטר אױבר אל יִ ְש ָר ֵאל דרײא מול אים יאֹר ווען זיא אוף גינגן אים יאר צום ֵרגֵ ל אונ
7
Glossary
story fns [maasə/maysə] ַמ ְע ֶשׂה
was called/named 3s.prt.ind.sv11 [his] היש/ היז
Briyo fem.prop.name fns.pred.n [briyo] ְב ִריעָ ה
Zimro masc.prop.name mns.pred.n [zimro] זִ ְימ ָרה
Tovas masc.prop.name mns.pred.n [tovas] ָטבֿת
nearest suprl.adv [am nés(t)ən] אם נעשן
king mds [meleχ] ֶמלֶ ך
Hurknis, masc.prop.name mds [húrk(ə)nis] הורקנִ יש ְ
esteemed/held in honor ptprt(stat.pass)sv9 [vól gəhàltən] וואל גיהלטן
among prp + d [untər] אונטר
Jews mdp [yïdən] יוֻ דן
leader/prince mns [f ïrst] בֿױרשט
people ntds [folk] ואלק
Zimro, son of Tovas constr [zimro zun tovas] זִ ְימ ָרה זון ָטבֿת
great mns.pred.n [gróusər] גרושר
sage/wise man mns.pred.n [χoχəm] ָחכָ ם
one who studies = Torah scholar mns.pred.n [lernər] לערנר
held him dearer = loved him more id [hatə in libər] הט אין ליבר
than conj [den] דען
servants/subjects map [dinər] דינר
chief/head/leader mns.pred.n [ḯbərstər] אױברשטר
at the king’s court id [an des kënigəs/kïnigəs houf] אן דעש קױניגיש הוף
after (temp.prp); in honor of [noχ] נוך
grandfather mds [eltər fotər] עלטר ואטר
made 3s.prt.ind [maχtə] מכֿט
judge mas [riχtər] ריכֿטר
over/above prp [ïbər] אױבר
his people Israel [zayn folk yisroəl] זײן ואלק ישראל
teach them Torah double acc.obj [lernən zi tóurə/tóuro] תוֹרה
ָ לערנן זיא
gave 3s.prt.ind.scv2 [gab] גב
house ntas [hóuz] הױז
castle ntds [šlos] שלוס
at, near, in prp + d [tsu] צו
Jerusalem [yərušəláyim] רושלַ יִ ם
ָ ְי
priests mgp [kóənim/kəhánim] כ ְֹהנִ ים
7 In antiquity, there were three principal holidays on which one “went up” to Jerusalem: Passover,
Shavuot, and Sukkoth.
80 a guide to old literary yiddish
Notes
Just as one has become accustomed to forms such as [ זיןzin] ‘his’ and [ ביbi] ‘by/at/
with’ in the JtR text, in this narrative from around two centuries later, those forms
(whose vowels ultimately derive from a long vowel in the German stock language—
sîn / bî [i:]) have shifted to a spelling that most likely indicates a shift in pronuncia-
tion as well: [ זייןzayn] and [ בייאbay]. Likewise, older שוןappears here as שוין
(~ MHG schœn), which may or may not reflect a pronunciation shift or may simply
be an orthographical convention for the pronunciation [šen].
Translation
A tale took place: one was named Briyo, and one was named Zimro. One was
named Tovas, who was second only to the king Hurknis and was held in honor
among the Jews, a leader among the people. And Zimro, the son of Tovas, was very
noble and a great sage and a Torah scholar. And the king loved him more than all
his servants, and he had the chief position at the king’s court. And he [Tovas]
named him [i.e. his son] Zimro after his grandfather. And the king made him
[Zimro] judge over all his people Israel, to teach them Torah. And the king gave
him a house next to his castle in Jerusalem and next to the houses of the priests, for
he was a judge over all Israel, the three times a year when they went up [to Jerusa-
lem] during the year to the festival, and every day they came to offer the sacrifices.
Grammar
Diminutives9
The variant forms of the diminutive have increased dramatically in modEY, especially
as a result of Slavic influence, while OLY diminutives were generally simpler. The main
form of diminution in modern Yiddish is also present in OLY although not especially
common: this form has two degrees of diminution (the first formed by suffixing [ ־ל-əl]
to the noun, the second by suffixing [ ־(א)לא-ələ]; the noun’s base form generally
8 Interestingly, the OY expression is a calque of the Hebrew construction with ‘ קרבto approach,’
which also has the secondary sense of ‘be sacrificed.’
9 See Jacobs (2005: 162–3) on diminutive formation in modEY.
lesson nine81
undergoes i-mutation (Umlaut) where appropriate: [ בוך > ביכל > ביכלאbuχ > biχəl >
bíχələ]. The meaning of the two degrees of diminution formed with ־לא/[ ־ל-əl/-ələ] is
often idiosyncratic, but frequently the first degree indicates a diminution in size, while
the second indicates some mode of endearment. Thus in the example בוך > ביכל > ביכלא,
one might understand the distinct denotations as ‘book’ > ‘small book/booklet’ > ‘dear
little book,’ but precise shades of meaning are almost always context-specific and can-
not be defined by such programmatic rules. The plural of both degrees is formed by
means of a suffixed ־ך, thus [ ביכלךbiχləχ/biχələχ] ‘small books.’
The statistically more common diminutive formation of OLY has, however, dis-
appeared from modEY: in both OY and MY texts, the suffix [ ־לין-lin/-layn] (parallel
to the diminutive formation characteristic of the German determinant -lein) is
commonly found: [ יודליןyïdlin/yïdlayn] ‘little Jew’ (JtR30) and [ הױזליןhaÿzlin/
haÿzlayn] ‘little house’ (BZ20).
Diminutives are grammatically neuter, regardless of the gender of the base noun
or referent, as demonstrated in the example of Joseph, cited earlier: the obviously
masculine Joseph is the ‘ יודליןlittle Jew,’ to which the neuter pronoun עשrefers in the
following line.
Demonstrative pronouns
Languages generally have at least two distinct demonstrative pronouns, denoting
the nearer and the more distant specified entity, e.g. ‘this’ and ‘that’ (some lan-
guages, such as Latin, make further distinctions). OLY often employs the definite
article as the demonstrative pronoun generally in the sense ‘that,’ although יענר
[yenər] ‘that’ is also used, while ‘this’ is expressed by [ דיזרdizər]. The inflectional
pattern is as follows:
plural singular
n f m
דיזא דיש דיזא דיזר nom
דיז(ש) דיזא דיזר )דיז(ש gen
דיזא/דיזן דיזם דיזר דיזם dat
דיזא דיש דיזא דיזן acc
century), was written in 1392–3 ce, are fourteen brief texts that were added later in
a different hand: three Hebrew poems (120r), Hebrew recipes for medical remedies
(which include a few Yiddish words), and two charms in Yiddish. The book con-
tains indications regarding three owners (2r), the last of whom indicates that the
codex was in his possession in the year ( רכה5)225 (= 1465 ce).
The text presented here is to be understood in the larger context of the tradition
of the תפילת הדרך, i.e. a prayer recited upon setting out on a journey, to protect the
traveler from the dangers of the road. The Talmud traces the practice of such a
prayer from the prophet Elijah; the form of that prayer in the Talmud is: ‘May it be
Thy will, O Lord my God, to lead me forth in peace, and direct my steps in peace
and uphold me in peace, and deliver me from the hand of every enemy and ambush
by the way, and send a blessing on the works of my hands, and cause me to find
grace, kindness, and mercy in Thy eyes and in the eyes of all who see me. Blessed
art Thou, O Lord, who hearkenest unto prayer’ (Berakhot 29b). The present text is
a fixed formula, and its triple invocation of the name of God—twice in Yiddish,
once in Hebrew—is clear evidence for the text as incantation of the type known as
שמירת הדרך, medieval Hebrew examples of which date back at least to R. Avigdor
Katz (d. c.1275).
אז איך הױט אױש גי צווילף מלאכי' די מױשן בײ מיר זײן דרײ די מיך גלײטן דרײ ווײזן
מיך דען וועג דרײ בשידן מיר גלױק אונ' הײלא דרײ ברינגן מיך אין דש אלמעכטיגן
: גוטיש נאמן ווידר הײמא דש זײ וואר אין גוטיש נאמן אמן בשם יי אלקי ישראל
Glossary
Translation
When I go out today, twelve angels must [or: should/ought to] be with me: three
that accompany me, three that show me the way, three grant good luck and fortune
to me, three bring me—in the name of Almighty God—home. Let that be true in
God’s name, amen. In the name of the Lord God of Israel.
10 As noted earlier, just as the written form of the personal name of the Hebrew deity was already in
antiquity deliberately distorted due to the prohibition on using the name in vain, and other modes of
reference to the deity were also thus distorted, especially in non-sacred contexts, as here, the first word
of the standard phrase ֹלהי יִ ְׂש ָר ֵאל
ֵ ‘ ֱאGod of Israel’ is distorted by substituting קfor penultimate ה.
Lesson Ten
אונ' צו אײנום ראש השנה זאש דער מלך אוף זײנום שטול · אונ' זײני קינדר שטונדן
בֿױר אים · דא קאם אײן ורווא מיט צווֵ ין אירי זוֻ ינין ור אין אונ' הטן אײן צנק בֿון וועגן
רוּשה דיא אין איר ואטר גילושן הוט · דער אײן הט צווײא הײבטר אונ' ֵרידט אײנר יְ ָ
מיט צווײא מױלר אונ' ביגערט צווײא ְחלָ קיִ ם · דען עש ווער זײנר צווֵ ין · דא זגט דער
טוּבֿת אונ' זִ ְימ ָרה טױט איר גיריכֿט · וויל זעהן וויא וועלט איר קױניג צו זײני צווֵ ין זױנן ַ
דש אורטײל שפרעכֿן · דא ענטוורטן זיא גינעדיגר הער ואטר אונ' קױניג מיר וועלן עש
טוּבת וואושט ניט וויא גערן טון · דא קאם דער מיט דען צווײאן קױפפֿן ור זיא · אונ' ַ
ער זולט אײן אורטײל געבן · אונ' [זימרא] היז אים הײש וושר געבן אין אײן קנט דש
שריא דש אנדר הײבט · גישך · דא גוֹס מן אים דש הײש וושר אױבר דש אײן הײביט דא ִ
דא זגט זִ ְימ ָרא ווארום שרײשטו הב איך דיר דוך ניקש גיטון ־ זא זיך איך אױך וואל דש
דו אײן לײפ בישט · מן זול דיר אױך אײן ֵחלֶ ק געבן .דא לכֿט דער קױניג אונ' אל זײן
ואלק דעש אורטײל בֿון זִ ְימ ָרה :
Glossary
Notes
The fact that Tovas and Zimro are here identified as sons of the king may simply be
conventional, as all a king’s subjects are construed as standing in such a subordinate
relationship to the monarch, and his close advisors may even be treated almost as if
family. Or, the usage may reflect the continued confusion of character and relation-
ship identity of the tale’s first lines.
One of the conventional uses of the dative case with prepositions is to designate
the place where an action occurs. In the first sentence of the reading for this lesson,
the usage occurs twice:
· צו אײנום ראש השנה זאש דער מלך אוף זײנום שטול · אונ' זײני קינדר שטונדן בֿױר אים
The king is on his throne = location, and thus dative, as signaled by the mascu-
line, dative, singular inflection ־וםof the possessive pronoun. And his children
stood before him = location, and thus dative, as signaled by the masculine, dative,
singular form of the personal pronoun.
Among the uses of the accusative case, on the other hand, is the designation of
destination after a verb of motion and the appropriate preposition, as occurs in the
second sentence of the reading:
דא קאם אײן ורווא מיט צווֵ ין אירי זוֻ ינין ור אין
A woman came before him (sc. the king), i.e. she moved to a location in front of the
king = destination, and thus accusative, as signaled by the masculine, accusative,
singular form of the personal pronoun: אין.
lesson ten87
Variant forms of the number two, צווֵ יןand צוויי, appear in the reading. One might
wish to construe the ־ןending as a dative plural inflection; but in fact the nomina-
tive plural also often has that ending (as also in this reading), while the dative often
does not.
As noted earlier, when Masoretic hatef vowel pointings ( ֱ ֲ ֳ ) appear in OLY
texts, they are quite often reduced to a simple schwa ( ְ ), as in ‘ ְחלָ קיִ םportions.’
While the indefinite article אייןis frequently (though inconsistently) inflected,
the indefinite pronoun אנדרis generally indeclinable.
The clause דען עש ווער זײנר צווֵ יןdisplays an interesting genitive formation in the
form זיינר, which might seem a genitive plural possessive adjective *‘of hims,’ but is
in fact simply idiomatic ‘of him.’
The first clause in the sequence ‘ וויל זעהן וויא וועלט איר דש אורטײל שפרעכֿןwant to see
how you will render the verdict’ lacks a grammatical subject, and there is none in
the previous clause that could be carried over, nor is there a subsequent clause
whose subject might be anticipated. One might imagine that no stated subject is
required, since that subject here must obviously be the king. But the structure may
also anticipate the verb-initial consecutive clausal construction of modEY (cf.
Jacobs 2005: 262), which conveys a sense of an action or state consequent on the
action or state expressed in the previous sentence, as in the sequence: האסט געשריבן ָ דו
וויל איך לייענען.‘ אַ ביכלYou’ve written a book. So, I want to read it.’ Even so, that modern
construction also requires a grammatical subject.
In modEY the reflexive pronoun is זיךfor all persons, both singular and plural,
which is the result of a simplification of a more complex system of reflexive forms in
OLY, where, however, the normal third person singular masculine reflexive pronoun
could in fact be זיך. In the sentence, ‘ אונ' [זימרא] הי<ז> אים הײש וושר געבןand Zimro com-
manded that hot water be given to him(self),’ it seems that (‘ איםto) him’ must refer to
Zimro and thus be reflexive. But in fact this sentence, as the one discussed in the previ-
ous note, lacks a subject. I have added ‘] ’[זימראin the text for the sake of clarity, and
thus, technically, there can be no actual reflexive. Perhaps that is why the personal
pronoun is here substituted. One should note, however, that it is not particularly com-
mon elsewhere in OLY text for personal pronouns to function as reflexives.
While the most commonly observed function of the genitive case is perhaps to
mark possession (in a broad range of senses), the partitive genitive has also already
occurred in the readings, and in this reading a form appears that seems a quasi-
direct object in the genitive: ‘ דא לכֿט דער קױניג אונ' אל זײן ואלק דעש אורטײל בֿון זִ ְימ ָרהThe
king and all his people then laughed at/because of Zimro’s verdict.’ To construe it as
an adverbial genitive (‘ דעש אורטײלabout/because of the verdict’) is a more func-
tional description.1 Just as with the phrase ‘ דעש פױאר טוכטרthe farmer’s daughter’ in
the Riddle from Lesson Eight, where the masculine singular noun lacked the
expected genitive inflection, here the same is true of the neuter singular noun. The
genitive marker on the definite article makes the case function clear, however.
While OLY normally requires subject–verb agreement, it seems that when the
verb precedes a compound subject, the verb may appear in the singular: דא לכֿט דער
‘ קױניג אונ' אל זײן ואלקthe king and all his people then laughed.’
1 See, however, the note to another quasi-direct object genitive in Lesson Eleven.
88 a guide to old literary yiddish
Translation
And on one Rosh Hashone the king sat on his throne, and his children stood before
him. There came before him a woman with two of her sons, and they had a quarrel
about an inheritance that their father had left them. One of them had two heads
and spoke with two mouths and wanted two shares, for the claim was that he was
two people. So the king said to Zimro and to his son: “Make your judgment! I want
to see how you will render the verdict.” Then they answered: “My lord, father and
king, we are happy to do so.”
Then the one with two heads came before them, and Tovas was not sure how to
render a verdict, and Zimro commanded that hot water be given to him in a jug,
which was done. The hot water was poured over one of his heads. Then the other
head screamed. Then Zimro said: “Why are you screaming? Indeed I have done
nothing to you. Thus I also see that you are one body. You should also receive a
single share.” The king and all his people then laughed because of Zimro’s verdict.
Grammar
Comparative/superlative
The formation of the comparative and superlative degree of adjectives and adverbs
is relatively straightforward in OLY, following essentially the same pattern as in
modEY (and in large part also English). The comparative adds the suffix [ ־ר-ər] to
the positive form (base form) of the adjective/adverb, and the superlative adds the
suffix [ ־שט-əst]. Often (but not always) the comparative and superlative formation
triggers Umlaut. One might take as examples ‘ ליבdear’ and ‘ אלטold’:
Comparative:
דש איך מיך זולט צו אײנום נידרין גישלעכֿט געבן דען איך בין
BZ13 ‘that I join myself to a lineage lower than my own’
איך הב ניט ױל גישײדר יודן גיהױרט אליש דו בישט
BZ17 ‘I have not heard many Jews more clever than you’
Superlative:
ליבשט... דיאWh6 ‘the dearest’
אם נעשןBZ9 ‘nearest’
The adjectival forms are inflected as appropriate (as, for instance, with the weak
neuter, accusative plural adjective ending ־ןin the form ‘ די ̌שונשטןmost beautiful’ in
JtR 43); the positive and comparative forms of the adverb are uninflected, while the
superlative adverb is constructed as a prepositional phrase with the dative case
inflection following the compounded preposition + definitive article in אםor צום.
lesson ten89
Just as in other Germanic languages, such as English, there are exceptional com-
parative and superlative forms in OLY. In English the most common example is ‘good
> better > best,’ which also happens to be exceptional in OLY: [ גוטgut] > בז/[ בשbas] >
[ בעשט־best-]. Such exceptional forms will be identified as they occur in the readings.
Strong verbs
inflectional endings
plural singular
[-ən] ־ן ø 1
[-(ə)t] ־(ע)ט [-(ə)st] ־שט 2
[-ən] ־ן ø 3
plural singular
[gingən] גנגן [ging] גנג 1
[ging(ə)t] [ גנג(ע)טging(ə)st] גנגשט 2
[gingən] גנגן [ging] גנג 3
Weak verbs
inflectional endings
plural singular
[-ən] ־ן [-ə] ־א 1
[-(ə)t] ־(ע)ט [-(ə)st] ־שט 2
[-ən] ־ן [-ə] ־א 3
plural singular
[bəzámnətən] בזמנטן [bəzámnətə] )בזמנט(א 1
[bəzámnət(ət)] )בזמנט(ט [bəzámnət(ə)st] בזמנטשט 2
[bəzámnətən] בזמנטן [bəzámtnətə] )בזמנט(א 3
90 a guide to old literary yiddish
The reader should note well that while it seems all but certain that the final ־אinflec-
tion was pronounced in the third person singular preterite of the weak verb, that
vowel is rarely actually written in the texts, which means that the 3rd sg. preterite
tense appears exactly as does the 3rd sg. present tense: [ בזמנטbəzamnət] ‘assemble’ or
[bəzamnət(ə)] ‘assembled.’ One might imagine that the elision of such an essential
grammatical marker as the distinction between present and past tense would be
prohibited, but sentences such as the following suggest otherwise: דא שריא אונ' ווײנט זי
(BZ16) ‘then she shrieked and weeps/wept.’ Here the first verb is obviously a 3rd sg.
preterite, class 7 strong verb, which would lead the reader to expect that the parallel
verb in the same clause/context, וויינט, sharing the same grammatical subject, would
logically also be a 3rd sg. preterite, although it lacks the expected final ־אmarker. It
almost certainly is to be construed as preterite and was almost certainly pronounced
with the final [-ə]: [ וויינטveyntə]. One might imagine that, as the spoken language lost
the preterite tense altogether (as in modEY), this minimal distinction between the
verb forms of present and preterite weakened. But languages do not generally elide
such functionally significant distinctions, and it is probably best to construe the weak
preterite as still retaining a spoken but inconsistently written final [-ə]. Readers will
then have to be vigilant and often construe such forms for themselves, deciding on
whether given 3rd sg. weak verbs are present or preterite, depending on context.
תקנ''ב אהבה
נים אײן דורן אונ' טו אין אײן טוך · אונ' זג די ֵש̅מ̅ו̅ת טר̅ט̅יה פ̅ר̅טיה גו̅ר̅טא · אונ' דוה
·· אן איר גוואנט זא מוש זי דיר נוך לױיפֿן
אײן אהבה3תשמ''ד
נים אײן אונץ קוועק זילבר אונ' מאך דרײא טײל דרױש אונ' ווערף עש דרײא טג נוך אננדר
אין דש בֿױיער אונ' שפריך אלזא · אז איך ור ברען דש קוועק זילבר אזו זול אױך ברענן
הערץ פל̅ו̅נית טוכֿטר פל̅ו̅נית ביש דש זי טוט מײן בגערונג אונ' מײן ווילן · אונ' ווען ער דש
·· גזגט הוט · זא זול ער דען זאגן דען פ̅ס̅וק אש תמיד תוקד על המזבח לא תכבה
2 The individual entries in the collection are numbered according to the Hebrew alphanumerical
system, on which see the section on numbers and numerals in Lesson Fifteen.
3 Facsimile 2 (Appendix 3) begins here.
92 a guide to old literary yiddish
Glossary
4 The strict paradigm of the stem-changing strong verb would require require [virf]; it is unlikely
that ווערףreflects that pronunciation.
lesson ten93
Translation
No. 480: Whoever wishes to have a beautiful face, take lily-root and parsley and
quicksilver and wine and honey and rendered animal fat and boil that all together
and wash yourself therewith: that person will get a beautiful face.
No. 552: Love. Take a thorn and put it in a cloth and say the [holy/magical] names
Tórtia, Pórtia, Górtia, and put it on her garment. Thus she cannot but run after you.
No. 744: A love. Take an ounce of quicksilver and divide it into three parts and
throw it three days in a row in the fire and say the following: “Just as I burn this
quicksilver, so also should the heart of ________ (insert the name) daughter of
_____ (insert the name) burn until she does my bidding and my desire.” And when
he has said that, then he should say the verse “Fire shall be kept burning upon the
altar continually; it shall not go out.”
Lesson Eleven
Introduction
Up to this point in the lessons, glosses have been very strictly and pragmatically ad
hoc, providing information only about the specific word form that actually occurs
in the text at any given point, e.g.:
Beginning with this lesson, however, the glosses will function as quasi-dictionary
entries, that is, they abstract from the form of the word that occurs in the text the
“basic” form, i.e. the form that one would find in a dictionary of OLY (if such a
reference work existed!), and then provide the basic grammatical information
necessary to derive its other forms (insofar as relevant in the present context). Thus
for חלָ קיִ ם,ְ the glossary entry will from this point forward in this volume take the
form:
That is, for a noun, as here, the information provided is: (1) the base form (nomina-
tive singular), (2) an indication of grammatical gender via the nominative singular
form of the definite article (in this case [ דערder], i.e. masculine), (3) the nominative
plural form (in this case the full form is provided, since the vocalization of the
Semitic plural, though predictable, might be opaque to many readers; once that
pattern is exemplified, full forms will not generally be provided), (4) the English
gloss of the base form, (5) a suggested pronunciation. Thus the gloss provides the
reader with the necessary information to recognize the form that actually occurs in
the text at this point, but also the information necessary to recognize it in any form
that might occur in any text.
For strong verbs, the format will be:
The citation form of the verb is the infinitive, here of a strong verb (identified by
sv, or as here, scv, since the verb is a stem-changing strong verb, and the class
number of the strong verb). As noted earlier, all strong verbs that occur in the
readings are listed in Appendix 2, which should be consulted to determine the
principal parts of the verb. On that basis, the reader should be able to construe any
regular forms of the verb encountered. Weak verbs will be identified simply by the
infinitive form, since the remaining forms are predictable on the basis of that form
96 a guide to old literary yiddish
alone. Irregular weak verbs are so identified and also listed in Appendix 2 with
their principal parts.
Glossary entries remain strictly pragmatic, however, and thus additional gram-
matical information may be supplied when necessary for comprehension in any
particular instance.
Mashket script/font
While it is a generalization for which no conclusive evidence can be adduced, read-
ing experience suggests that OLY texts were generally not valued as highly as were
Hebrew-Aramaic texts: they were generally not written or printed with ink, parch-
ment, or paper of as high a quality as that used for Hebrew/Aramaic, and the
“presentation” was not as careful (uniformity of handwriting, proofreading and
correction, binding, page layout, script size, etc.). Texts in Hebrew-Aramaic were
generally written in the script or printed in the font conventionally identified as
Hebrew square script, which is, almost everywhere that it is encountered, a bal-
anced, uniform, aesthetically pleasing design. It is the traditional script/font used
for the Torah, for instance, and has also been generally used from the nineteenth
century up to the present for printing modern Yiddish books, newspapers, and
magazines. As introduced in Lesson One, those who have studied modern Hebrew
or Yiddish know that the handwriting script that one learns in the early days of
instruction in those languages is not actually a handwritten approximation of the
square-script printing font, but rather a semi-cursive script. In the OLY period, a
semi-cursive script was also used for writing Yiddish. The various related fonts
designed for printing Yiddish texts in the early centuries of the printing industry,
generally designated mashket/mashait or vaybertaytsh fonts, were based on that
particular semi-cursive manuscript hand, which in fact has some similarities to the
handwriting which is now taught in beginning modern Hebrew and beginning
modern Yiddish classes, but differs in many of its letter forms. Since it is the mash-
ket script/font that readers will most often encounter in OLY manuscripts and early
printed books, it will be introduced here, so that readers can accustom themselves
to the letter forms and gain fluency in reading the script/font. Glosses, notes, and
(generally also) supplemental texts will continue to use square script.
Some readers may object that the use of square-script font for all OLY texts thus
far presented in the present volume has in some sense been a misrepresentation of
the texts, and they would be right. Its use has, however, been tactical: since many
if not most readers of this volume will have already learned square script from
previous language study, and it is the font in which modern editions of Yiddish
books, whether of texts from the OLY period or of more recent periods, are
printed, it seemed most practical at least to begin with that script. From this point
forward in the course, however, the focal OLY texts in each lesson will be pre-
sented in ‘authentic’ fonts, i.e. modern font designs of the earlier scripts/fonts. The
mashket font is:
lesson eleven97
Several groups of letters resemble each other closely enough that they might
initially cause trouble for the reader, who is thus cautioned to note the small
distinguishing differences even now:
alef mem beys kof giml nun dalet resh he khes tov
מ א כ ב נ ג ר ד ת ח ה
vov lamed langer-nun langer-fe langer-tsadik tes samekh shin shlos-mem kuf
ל ו ץ ף ן ש ס ט ק ם
Once again the reader is referred to Appendix 1, where the letter forms of all the
fonts used in this volume are presented in tabular format for ease of reference and
study. Above all, the reader is counseled not to panic: learning a new alphabet is a
matter of a few hours of practice. In this case, one is hardly even learning a new
alphabet, however, but rather simply learning to read a variation on an alphabet
already mastered, something like becoming accustomed to the handwriting of a
familiar alphabet but from another country or century. To ease the difficulties here,
this lesson’s reading is divided into sentences and presented in parallel, in both
square script and mashket. There is, incidentally, no need for the reader to learn to
write the mashket script at this point, although at a later stage of study such a prac-
tice skill can sometimes aid in deciphering a troubled passage in a manuscript.
· הד ָב ִרים ה ֵֹאלֶ ה דא זאך דער קױשליך זִ ְימ ָרה דיא שױן ְב ִריעָ ה טוכטר ֵפיגִ ין
ְ אַח ֵרי
ְ
אַחרֵי ה ְד ָברִים הֵֹאלֶה דא זאך דער קױשליך זִי ְמרָה דיא שױן ְברִיעָה ְ
· טוכטר פֵיגִין
· אונ' זיא ווש זער דעמױטיג אונ' גר ורום · אונ' זיא גיױל אים גר וואל
· אונ' זיא ווש זער דעמױטיג אונ' גר ורום · אונ' זיא גיױל אים גר וואל
98 a guide to old literary yiddish
איר שונהײט איז ניט צו שרײבן · דרום מוש איכֿש לושן בלײבן .
איר שונהײט איז ניט צו שרײבן · דרום מוש איכֿש לושן בלײבן .
אונ' דער זִ ְמ ָרה זאך זיא גר עבן אן · אונ' קונט זיא ניט גינוג זעהן ·
אונ' דער זִ ְמרָה זאך זיא גר עבן אן · אונ' קונט זיא ניט גינוג זעהן ·
אונ' דר שרק בֿון וועגן דער ליבן · דש ער ור בלײכֿט ·
אונ' דר שרק בֿון וועגן דער ליבן · דש ער ור בלײכֿט ·
אונ' דיא לױט זאהן עש וואל אן אים ·
אונ' דיא לױט זאהן עש וואל אן אים ·
אונ' לכֿטן זײן · אבר זיא שוויגן שטיל דר צו :
אונ' לכֿטן זײן · אבר זיא שוויגן שטיל דר צו :
אזא גינגן זיא ווידר בֿון איר אין דיא אנדר שטוב ·
אזא גינגן זיא ווידר בֿון איר אין דיא אנדר שטוב ·
אונ' אנטשליפֿן אזא טרונקן ווארן זיא · אבר דער זִ ְימ ָרה דער שליף ניט
אונ' אנטשליפֿן אזא טרונקן ווארן זיא · אבר דער זִי ְמרָה דער שליף ניט
אונ' גידוכט וויא ער צו דער שױן טוכֿטר וועלט גֵ ין ·
אונ' גידוכט וויא ער צו דער שױן טוכֿטר וועלט גֵין ·
אונ' זולט עש אים זײן לײפ קושטן .
אונ' זולט עש אים זײן לײפ קושטן .
חדר דא זיא אינן וואר ·
אונ' גינג אזא מיט ורײאים מוט · צו איר אין דש ֶ
אונ' גינג אזא מיט ורײאים מוט · צו איר אין דש חדֶר דא זיא אינן
וואר ·
אז ער דיא טױר אוף טעט · אונ' זיא זאך אין קומן · דא שטנד זיא אוף גֵ יגן אים ·
אז ער דיא טױר אוף טעט · אונ' זיא זאך אין קומן · דא שטנד זיא
אוף גֵיגן אים ·
אונ' אנטפפינג אין גר ליפליך אונ' שון .אונ' ער דאנקט איר צױכטיגליך ווידר ·
אונ' אנטפפינג אין גר ליפליך אונ' שון .אונ' ער דאנקט איר צױכטיגליך
ווידר ·
אונ' זיא בֿורט אין בײא דער הנד · אונ' זעצטן זיך נֵ יבן אננדר נידר ·
אונ' זיא בֿורט אין בײא דער הנד · אונ' זעצטן זיך נֵיבן אננדר נידר ·
דא הוב ער אן אונ' שפרך איך העט עטווש מיט אױך צו ֵרידן ·
דא הוב ער אן אונ' שפרך איך העט עטווש מיט אױך צו רֵידן ·
אין אלום צױכטן אונ' ֵאירן ·
אין אלום צױכטן אונ' אֵירן·
100 a guide to old literary yiddish
וויל אױך דר בײא גיבעטן הבן וועלט מיר ניט ור אױבל הבן ·
וויל אױך דר בײא גיבעטן הבן וועלט מיר ניט ור אױבל הבן ·
דא זגט זיא ליבר זִ ְימ ָרה ֵריד ווש דו ווילט · איך וויל דירש ניט אױבל הבן :
דא זגט זיא ליבר זִי ְמרָה רֵיד ווש דו ווילט · איך וויל דירש ניט אױבל הבן :
דא זגט ער זינטמול דש איך אױך אן גיזעהן הב ·
דא זגט ער זינטמול דש איך אױך אן גיזעהן הב ·
זא בין איך מיט זױלכֿר ליבי בישטריקט דש איך קײן רוא הב ·
זא בין איך מיט זױלכֿר ליבי בישטריקט דש איך קײן רוא הב ·
אונ' פיט אױך איר וועלט מיר ור הײשן מיך צו אײנום מן נעמן ·
אונ' פיט אױך איר וועלט מיר ור הײשן מיך צו אײנום מן נעמן ·
זא וויל איכֿש בײא מײנום הער ואטר צו וועגן ברענגן
זא וויל איכֿש בײא מײנום הער ואטר צו וועגן ברענגן
דש ער מיט אױערם וטר ֵרידט ·
דש ער מיט אױערם וטר רֵידט ·
דש ער זײן ווילן דרײן גיבט .איך וויל מכֿן דש עש מיט גרושר ערן צו גֵ יט ·
דש ער זײן ווילן דרײן גיבט .איך וויל מכֿן דש עש מיט גרושר ערן צו גֵיט ·
דא זגט זיא · ליבר הער זִ ְימ ָרא איר העט מיך ניט אזא גערן ·
דא זגט זיא · ליבר הער זִי ְמרָא איר העט מיך ניט אזא גערן ·
נוך ויל ליבר הב איך אױך ·
נוך ויל ליבר הב איך אױך ·
איך קאן אױך ניט דר צֵ ילן דיא ליפ דיא [איך] צו אױך הב ·
איך קאן אױך ניט דר צֵילן דיא ליפ דיא [איך] צו אױך הב ·
ווען עש בֿון גאט ית' בישערט זול זײן זא וועלן מיר די זאך וואל צו וועגן ברענגן ·
ווען עש בֿון גאט ית' בישערט זול זײן זא וועלן מיר די זאך וואל צו וועגן
ברענגן ·
Glossary
Notes
The whole Hebrew expression הד ָב ִרים ה ֵֹאלֶ ה
ְ אַחר/י ְ ‘after these things [had come to
ֵ אַח ֵר
pass]’ is a biblical idiom commonly employed to link successive episodes of a lon-
ger narrative (e.g. Gen. 15:1, 22:1, 22:20, 39:7, 40:1, 48:1; Josh. 24:29; 1 Kgs 17:17, 21:1;
Esther 2:1, 3:1). In this obviously non-biblical, quasi-midrashic, and quasi-secular
while still very pious tale, the idiom provides if not a quasi-biblical tone, at least a
clear indication that this is a very centripetally Jewish narrative, linking it more
lesson eleven103
1 The same unconventional masculine/neuter clash recurs a few lines later with the marking as neu-
ter of the masculine noun חדר. Whether one concurs with Erik’s emendation or not, grammatical gender
in OLY seems—as must by this point have become clear to the reader—more fluid than it is in standard
modEY (which is often also rather fluid).
104 a guide to old literary yiddish
quite find his way out of the grammatical thicket of his multilayered construction
of courtesy. The use of the perfect tense (‘I wish . . . to have requested’ instead of a
simpler ‘I want’) obviously distances the speaker from the abrupt and direct expres-
sion of a desire, as if ‘I would have liked to ask you to do X, but of course I could not
actually ask such a thing of someone such as yourself and naturally I am not doing
so now, but . . . .’ One might imagine that as Zimro, who at this point in the tale is
still the quintessentially stumbling and bumbling adolescent male would-be lover,
who is also shy, pious, and nervous—just as he will later become the consummately
courageous intellectual hero in saving the Jews from the bloodless but ultimately
genocidal papal edict—struggles toward the point of his belabored request, the
eager Briyo—who is no less shy, pious, and nervous—breaks in to rescue the lad
from syntactic purgatory and pre-emptively acquiesce to his as yet unexpressed
desire: ריד ווש דו ווילט,ֵ in essence: ‘just do it!’ or ‘get on with it, dude!’ Ah, young love!
While we all as language learners welcome lexical “friends,” we must beware of
“false friends.” Those who know modEY often automatically assume that Old Yid-
dish words that are familiar to them from modEY must have identical meanings, a
fallacy against which the reader must be constantly on guard. The OLY word ֿפרוםis
just such a “false friend” (or perhaps better: a fickle friend) which has had an inter-
esting history in Yiddish after deriving from the Germanic determinant of Yiddish.
Like the modEY term, the NHG term means ‘pious.’ That exclusive sense in both
languages is, however, a result of a centuries-long historical development: the
MHG reflex vrum signified ‘capable,’ ‘honest,’ ‘honorable,’ ‘good,’ ‘felicitous,’
‘respectable,’ ‘genteel,’ ‘valiant,’ ‘courageous,’ and is much used in medieval courtly
literature, where it signified the virtues associated with the aristocratic, courtly
culture of knights and ladies. More generally, however, the MHG word denoted
something that was ‘beneficial,’ ‘advantageous,’ ‘helpful,’ ‘useful.’ And finally, only in
a minority usage, the term denoted ‘pious’ or ‘holy’ (Lexer 1872–8: vol. 3, col. 549).
Even in the early modern period, the German word was still primarily used in the
sense of ‘capable’ and ‘honorable’ (Götze 1967: 91). Even the Grimms’ dictionary of
modern German lists the term’s definitions in the order of significance: probus,
utilis, bonus, pius,2 i.e. ‘honorable,’ ‘useful,’ ‘good,’ ‘dutiful,’ with the Latin pius con-
noting at best a distant sense of ‘dutiful piety,’ but only in the final listed definition.3
That is, however, obviously the sense of the German word, not the Yiddish word.
There are many ways of expressing the concept of piety in OLY, and ורוםis only one
of them—and in fact not a particularly frequent one. That is, while ורוםcan indeed
mean ‘pious,’ in OLY it does not consistently do so, but instead almost always means
‘honorable,’ ‘upright,’ ‘just.’ In the (in)famous tag of prefaces to OLY texts, purport-
ing to identify the intended readership of those books as ורומא ווייבער, it is almost
certain that ‘honorable/upright/just’ and not ‘pious’ was the sense of the adjective.
2 The German dictionary of the Brothers Grimm very often provides definitions in Latin, still in their
day the language of European Christian, and indeed sometimes secular Jewish, scholarship; see e.g.
Moritz Steinschneider, Catalogus librorum hebraeorum in bibliotheca bodleiana (Berlin: Friedlaender,
1852–60), and Carolus Bernheimer, Fontes Ambrosiani in lucem editi cura et studio Bybliothecae Ambro-
sianae, V: Codices Hebraici Bybliothecae Ambrosianae (Milan: Biblioteca Ambrosiana, 1933).
3 Virgil’s epic hero, ubiquitously identified as pius Aeneas, is after all definitively ‘dutiful’ in the Stoic
sense and never really ‘pious’ except insofar as he is dutiful.
lesson eleven105
That OLY phrase has, however, been generally misconstrued by speakers of modEY
to mean ‘pious women,’ instead of the more appropriate sixteenth-century sense of
‘honorable women.’ But that ship, as they say, has sailed, and I do not imagine that
this note may ever change that misconception of the primary sense of the OLY
phrase.
That said, however, in returning to the present case of Briyo described as דעמױטיג
‘ אונ' גר ורוםmodest and quite frum,’ one might construe the term to mean either
‘honorable’ or ‘pious,’ or, I would suggest, both connotations, because in fact those
are precisely the traits of Briyo as revealed in the course of the tale. Thus, while the
point of this particular note is to caution against assuming the semantic identity of
OLY and modern reflexes of a Yiddish word such as ֿפרום/ורום, in this particular case
it would probably not be inappropriate to color one’s sense of ‘honorable’ with a
semantic dash of ‘pious,’ or indeed simply to translate the term here as ‘honorably
pious.’ And indeed the same could be said for the second occurrence of the term in
this text, only a couple of lines later, in reference to Zimro, who is identified as a
man learned in Torah study and ורום. In that context, the word again almost cer-
tainly means ‘pious.’ Nonetheless, the cautious reader will keep an eye out for ורוםas
‘honorable’ and even ‘valiant,’ especially in the word’s frequent use in OLY narrative
literature, where it almost never means ‘pious.’
The standard idiom ‘to like something’ in OLY (as also in modEY, Italian, Ger-
man, etc.) seems “backwards” to speakers of English: ‘ זיא גיױל אים גר וואלshe pleased
him very much’ = ‘he liked her very much.’ From the Anglophone reader’s perspec-
tive, the logical object (person/thing) liked is the grammatical subject of the sen-
tence, while the logical subject who likes that object is in the dative case. In this
reading passage, interestingly, the commonly used alternate mode of expressing
the same idea immediately follows the first expression: דיא יונק ורווא הט אין אווך גר ליפ
‘the maiden also had him very dear’ = ‘the maiden also liked him very much.’ For
the sake of English idiom, one might slightly skew the sense of הטtoward ‘held,’ and
understand ‘the maiden also held him very dear,’ producing a slightly archaic but
still idiomatic English rendering.
This reading passage includes an example of a so-called “nested” construct for-
mation in Yiddish: ‘ דא זיא נון קאמן אין דעש הערן כ ֵֹהן ַהגָ ֹדול הױזNow when they entered
the house of the lord high priest [= the noble high priest] . . . .’ For a further discus-
sion of this construction, see Lesson Twelve.
An emendation seems plausible in the clause דיא ליפ דיא [איך] צו אױך הב, since
otherwise the relative clause lacks a non-deletable subject. The word צוhas been
entered above the line in the manuscript, indicating that the scribe/corrector rec-
ognized a problem in the text, but in correcting it did not, it would seem, go quite
far enough.
The underlying grammatical form of the construction ‘ דארןon/by it’ is a combi-
nation of the preposition ‘ אןon’ with the demonstrative pronoun ‘ דשit/that.’ Were
that form as such actually to exist, it would be *אן דעם, with the dative case governed
by the preposition. Instead, however, the word order is inverted, and the demon-
strative appears in a fossilized and indeclinable form -דאר. For further discussion of
this construction, see Lesson Sixteen.
106 a guide to old literary yiddish
Translation
After these things had come to pass, modest Zimro saw the beautiful Briyo, the
daughter of Feygin, and she was very humble and quite honorably pious, and he
liked her very much. And the maiden also liked him a great deal, for she heard that
he was a man learned in the Torah and honorably pious. And in her heart she
desired [or: delighted in] him.
One day Feygin had a banquet and invited Tovas and Zimro. Then Zimro rejoiced.
When it was time to dine, he said: “Now I will reveal my heart to the maiden.” Now
when they entered the house of the lord high priest, quite a magnificent banquet had
been prepared, and the table was set with many noble dishes, such as they had never
before been seen at any person’s house. And the people were very astonished by that.
Then he said: “Those are not noble dishes. I have a much more beautiful thing,” and
led them—the king and Tovas and Zimro—with him into a room where he showed
them his beautiful daughter. She was the most essentially beautiful woman that
anyone had ever seen. Her beauty is indescribable; so I must give up trying. And
Zimro looked directly at her and could not be sated in looking at her, and was
stricken by love, so that he turned pale, and people clearly noticed it in him and
laughed at him. But they kept silent about it. Thus they once again left her and went
back into the other room and went to sleep—so drunk were they. But Zimro did not
sleep and thought how he wanted go to the beautiful daughter, even if it were to cost
him his life; and thus he went cheerfully to her in the room where she was. As he
opened the door, and she saw him coming, she got up and faced him and welcomed
him quite cordially and well, and he in turn thanked her courteously, and she led
him by the hand, and they sat down beside each other. Then he began to speak: “I
would like to say something to you in all propriety and honor and would also at the
same time like to ask that you not take it amiss.” Then she said: “Dear Zimro, say
what you wish, I will not take it amiss.” Then he said: “From the moment that I first
looked at you, I have been captivated by such love that I have no peace and beg you
to promise me that you will marry me. Then I will arrange with my father that he
speak with your father, so that he grant his permission. I will do it so that it comes
about quite honorably.” Then she said: “Dear my lord Zimro, you do not like me
lesson eleven107
nearly as much as I love you. I cannot tell you the love that I have for you. If it is the
will of God, blessed be He, then we will bring this thing about.”
Grammar
Due to the lengthy notes required by the reading passage and the inevitable initial
difficulties in learning the mashket font, no further grammatical issues are intro-
duced in this lesson.
Glossary
4 While the first of these three Hebrew verbs obviously semantically relates directly to stopping
the flow of blood, the others are only very tangentially relevant if at all. They have incantational
signficance.
108 a guide to old literary yiddish
Translation
No. 561: Whoever has a nosebleed, write on his forehead with his own blood with
the finger that is called the ring finger agef, nagef, sagef.
No. 606: A murderer who has murdered someone, and you would like to see that
the murderer dies; then take salt and put it into the wounds of the one whom he
murdered; thus he will have to die that same year.
No. 704: For quaternary fever: Take a bone from a corpse and grind it thoroughly
to powder and administer it to the patient. If it is a man, then give it to him from a
male [i.e. a man’s bone]; if it is a woman, then give it to him [!] from a female;
[it works] well.
Lesson Twelve
אזא שידן זיא בײד בֿון אננדר מיט ורױליכֿם מוט · אונ' זִי ְמרָה קאם ווידר
צו דען לױטן · אונ' שטעלט זיך אז ווען ער קײן וושר ביטרױבט העט · אונ'
ווער אנטשלופֿן בֿון וועגן דער טרונקהײט · אזא נמן דיא גישט ווידר אורלב
שלֹום :דא זִי ְמרָה הײם קאם · נאם אונ' צוגן אײן איטליכר ווידר הײם מיט ָ
ער זיך אײן קרנקהײט אן · וואלט וועדר עשן נוך טרינקן נוך שלופֿן אונ' וואר
גר טרױריג · דא זגט זײן ואטר · ליבר זון זג מיר ווארום בישטו אזא טרױריג·
זג מיר ווש אישט דײן אן ליגן · דא זגט ער ליבר הער ואטר איך מוש דיר
ֹהן גִדֹול טוכֿטר הב גיזעהן · זא בין איך זגן · זינטמאל דש איך דעש כ ֶ
מיט זױלכֿר ליבשפט גֵיגן איר ור שטריקט · וואו זיא מיר ניט צו טײל ווירט·
זא מוש איך שטערבן ור גרושר ליפא · דער הלבן ליבר הער ואטר · רֵי ד
ֹהן הגִדֹול · דש ער מיר זיא צום ווײפא גיבט :דא זגט זײן מיט דעם כ ֵ
ְחְרפָה · איך ואטר טובַת · ליב זון שווײג שטיל אונ' מך דיך אונ' מיך ניט ב ֵ
ַתן דער הלבן ואליג מיר ֶה · ער איז זיך צו מיר ניט מ ְ
ִתח ֵ בין מיך ניט טֹוע
אונ' זעץ דײן ֵדעַה דר בֿון :דא זגט זִי ְמרָה ליבר ואטר זא וויל איך דיר
חְרפָה ווערט ווש זיך דען סֹוד מְאמִין זײן · זא ווירשטו הױרן דש איך ניט ְב ֶ
הגָדֹול צו גשט גיהעט הוט · אונ' אנדר צו גיטרגן הוט · דא אונש דער כ ֵ
ֹהן ַ
לױט הבן גישלופֿן זא בין איך הײמליך צו איר קמן · אין אלין צױכטן אונ' אירן ·
דא הבן מיר בײד אננדר דיא אֵי גיהײשן · אונ' ור שפרוכֿן דא הורט
ת וואל וויא דיא זאך אײן גישטלט העט אונ' זגט נון ליבר זון זא גיהב טוב ֿ
דיך וואל · איך וויל מײן הײל ור זוכֿן · אזא גינג טובת בֿון זײנום זון זִי ְמרָה
אונ' גינג צו ויר מאנן דיא בעשטן אין דער שטט אונ' זגט אין זײניש זונש
הגָדֹול רֶידן דש אן ליגן אונ' ביגער · אונ' בט זיא זיא זולטן מיט דעם כ ֵ
ֹהן ַ
ת · דא זגטן דיא ער זײן ווילן דר צו גיבט אונ' ור היס אין אײן גוט שדְכונִי ֿ
ויר מאנן זײא דו אונ' דײן זון גיטרױשט דש ווֵילן מיר וואל צו וועגן ברענגן
איז אונש אױך קײן צווײבֿיל ניט .גיא אונ' רױשט אױך נור צו דער ברױיליפֿט
:דאֹ זגט טוב[ת] עש איז נוך צו בלד צו דער ברױיליפט צו רױשטן· איך
הב נוך צײט גינוג ורעגט אין ואר :
Glossary
Note
OLY maintains a semantic distinction between the plural forms of מ(א)ן: מאנן/מענר,
the former being the general plural, while the latter signifies a group as a collective,
as here with ויר מאנן.
Translation
Thus they parted from each other in good spirits, and Zimro returned to the people
and behaved as though he had not made waves and had slept because of drunken-
ness. Thus the guests again took their leave, and each went home in peace. When
Zimro came home, he became ill and did not want to eat, drink, or sleep and was
quite sad. Then his father said: “My dear son, tell me, why are you so sad? Tell me,
what is the matter?” Then he said: “Dear father, sir, I must tell you: since I saw the
high priest’s daughter, I have become so captivated by love for her, that if I cannot
obtain her, then I must die from my great love. For that reason, dear father, sir,
speak with the high priest so that he grant her to me as a bride.” Then his father
Tovas said: “My dear son, be silent and do not disgrace yourself or me. If I am not
mistaken, I am not of the necessary status to become his in-law. For that reason,
obey me and give up this plan.” Then Zimro said: “In that case, dear father, I would
like to share a secret with you, and thus you will hear that I am not going to bring
disgrace on myself by what has happened. When we were guests of the high priest,
and other people were sleeping, I went secretly to her with all propriety and honor.
There we both made and accepted vows to marry each other.”
Thus Tovas heard just where the matter stood and said: “Now, dear son, so be it.
I will try my luck.” So Tovas left his son Zimro and went to four men, the most
prominent in the city, and told them his son’s concern and wish and asked them to
speak with the high priest so that he would give his permission and promised them
a good matchmaker’s fee. Then the four men said: “You and your son can be confi-
dent; we will certainly bring this about; we have no doubts. Go on and prepare for
the wedding.” Then Tovas said: “It is too early to prepare for the wedding. I have
plenty of time. Ask him first.”
112 a guide to old literary yiddish
Grammar
Imperative
The imperative mood expresses a command. While some languages have complex
grammatically marked distinctions between positive and negative commands, and
even have distinct forms for first and third person commands (e.g. ‘[let them] go!’),
modern English has only a single second person form that functions for singular
and plural, while in OLY there are distinct forms for second person singular and
plural imperatives. Thus far encountered are forms such as ‘ גיgo!’ [singular] and
‘ ̌שילטpeel!’ [plural] and ‘ ̌שווטlook!’ [plural], in addition to those occurring in the
recipes.
plural singular
[zing(ə)t] זינגט [zing(ə)] )זינג(א
[fərdóu(ə)t] בֿורדווט [fərdóu(ə)])בֿורדוו(א
The negative imperative is formed by the addition of the negative particle ניט, which
generally (but not always) precedes the verb: ( ניט דר שריקBZ21) ‘do not be alarmed’;
( ניט וועש דיא הענדBZ20) ‘do not wash your hands’; but ( רױר מיך ניט אןBZ20) ‘do not
touch me.’
Quasi-construct state
After the loss of case in the course of the prehistory of the Hebrew language, the
so-called construct formation came to express the relationship between two nouns
that is in many languages expressed via the genitive case. In the simplest possible
definition functional for the present purposes, in the case of Hebrew, the two nouns
are juxtaposed with the “possessed” noun preceding the ‘possessor’ noun, e.g. יַ ד ִאישׁ
[yad iš] *‘hand man = a hand of a man = a man’s hand.’ There are complex rules in
Hebrew concerning (among other things) the shift of word stress from the first
noun and a consequent shift in vocalization, and further rules concerning the
expression of definiteness vs. indefiniteness (e.g. ‘the man’s hand’) etc., which need
not concern us here, since the points at issue are simply that this construction exists
in Hebrew, that it is quite ubiquitous, and that it expresses (among other things) a
quasi-genitive relationship between the two nouns. The construction appears in
whole Hebrew and merged Hebrew phrases in OLY.
While OLY obviously retains a functional use of the genitive case, as already seen
in many situations in the texts encountered thus far, it also occasionally displays
even in its Germanic component, a quasi-construct formation that is modeled on
the Hebrew formation, primarily to indicate possession, as in the phrase found in
the reading passage of the present lesson: ‘* זִ ְימ ָרה זון ָטבֿתZimro son Tovas’ = ‘Zimro,
son of Tovas.’ While the phrase initially may seem strange, once it is recognized as
a quasi-construct, its meaning is perfectly straightforward. The reader must be
alert to other occurrences of the construction.
lesson twelve113
Glossary
Translation
No. 746: Whom a snake has bitten—he should drink immediately, before the snake
drinks. It helps. If he has nothing to drink, he should spit onto his hand and should
drink [it] before [the snake drinks]; or he should drink of a herb called asafoetida,
or he should rub it [i.e. the bite] with garlic.
No. 854: Whoever wishes to make hair blond: Let him take swallow’s dung and mix
it with a steer’s gall and wash the hair with it.
No. 921: If you wish to make hair grow: Then take garlic or onion and rub the place
where your hair is falling out or has fallen out; and also take agrimony and grind it
thoroughly into it [the garlic or onion?] and rub it into the place that is bald; then
hair will grow there.
Lesson Thirteen
Glossary
Jewish community leader [parnes parnosim] פרנס דער פרנָ ִסים
present spv.sv9 [fḯrhaltən] בױר הלטן
money [mamən/mamoun] ָממן דער
נסי' = ַפרנָ ִסיםִ ַפ ְר
friend/relative [fraÿnd] ורױנד דער
dignified/lordly/noble/clever [klug] קלוג
young man/lad [knab] קנאב דער
empire/kingdom [raykh] רײך דש
way/manner [veg] וועג דער
sooner adv [e] אי
drown tr [dərtrenkən] דר טרענקן
disposition/decision [bəšéyd] בישײד דער
go one’s way spv.sv8 [híntsiχən] הין ציכן
in health and peace H [ləχayim uləšoləm] לְ ַחיִ ים ולְ שֹלם
predict spv [fárzogən] ור זוגן
bucket/pail [kïbəl] קױביל דער
cow [ku kï] קוא דיא קויא
buy the bucket before the cow = דען קױביל ור דער קוא קאפֿן
put the cart before the horse id
shame/disgrace [šand] שנד דיא
message/report [botšaft] פוטשפט דיא
painful [vey] ווֵ יא
burst/shatter [tsəršpringən] צור שפרינגן
for/because of prp+d/a [far] ור
pain/trouble/sorrow [tsorə] צָ ָרה דיא ־ות
twenty [tsvantsig/tsventsig] צווענציג
thousand [tóuzənt] טױזנט
guilder [gïldən] גױלדין דער ־
I get X [mir . . . verdən] ווערדן. . . מיר
suffering/affliction/distress [leyd] לײד דש
arrange/accomplish/bring about spv [óus rìχtən] אױש ריכֿטן
פט = בט
send [šikən] שיקן
for/after prp+d/a [noχ] נוך
refuse/deny spv.sv6 [óbšlogən] אב שלגן
advise sv10 [rotən] רטן
family/clan [gəšléχt] גישלעכֿט דש
mock [špotən] שפוטן
find sv5 [findən] וינדן
royal [kë́nigləχ/kḯnigləχ] קױניגליך
majesty/highness [may(ə)stót] דער/מײשטוט דיא
force/coerce [nëtən] נױטן
fetch/receive/get [holən] הולן
what kind of __ [vos __ far] ור. . . ווש
lesson thirteen117
Notes
Unless inflected, as indicated earlier (Lesson Eight), proper names are sometimes
initially difficult to construe in constructions such as ‘ דיא פוטשפט קאם זִ ְימ ַראthe news
came (to) Zimro,’ where the proper name is functionally dative.
While the construction is straightforward when parsed word by word, the clause
‘ וועם וואר ווֵ יאר דען איםfor whom was it more painful than for him?’ seems initially
densely complex syntactically.
In the clause ‘ זײן ִהערץ וואלט אים צור שפרינגןhis heart wished to shatter into pieces,’
the dative pronoun איםwould seem a dativus ethicus ‘ethical dative,’ indicating the
concern or interest of the person in question for the matter at issue (as in some
dialects of the southern US ‘I bought me a new pen’).
Just as elsewhere ‘ כּל ישראלall Israel’ idiomatically connotes ‘everyone,’ so here אלי
‘ יוֻ דןall Jews’ signifies ‘everyone.’
Translation
The four community officials went to the high priest and presented him with the
request of Tovas and Zimro that if he were to become his in-law, then he would give
his son great wealth. Then Feygin, the high priest, laughed and said: “Dear officials,
my good friends, I well know that Zimro is the most handsome and noble lad in the
land and kingdom. But to give him my daughter’s hand—that will never happen
under any circumstances. I would rather drown her. Now you have my decision.
Go, and long life and peace to you.”
Thus the four officials returned to Tovas and told him the decision. Then Tovas
said: “That is just what I predicted! You wanted me to buy the bucket before the milk
cow! Now it is a disgrace for me that I began this.” The news came to Zimro: to whom
could it have caused more pain than to him? His heart wished to shatter into pieces
from grief. Then his father said: “Be silent, my dear son. I will certainly find another
bride for you, and twenty thousand gold coins, in addition.” But Zimro could not be
comforted and said: “If I do not get the beautiful daughter, then I must die of grief.”
When Zimro saw that he could accomplish nothing through his father and the
four officials, he went to the king and told him his concern, for he was dear to the
king, and he asked him to speak to the high priest, so that he would give him his
daughter in marriage. Then he said: “I would be happy to do it,” and sent for the high
priest and said to him: “I would like to make a request of you; you will not refuse to
do it for me: give your daughter Briyo to Zimro in marriage.” Then the high priest
took fright and said: “Dear my lord king, would you advise me to join myself to a
lineage lower than my own? All Jews will ridicule me. It is not in my nature, and
I will, moreover, not do it. May your royal highness do as he wishes.” Then the king
said: “I will not force you.” Thus he departed. And Tovas and Zimro came to the king
and wanted to get good news from him, but it was not what they wished for. Then
118 a guide to old literary yiddish
the king told them what answer the high priest had given him. “Therefore, my dear
Zimro, give up your desire. Try what you will, it will not happen.”
Grammar
Past participle
The past participle is the third principal part of the OLY verb, as explained in Lesson
Six. As a participle, it is by definition a verbal adjective and is widely used as such in
OLY (e.g. JtR34: ‘ די גבֿלדנן שטױלא מיט גולדא וול בשלגןthe folded [= folding] chairs well
inlaid with gold’), where both ‘ גבֿלדנןfolded’ and ‘ בשלגןinlaid’ are past participles and
in this passage used adjectivally. Thus, a semantically appropriate participle can
legitimately be simply substituted for another adjective, as in the examples: ‘she is
intelligent’ (adj.)/‘she is educated’ (participle < ‘educate’). In addition to its strict
adjectival use, the participle is—as a verbal—also a component of two important
constructions in the OLY verbal system: the perfect tenses of the active voice (see
below in this lesson) and all forms of the passive voice (see Lesson Fourteen).
Depending on the type of base verb on which it is formed, the past participle has
both a characteristic prefix and a characteristic suffix. In both strong and weak
verbs, the past participle is in principle formed by prefixing the marker -)[ ג(יgə-] to
the participial stem (or infixing it between separable prefix and the participial
stem). In practice, however, that prefix/infix is frequently omitted, and in a particu-
lar sub-class of verbs that have their own additional (quasi-adverbial) prefixes, the
-) ג(יparticipial prefix is in fact prohibited (see below).1 Two types of suffixes mark
the participle: weak verbs characteristically add a dental suffix ([ )־ט-t] to the end of
the stem,2 while strong verbs add the ending [ ־ן-ən] (in addition to exhibiting the
stem vowel shift characteristic of the strong sub-class to which they belong).
1 Moreover, as has already been seen, some non-participial verb forms take the -) ג(יprefix.
2 Verbs whose stems end in a dental (־ד/ )־טdo not generally add the additional participial dental, e.g.
the past participle of בֿור שולדןappears as ( בֿור שוּלטPaV 260, 6). This same assimilation of stem-final
dentals with the ־טinflection of the 3rd sg and 2nd pl is also general.
lesson thirteen119
original denotations have often faded or shifted. But whatever their origin, these
prefixes have in OLY become functional components of the verbs themselves. The
two types have generally been designated as separable prefix verbs and inseparable
prefix verbs, and despite some problems with those designations, those terms will
be retained here.3 In this lesson’s reading there are examples of both types: דר טרענקן
‘drown,’ ‘ בויר הלטןoffer/make presentation to,’ and ‘ אויש ריכֿטןaccomplish,’ the first of
which is an inseparable prefix verb, while the latter two are separable prefix verbs.
The terminological problem just noted derives from the fact that the prefix + verb
of both types are more often than not written as two words in OLY. The grammati-
cally functional separation or lack thereof becomes clear, however, in quite another
manner. In addition to the participial prefix -)ג(י, just introduced, the infinitive
marker ‘ צוto’ has also been encountered previously: תֺורה ָ ‘ צו לערנן זיאto teach them
Torah.’ When the prefix -) ג(יor infinitive marker צוoccur with separable prefix
verbs, they are infixed between the prefix and the main verb:
With inseparable prefix verbs, on the other hand, the infinitive marker צוis never
infixed between the prefix and main verb, but rather precedes the prefix. Moreover,
the participial prefix -) ג(יnever occurs with inseparable prefix verbs, which are
marked as past participles simply by the characteristic strong or weak participial
ending:
Finally, one should note that the prefixes of separable prefix verbs always receive
the word accent, while prefixes of inseparable prefixes never receive the word
accent:
[dərtrénkən] דר טרענקן
[fḯrhaltən] בויר הלטן
[óusriχtən] אויש ריכֿטן
Among other separable prefix verbs encountered are the following examples,
which demonstrate the final characteristic of this category of verbs: when the separ
able prefixed verb is the finite verb of the clause (i.e. it agrees with the subject of the
sentence), then the prefix is generally shifted to final position in the clause (or in
any case to a position after the verbal root) and is thus indeed quite separate:
3 The attentive reader will have noticed that separable prefix verbs have been identified as such (spv)
in the lesson glossaries, and all such verbs are so marked in the volume glossary at the end of the book.
120 a guide to old literary yiddish
‘they all gazed at Joseph’ (JtR62) זי זוהן אלא יוסף אן אן זהן
‘then she got up’ (BZ11) אוף שטן דא שטנד זיא אוף
‘administer it to the patient’ (Rec11) איין גיבן גיב עש דעם קרנקן אײן
‘he became ill/feigned illness’ (BZ12) אן נימן נאם ער זיך אײן קרנקהײט אן
(JtR 6) ווי מוכטא איך דיזא מישטט אומר מי בֿור דוון בֿור דוון
‘How might I bear this transgression for evermore’
(JtR49) בֿור שניטן אונ' בֿור וונדט וורדן אין די הינדא בֿור וונדן/בֿור שניידן
‘Their hands became carved up and lacerated.’
Perfect tense:
BZ17 ‘ איר הט ור פיטן דיא יודן ווײבר זולן ניט ְט ִבילָ ה גֵ יןYou have forbidden Jewish
women to go to the ritual bath’
Pluperfect tense:
JtR60 ‘ זין חרצא הטא ער צו ג' גזנטhis heart he had sent up to God’
With some frequency in OLY, the perfect tense is constructed with what appears
to be an infinitive instead of the past participle: ‘ זינד דש דיר גאט דש גלױק געבן הוטsince
God has granted you the good fortune . . . ’ and ( דש דו ור מיך בישט קומןBZ17) ‘that you
have come before me.’ The forms should, however, be recognized as past participles
that simply lack the non-obligatory -) ג(יprefix of the past participle.
Such is then the basic structure and usage of the perfect tenses in OLY, but there is
also a further complication, already familiar to those readers who know modern Yid-
dish or German: there are two possible auxiliary verbs in the perfect tense. Generally,
the perfect auxiliary is ‘ הוןhave,’ but in some cases it is ‘ זייןbe.’ This feature incidentally
also characterized Old English and survived even into early modern English, although
it is now generally only known from the King James Bible in such expressions as ‘he is
come’ (as opposed to the modern standard ‘he has come’). Lest the reader imagine that
the use of one or the other auxiliary be arbitrary or a matter of personal choice, it
should be noted that the usage is strictly governed: certain verbs use the one auxiliary,
while others use the other auxiliary; there is no vacillation. Fortunately for the reader,
it is only a matter of recognizing the form, not producing it.
In OLY the use of the auxiliary זייןin the perfect tenses is quite common, and,
fortunately for those who know modern Yiddish or German, the distribution of הון
and זייןas auxiliaries is in large part the same as in those languages. The use of the
one as opposed to the other auxiliary cannot always be defined according to an
abstract rule, but it is possible to propose some rules of thumb: הוןis used with
transitive verbs (verbs that take an accusative object: ‘she has seen him’), reflexive
verbs (‘she has seen herself [in the mirror],’4 and most impersonal verbs (‘it has
rained’). On the other hand, זייןas the auxiliary verb of the perfect tenses is used
with intransitive verbs denoting a change of state or place (dying, going, coming,
riding, etc.), and with זייןand בלייבן.
4 Examples of reflexive verbs (i.e. verbs that require the reflexive pronoun to complete their mean-
ing): זי ̌שעמטן זיךJtR53 ‘they were embarrassed’; זי בגונדן זיך אומא זחןJtR53 ‘they began to glance around’; ער
זולט זיך צו אים ִמ ְת ַח ֵתן זײןBZ13 ‘if he were to become his in-law.’
122 a guide to old literary yiddish
JtR54 ‘ זי ווישטן ניכט זעלבר ווי אין ווש ג̌שחןthey themselves did not quite understand
what had happened to them’
PaV 252,3 ‘ נורט וויא זיא וואר גיוועזט בײ זײנם עטonly how she had been with his
father’
Glossary
which(ever)/who(ever) [velχ-]5 וועלכ־
breast [brust brïst] ברושט דיא ברױשט
hang sv9 [hangən] האנגן
eggshell [eyəršal] אײער שאל דיא
strawberry [róutber] דש ־ן/רוט ביר דיא
(bees)wax [vaχs] וואכש דש
butter [putər] פוטער דיא
rise/straighten/firm refl.spv [óuf rìχtən ziχ] אױף ריכֿטן זיך
depart/leave spv.irv [obgon] אב גון
so that a woman has a miscarriage דש אײנר ורױאן דש קינט אב גיא
[dos eynər frouən dos kind obge]
milk [milχ] מילך דיא
fem dog [hïntən] הונטין דיא
pregnant [trogən] טרגן
mouse [mouzə] מױיזא דיא
Translation
No. 949: (For) whichever woman whose breasts sag: let her take egg shells, straw-
berries, and wax and butter and rub them therewith; then will they rise up.
No. 993: So that a woman will miscarry: give her dog’s milk to drink, mixed in wine
or honey; then she will miscarry.
No. 998: So that a woman not be impregnated by you: carry with you the heart of a
mouse; then she will not be impregnated by you.
5 The syntax of the title ווילֿכער ורױיאן די ברושט האנגןmay initially seem opaque, but indeed represents
the common dependent genitive + nominative construction: ‘Jane’s job,’ here: ‘of whichever woman the
breasts sag’ = ‘whichever woman’s breasts sag.’
Lesson Fourteen
דא ווארטיט זִי ְמרַא ביז דש מן אין דיא שול גינג · דא גינג ער אין דש כהן
הגדול הױז :אז בלד זיא אין דער זאך ליש זיא אין אײן אונ' אנטפפינג אין ·
אונ' ער הוב אן צו ווײנן · דא זגט זיא ווארום ווײנישטו · דא זגט ער דארום
דש דײן ואטר דיך מיר ניט וויל געבן צום ווײפא · דא הוב זיא אווך אן צו
ווײנן · אונ' זגט דש גאט דער ברים · דא זגט זִי ְמרָה הערץ ליבי טרױא
איך וויל דיך אום אײן פיט פיטן :דש דו מיר זיא גיווערשט · דא זגט זיא
פיט ווש דו ווילשט · דוא זולשט גיווערט זײן · איך ווײש וואל דש דו מיר ניקש
צו מוטשט דש · זױנדא אונ' שנדא איז · דא זגט ער זא ביט איך דיך דש
דו קײן אנדר מן נעמשט דען מיך · זא וויל איך דיר ור הײשן קײן אנדר
ווײפא צו נעמן דען דיך · דא שפרך זיא איך וויל עש גערן טון · אזא גילובטן
זיא אן אננדר · דא ליש זִי ְמרָא אײן גרושן זיפפֿצא אונ' זאך זיא אן · דא שפרך
זיא אײ ווארום טושטו אזא · דא זגט ער איך וועלט נוך אײן בעט אן דיך
הון וועלשט מירש ניט ור זגן · איך וועלט דיך גערן קוסן · דא זגט זיא עש
זײא דיר דר לאבט · דא קוסט ער זיא טױזנט מול אונ' זיא אין אווך :דא
וואלט מן שיר אױש דער שול גֵין · דא שטונדן זיא אונ' ווײנטן מיט אננדר ·
אונ' זיא שפרך ליבר זִי ְמרָא ווען דו מיט דעם יונגן קױניג רײטשט · זא רײט
ור מײנום הױז בֿור · זא שטֵיא איך אן אײנום וענשטר דש איך דיך זעהן
קאן · אבר דו קנשט מיך ניט זעהן · ווען איך דש וענשטר ניט אוף טוא ·
אבר אלי מורגן זא מן ָברְכֿוּ זגט זא דו איך דש וענשטר אוף אונ' הױר
ַברְכֿוּ אורן · זא קנשטו מיך זעהן · אונ' ווען דו זיכֿשט אײן הנד צוועל אױש
הער הענקן · זא קום צו מיר · אזא שיד ער דר בֿון · מיט ורױליכֿם מוט ·
אונ' אלי מורגן גינג ער אונטר איר וענשטר אונ' זאהן זיך אן אננדר אן :
Glossary
]wait [vartən ווארטן
]one indec [man/mən מן
]synagogue [šul שול דיא
]glimpse/catch sight of scv2 [dərze(χ)ən דער זעהן
]admit/let [someone] in spv.sv10 [áynlosən אײן לשן
]weep [veynən ווײנן
]for the reason that/because [dorúm dòs דארום דש
]also [óuχ אווך
]have mercy [dərbárəmən דער ברימן
]true/loyal/faithful [traÿə טרױא
124 a guide to old literary yiddish
[my] dear, true heart [herts líbə tràÿə] הערץ ליבי טרױא
grant/bestow/concede [gəverən] גיווערן
inflict/burden/subject to spv [tsúmutən] צו מוטן
sin/transgression [zïndə] זױנדא דיא
shame/disgrace [šand(ə)] שנדא דיא
promise/vow [gəlobən] גילובן
sigh [ziftsə] 1זיפפֿצא דער
ah!/oh! interj [ay] אײ
deny/refuse [fərzogən] ור זגן
kiss [kusən] קוסן
may be subj [zay] )זײא (> ַזײן
permit/allow/grant [dərlabən/dərlóubən] דר לאבן
time(s) often pl sense [mol(t)] מול(ט)דש
immediately/at once/almost [šir] שיר
young king = prince [yung kënig/yung meləχ] מלֶ ך דער/קױניג
ֶ יונג
ride sv7 [raytən] רײטן
window [fenstər] וענשטר דש
open ir.spv [óuftun] אוף טון
morning [morgən] מורגן דער
[beginning of] morning prayer H [borχu] ָב ְרכֿוּ
דו = טו
pray/recite (prayer) [orən] אורן
towel [tsvel] צוועל דער
hang out spv.sv9 [óushangən] אױש האנגן
here/there/at that place [her] הער
Note
While the two distinct grammatical structures associated with the verb גיווערןin this
passage seem almost the standard active and passive voices, there is a slight quirk:
(1) ‘ דש דו מיר זיא גיווערשטthat you would grant it to me’ and (2) ‘ דוא זולשט גיווערט זײןyou
will be granted [it].’ In the former (active), that which is sought constitutes the
direct object of the verb, and the one who benefits is in the dative case, while in the
latter (quasi-passive), the one who benefits is the subject of the sentence, while that
which is sought remains unexpressed. The latter expression seems slightly askew,
but the meaning is nonetheless clear.
Translation
Then Zimro waited until they went to the synagogue; then he went into the high
priest’s house. As soon as she saw him, she let him in and welcomed him, and he
began to weep. She then said: “Why are you weeping?” He then said: “Because your
father will not give you to me in marriage.” Then she also began to weep and said:
1 The spelling of this word is an interesting orthographical suggestion of the unrounding of the
German stock language (~ MHG siufze [züftsə]).
lesson fourteen125
“May God have mercy!” Then Zimro said: “My dear beloved, I would like to make a
request of you, if you would grant it to me.” Then she said: “Ask whatever you wish; it
will be granted to you. I know that you will not force on me anything sinful or shame-
ful.” Then he said: “Then I ask that you take no husband besides me, and I will promise
you that I will take no other wife besides you.” Then she said: “I will gladly do that.”
Thus they vowed to each other. Zimro sighed deeply and looked at her. Then she said:
“O why are you doing that?” Then he said: “I’d like to make one more request of you:
if you would not refuse me, I would like to kiss you.” Then she said: “You would be
permitted.” Then he kissed her a thousand times, and she kissed him also.
Then it was almost time for people to leave the synagogue. There they stood,
weeping with each other. And she said: “Dear Zimro, when you ride with the
prince, ride first before my house. Then I will stand at a window, so that I can see
you, but you cannot see me if I do not open the window. But every morning when
the morning prayer begins, I open the window and listen to the opening of the
prayer. Then you can see me. And when you see a towel hanging at the window,
then come to [visit] me.” At this he departed with a cheerful spirit, and every morn-
ing he passed beneath her window, and they looked at one another.
Grammar
Passive voice
While the passive voice has become quite rare in spoken modEY, replaced by the
active voice with an impersonal subject (so that a sentence such as דאס הױז ָ מען קױֿפט
‘one buys the house’ is far more common than דאס הױז ווערט געקױֿפט ָ ‘the house is
bought’), in OLY literary texts the passive is not infrequent. Indeed, there are several
distinct forms of the passive voice in OLY. The most common form is regularly con-
structed with the appropriate finite form of the passive auxiliary verb ווער(ד)ןand the
past participle of the main verb: ( בֿור שניטן אונ' בֿור וונדט וורדן אין די הינדאJtR49) ‘their
hands were/became carved up and lacerated.’ This sentence’s syntax is conditioned
by the poetic form; normative word order would presumably be: די הינדא וורדן אין בֿור
שניטן אונ' בֿור וונדט. The (3rd pl) preterite tense of the passive auxiliary verb agrees with
the plural subject די הינדא, and the past participles בֿור שניטןand בֿור וונדטcomplete the
verbal construction. A further example: ( עש מוש בצײגט ווערדןJtR31) ‘he2 must be put
on display.’ Here the passive construction is made more complex by the addition of
the modal verb ‘ מושmust,’ but the structure is still quite normative, consisting of
subject + finite modal + preterite participle + infinitive of the passive auxiliary.
The past tense of the passive is predictably constructed with a past tense of the
auxiliary verb + the past participle of the main verb: אין (מאשקווה) איז בישלאסן ווארדן
. . דאש דיא צווייא גיברידר. (Cou22) ‘In Moscow (it) has been (= was) decided that the two
brothers . . . ’; ‘ אונ' זיא זײן אלי דרײא פֿרברענט ווארדןand they have all three been burned’
(Cou23); ( אונ' זײן שיף איז דאך גלײך וואול נ[א]ך אין דען (טעסל) ארײן גישלעפט ווארדןCou23)
‘and nevertheless his ship has still managed to be towed to Texel.’ As is clear in these
2 The 3rd person singular neuter subject of the sentence עשrefers to Joseph, since its grammatical
antecedent is the diminutive form, ‘ יודליןthe little Jew,’ with its neuter suffix.
126 a guide to old literary yiddish
cases, the perfect tense of the passive auxiliary verb וור(ד)ןis constructed with the
perfect auxiliary זיין.
The second form of the OLY passive is the so-called stative passive (as opposed
to the passive just described, which is often designated the dynamic passive), which
has no distinct form in modern English, although the semantic distinction is clear:
dynamic: ‘while I was watching, the window was broken’ (i.e. someone broke the
window); stative: ‘when I checked, the window was broken’ (i.e. at that moment the
window was not intact).
In OLY the two forms are sometimes expressed by distinct forms. While the
dynamic passive uses וור(ד)ןas the auxiliary verb, the stative passive instead uses זיין,
thus: ( אירא ליכטא וארווא ויל גר ווש בֿור בליכןJtR63), which literally means: ‘their bright
color had completely paled,’ but the sense of the stative passive could be approxi-
mated as: ‘their bright color was completely paled’; ‘ איך בינש אײן צינטI am inflamed’
(Wh3); ‘ דוא זולשט גיווערט זייןit should/would/will be granted to you’ (BZ14). In such
usage, the adjectival aspect of the participle is emphasized.
Finally, a third quasi-passive voice is possible in OLY (as well as modEY and
NHG) that is impossible in modern English: ( ̌שונא רוטא או̌פל היש זי חר בֿורא טרגןJtR41),
which could be literally (and non-idiomatically) translated as *‘she ordered to
bring forth beautiful, red apples,’ i.e.: ‘she ordered beautiful red apples [to be]
brought forth.’ It might seem to Anglophone sensibilities that a grammatical dele-
tion of some kind has occurred: either the recipient of the order has been deleted
(‘she ordered [a servant] to bring forth the beautiful red apples’) or the passive
auxiliary has been deleted and the participle replaced by the infinitive (‘she ordered
beautiful, red apples to be brought forth’). One might well construe the construc-
tion as such, but in fact, in OLY it is complete, idiomatic, and syntactically quite
normal as it stands.
תתרכ''ז ווען̅ ̅זיך אײנש ג̅ב̅רענט היט̅ ̅מיט הײשם ו̅ו̅אשר אודר א̅י̅ם בֿױיער
נים מילך אונ' וועש דען בראנט · דר נוך נים פֿפערדש מישט אונ' ברענש צו פולבֿר
··אונ' זע עש אױף דען בראנט עש הילפט
lesson fourteen127
Glossary
someone/anyone indecl [eyns] אײנש
burn ir.wv [brenən] ברענן
burn (wound) [brant] בראנט דער
ברענש = ברען עש
sow/strew [zeən] זעען
pain/ache [veytəg] וויא טג דער
tooth [tson / tsenə] צון דער צינא
on whatever day adv [veləχs togs] וויליכֿש טגש
juice [zaft] דש/זֿפט דער
hurt/ache spv.irv [veyton] וויא טון
study Torah [lernən] לערנן
mother [mutər] מוטר דיא
bathe [bodən] באדן
right [reχt] רעכט
mother/‘mom,’ here as incantational word H [imə] אמה
incantational word [timə] תמה
left [left] לינק
suckle/nurse/breastfeed [zeygən] זײגן
Note
The words אמהand תמהhere function as incantional words; it is not coincidental in
the present context that the first word means ‘mother’ in Hebrew, but the two
incantational words also rhyme and begin with the first and last letters of the
alphabet, the kind of characteristics typically important in the construction of
incantations.
Translation
No. 1027: If someone has burned him-/herself in hot water or fire: take milk and
bathe the burn; thereafter take horse manure and burn it to powder (ash) and strew
it over the burn. It helps.
No. 1032: For toothache: on whichever day one rubs the teeth with onion juice, they
will cause him no pain on that day.
No. 1047: If you would like to make a lad study well: when his mother bathes, write
on her right breast א̅מהand write ת̅מהon her left breast; and she is to breast-feed the
lad, and then he will study well.
Lesson Fifteen
אײן מולט קאם דער יונג ֶמלֶך צו רײטן · אונ' זגט צו זִי ְמרָה וועלן מיר ור
דש טור רײטן שפצירן · דא זגט זִי ְמרָה יוא · דא ריטן זיא מיט אננדר ·
אוש זִי ְמרָא וואר זיפצן אונ' גר טרױריג · דא זגט דער יונג מלך ווש אישט
דיר דש דו אזא טרױריג בישט · ור הושטו מיט דעם פפֿערד
גישפרענגט · אונ' איצונדר רײטשטו אז ווען דו שליפֿשט דו מושט מיר
ֹהן גָדול הוט אײןזגן ווש דיר אישט אודר אן ליגט · דא זגט ער דער כ ֵ
טוכֿטר וואו זיא מיר ניט ווערט זא מוש איך שטערבן ור לײד · דא זגט
דער יונג מלך גיהעב דיך ניט אױבל שווײג שטיל זיא מוש דיר ווערדן ·
איך וויל עש מײנום ואטר זגן ער מוש נוך אים שיקן · אונ' מוש מיט אים
רֵידן דש ער זיא דיר געבן מוש · ווערט עש מײנום ואטר ניט ור זגן ·
אזא רײטן זיא מיט אננדר ביז אוף דיא בורג ·· דא זגט דער אלט מלך
ווש אישט דיר דש דו אזא ערנישט הפֿט זיכֿט איך הלט דו בישט
ניט בײא זעלבשט · דא זגט דער יונג מלך איך ווילש דיר זגן · דא זגט
ֹהן גָדול פיטן · דש ער דֵים זִי ְמרָה זײן טוכטר ער אים ער זולט דען כ ֵ
צום ווײפ געב · דא זגט דער מלך איך הב אין ור אווך אײן מול גיבעטן
הוט מיר מײן פיט ור זגט · דא זגט דער יונג מלך איך וועלט עש אים
שאפֿן אונ' פיטן · וואו ערש דיר ווידר אב שלױג וועלט אין אם לײפ שטרופֿן
· דער שיקט ווידר נוך אים אונ' זגט צו אים איך הב דירש ור אווך צו
גימוט דו וועלשט זִי ְמרָה דײן טוכטר צום ווײפ געבן · דש זעלביג הושטו
מיר ור זגט · איצונדר פיט איך דירש · אונ' וועלט ניט מורִיד אן מיר זײן ·
הגָדול איך ווײש וואל וואו איך עש ניט טעט · זא ֹהן ַ
דא זגט דער כ ֵ
וואױרשטו מיך טױטן · דען ווער ניט טוט ווש דער מלך זגט דער הוט
דש לעבן ור לורן · אונ' וויל עש דוך ניט טון ווש מיר דארום גישיכֿט ·
וויא וואל דער זִי ְמרָה אײן שױנר וואל גילערנטר אונ' ווײזר קנאב איז · איך
וויל מײן טוכֿטר אֵי דר טרענקן אֵי איך זיא אים געבן וויל .דער מלך וואר
צורניג אונ' זגט איך וויל דיך לושן טױטן · דיא ווײל דו מיך ור אכֿשט · זא
ביהלט דיר דײן טוכֿטר · איך וויל זִי ְמרָ' וואל אײן אנדר ווײפ געבן · און
דײן טוכֿטר :דער מלך שפרך צו זִי ְמרָה זוך דיר אײן אנדר ווײפ אין אל
מײנום לנד · זא וויל איך דיר ויל ָממֹון דר צו געבן · אבר עש גיױל זִי ְמרָה
ניט · דיא שױן ְברִיעָה לג אים אין זין · אונ' זגט דעם מלך גרושן דנק
אונ' שיד בֿון אִים מיט טרױריקײט :
130 a guide to old literary yiddish
Glossary
come riding sv4 + sv7 [kumən . . . tsu raytən] צו רײטן. . . קומן
gate [tor] טור דש
outside the gate = outside the city [fár dos tòr] ור דש טור
take a ride/go for a ride sv7+wv [raytən špatsirən] רײטן שפצירן
yes [yo] יוא
take a ride/go for a ride spv.sv7 [óus raytən] אוש רייטן
sigh [ziftsən] זיפצן
what is the matter with you [vos íst dir] ווש אישט דיר
earlier/formerly adv [far] ור
saddle horse [(p)ferd] פפֿערד דש
leap/gallop [šprengən] שפרענגן
sleep sv10, here pres.subj [šlofən] שלופֿן
concern +d.spv.sv1 [ónligən] אן ליגן
be bothered refl.sv13 [gəhebən ziχ ïbəl] גיהעבן זיך אױבל
where; here: if [vu] וואו
castle/fortified town [burg] בורג דיא
grave/serious/earnest [érn(ə)sthaft] ערנישט הפֿט
[one]self [zelbst] זעלבשט
be oneself/feel well [zayn bay zelbst] זיין בײא זעלבשט
look at/look (= appear/seem) scv2 [zeχən] זהן
do/accomplish/arrange [šafən] שאפֿן
punish [štrofən] שטרופֿן
that/the selfsame (thing) [doszelbig(ə)] דש זעלביג
rebel/revolt [móurid zayn] מוֹריד זײן ִ
kill [tëtən] טױטן
life [lebən] לעבן דש
lose sv8 [fərlirən] ור לירן
here: no matter what/whatever [vos] ווש
[traditionally] educated/learnèd [gəlérnt] גילערנט
wise [vayz] ווײז
angry/irate/wrathful [tsornig] צורניג
because [diváyl] דיא ווײל
despise/be contemptuous of [fəraχtən] ור אכֿטן
keep/retain sv9 [bəhaltən] ביהלטן
without [on] און
seek/look for [zuχən] זוכן
but [abər/obər] אבר
be in his mind/heart sv1 [ligən im in zin] ליגן אים אין זין
thanks/gratitude [dank] דנק דער
sadness [tróurikeyt] טרױריקײט דיא
Notes
Two common idioms of motion occur in this lesson’s reading, both of which are
also idiomatic in modEY. First, the idiom קומען צו+ verb of motion corresponds to
lesson fifteen131
the English idiom ‘comes X-ing’: ‘ קומן צו רײטןcomes riding’; ‘ קומן צו ֿפרןcomes driving
[e.g. in a carriage]’; ‘ קומן צו גוןcomes walking’; e.g. אײן מולט קאם דער יונג ֶמלֶ ך צו רײטן
‘once the prince came riding’ (or ‘rode up’). Secondly, the construction consisting
of a verb of motion + שפצירןconnotes a leisure activity undertaken for the sake of
pleasure or recreation and/or without a specific goal or result in mind: רייטן שפצירן
‘go for a ride,’ ‘ ֿפרן שפצירןgo for a ride/drive [in a carriage],’ ‘ גון שפצירןgo for a walk/
stroll’; e.g. ‘ וועלן מיר ור דש טור רײטן שפצירןshould we go for a ride outside the gate
(= outside the city)?’ Compound tenses are formed by treating שפּצירןas a quasi-
separable prefix: ‘ ער אישט שפּצירן גיריטןhe took a ride.’
As is common with the expression of emotional or psychic states in OLY, the
issue of ‘what is the matter with you?’ is expressed by an impersonal statement: ווש
‘* אישט דירwhat is to you?’ (see also later in this passage ‘ עש גיױל זִ ְימ ָרה ניטit did not
please Zimro’). In this passage a single sentence includes both common modes of
expressing the idea: ווש דיר אישט אודר אן ליגט, literally *‘what is the matter with you or
what burdens/concerns ( )אן ליגןyou?’
With few exceptions, OLY texts maintain a strict orthographical distinction
between '[ אונun] ‘and’ and [ אוןon] ‘without.’ Remembering this seemingly trivial
orthographical distinction will ease the reader’s comprehension of many a simple
passage that otherwise might seem impenetrable.
The designation of the ruler as ‘ דער אלט מלךthe old king’ and his son as דער יונג מלך
‘the young king’ (i.e. ‘the crown prince’) only seems unusual at first sight, and is
clearly part of the conception of monarchy in this text, since in fact the king passes
sovereignty on to his son before his death.
Translation
Once the prince came riding and said to Zimro: “Should we go for a ride outside the
city?” Then Zimro replied: “Yes.” So they rode out together. Zimro heaved sighs and
was gloomy. So the prince said: “What is the matter with you, Zimro, that you are
so gloomy? In times past you made leaps with your horse, and now you are riding
as if asleep. You really must tell me, what the matter is or what troubles you.” So
Zimro said: “The high priest has a daughter, and if I cannot have her, I will die of
grief.” Then the prince said: “Do not let it bother you. Be silent. She will certainly be
yours. I will tell my father; he will have to send for him and speak with him, so that
he gives her to you in marriage. He will not refuse my father.”
Thus they rode with each other up to the castle. There the king said: “What is the
matter with you, that you look so serious? I do not think that you are feeling well.”
So the prince said: “I will tell you.” Then he told him that he should ask the high
priest to give his daughter to Zimro in marriage. So the king said: “I have already
asked him once. He rejected my request.” So the prince said: “I would ask him and
arrange it so that if he were to refuse you again, it would cost him his life.”
He again sent for the high priest and said to him: “I already insisted of you once
before that you give your daughter to Zimro in marriage, and you refused me. Now
I am asking you, and do not rebel against me.” Then the high priest said: “I am
certain that if I do not do it, you will kill me, for whoever refuses to do what the king
says has lost his life. But still I will not do it, no matter what happens to me because
132 a guide to old literary yiddish
of it. Although Zimro is a handsome, well-educated and wise lad, I would rather
drown my daughter than let her marry him.” The king was angry and said: “I will
have you killed because of your contempt for me. So keep your daughter. I will give
Zimro another bride, leaving your daughter out of it.” The king said to Zimro: “Seek
throughout my kingdom for another bride for yourself. I will give you in addition
great wealth.” But it did not please Zimro. He had only the beautiful Briyo in his
heart. So he thanked the king and departed sorrowfully.
Grammar
Punctuation
What follows here is a strictly minimalist discussion of OLY punctuation, solely for
the pragmatic purposes of the present pedagogical project. The issue is complex
and vexed and often to be reconceived for each individual text. The notes here are
intended to provide no more than an initial orientation.
In general one might simply observe that, as is also the case with other pre-
modern languages, the conventions of OLY punctuation are quite different from
those of modern languages. There is, for instance, neither question mark /?/ nor
any other marker of a question, and likewise no exclamation point /!/ or any other
marker of an emphatic statement, and none for marking direct speech or quota-
tions. Generally, what one finds is a simple indicator of a minimal clausal unit, but
even that is not consistent, i.e. not all clauses or sentences are set off by a mark of
punctuation. Statistically the most common mark of punctuation is probably the
mid-line point /·/, which is by far the fundamental form of punctuation in prose
texts, marking the end of syntactic units (clauses and sentences), although with
some frequency it seems to mark no discernible syntactic unit above the level of a
single word (as e.g.: · ֹטובת אונ' זִ ְימ ַרה ביגער · בױר
ַ אונ' הילטן איםBZ13). In poetry, the
mid-line point also variously functions to mark the end of a poetic line, while a
double point /:/ often marks the end of poetic couplets or poetic stanzas (but also
often of single poetic lines; cf. “Abraham the Patriarch,” EYT 5; “Duke Horant,” EYT 9):
The mid-line point as a marker of poetic lines is replaced in rare cases by a comma-
like mark on the lower line (the stanzaic Vidvilt epic, EYT 112). Rarely do poetic
lines have any internal punctuation, no matter the syntactic structure. Further-
more, not all poetic lines or couplets are marked by mid-line points or double
points, as in PaV, where line-ends are rarely marked, and couplets are sometimes
marked with mid-line dots, sometimes with double points, sometimes with nei-
ther, while double points often simply mark the ends of stanzas. The mid-line point
often “strays” to the level of the lower line (a quasi-period) with no function that is
discernibly distinct from the mid-line point:
Sometimes the graphic form of the mid-line point seems more like an apostrophe
than a dot (as in the selection from the “Fox Fable” (Lesson Nineteen). Often the
double points are not vertically but horizontally arranged (Rec10), and sometimes
there are more than two (Psalms translation, EYT 24), and sometimes repeating
patterns of double and single points (“Song of the Kid,” EYT 26). Sometimes the dots
of the double point that marks a line-end are somewhat elongated and appear almost
as a double apostrophe (as, inconsistently, in the Song of Songs translation, EYT 30).
Sometimes the double point is repeated /::/ as a marker of a syntactic unit (biblical
verse) (1544 Pentateuch, EYT 46). In poetic texts in which line-ends are marked with
a double point, stanza-ends may be marked by doubling that mark (Wallich,
“Memento Mori,” EYT 87). A similar usage is found in a sixteenth-century Penta-
teuch translation (EYT 79), where the mark is, however, a double apostrophe.
In general one might conceive of the double point as an indicator of a larger
syntactic unit (sentence, paragraph), while the mid-line point marks smaller syn-
tactic units (phrase, clause, and often also sentence). But one must bear in mind
that that is really only a general tendency, for in the hymn “Mighty is He” (Lesson
Seventeen), the double point and mid-line point seem to be indiscriminately used
to separate the succession of epithets for the divine attributes, although sometimes
adjacent items in the list are without any punctuation. The mid-line points and
double points of the song “Whither am I to go?” indeed provide no particularly
useful guidance even about what constitutes individual lines of the song. Texts
often have little or no punctuation of any kind, for instance, the letter of Pelayn
(Lesson Eighteen), while the first riddle introduced in this volume (Lesson Eight)
has none, except for the final mid-line point. Especially in prose texts, one can
sometimes read several pages before coming across any mark of punctuation (e.g.
EYT 82, 84, 128).
Readers of OLY will thus almost always have to supply punctuation mentally, that
is, construe and parse the syntax of texts, which obviously requires a nuanced
understanding of OLY syntax, i.e. how the language is structured grammatically and
phraseologically. The present volume provides as much guidance as practicable
(given its modest goals) on such issues, but readers will have to build steadily on that
basis as they proceed with their own readings after completion of this volume.
Some texts make a point of distinguishing between vocabulary components, i.e.
for instance between the Germanic component of Yiddish and other components.
This practice is most often seen with Semitic-component vocabulary, which, as
noted earlier, is often written or typeset in a square script to distinguish it from the
mashket script/font generally used. Semitic-component vocabulary and whole
Hebrew words or phrases are also often marked by superscript lining; such super-
script lining is, however, often also used simply to mark a word or phrase as a title
or rubric (cf. the medical remedies included in various lessons here). Words some-
how conceived as foreign or borrowed are sometimes marked by the use of paren-
theses, as in the following passage from the supplemental reading to Lesson
Twenty-One:
)אױך האבן דיא טירקן אלי דיא פֿרנצעזישי (שלאבֿן) פֿרײא גילאזן · אױך הבן דיא טירקן דען (קאפיטען
'איבר דיא רױבר לאזן דען קאפפֿא אב שלאגן ווײל ער דאש פֿרנצעזיש שיף האט גירױבט אונ
)האט קײן (ארדר) ניט גיהאט פֿון דער שטאט (זאלעה
134 a guide to old literary yiddish
1 Many of the names of the numbers are lacking in the texts included in the present volume, in which
case they are supplied from other OLY sources.
lesson fifteen135
2 Conventionally the basic pattern of Hebrew alpha-numerics is disrupted with fifteen ( טוfor the
expected )יהand sixteen ( טזfor the expected )יו, in order to avoid any possibility of profaning the
historical representations of the Holy Name ( )יהוהvia such usage.
3 An alternate form: [ צווענציקtsventsig].
136 a guide to old literary yiddish
s ystem or one that has numerical place value (i.e. digits, tens, hundreds, etc.), but
in simple numerals, the order proceeds from the largest to the smallest (right to
left), as in תקנ''ב400 + 100 + 50 + 2 = 552. This mode of identifying the series of
letters as numerals is also found, for instance, in the numbered entries of the potion
recipes excerpted in the supplemental readings already encountered. Other meth-
ods of indicating that a succession of letters is to be construed as numbers include
simply overlining the numerals (e.g. )תק נב.
Glossary
ink [tint] טינט דיא
acorn [eyχəl] אײכֿיל דיא ־ן
as/when/ [zo] זא
green [grïnə] גרונא
squeeze out/express spv [óusdrïkən] אױש דרוקן
iron (implement) [ayzən] אײזן דש
come out spv.irv [heróusgon/-gan] הרױש גון
black [švarts] שוורץ
enemy/adversary/foe [faynd] ויינד דער ־א
begin spv.sv13 [ónhebən] אן היבן
read [leyən] לײאן
lesson fifteen137
Translations
No. 1055: To make ink without water: take acorns while they are still green and
press them with an iron implement; the juice that comes out is as black as ink.
No. 1062: If you see your enemies approaching you, then begin to read (recite)
Psalms 90:17, and when you have finished reading it, say ;ש ַפֿר ְ and begin Psalms
90:17 again, and when you have finished, say ;ש ָֿפ ַרע
ֶ and begin Psalms 90:17 again,
and when you have finished, say עוסה ֶ and thus they can do nothing to you. And
ֶ ;ש
if they come close to you, then say the three magical incantations together ten
times. It helps, with God’s help.
No. 1197: To open a lock without a key: take a piece of vellum and write אַר ְדק
ְ אַר ַדק
ְ
on it with mouse blood, and put that parchment in the hole of the lock; then it will
open.
Lesson Sixteen
ָשע ·ה ְד ָברִים הֶאלֶה · וואר אײן אפִיפְפיֹור צו רֹום גר אײן גרושר ר ָ
אַחר ַ
ֵ
דער ור פוט עש זולט קײן ווײפ צו ְטבִילָה גֵין אונ' זולט קײן קינד יוֻדשן ·
אונ' זולט קײן יוֻד ור אין קומן לושן · וואו אײנר קעם זא זול מן אין טױטן ·
תפִילָההגָדֹול דש ער ְ אונ' מן שריב עש דיא יוֻדן אונ' בט דען כ ֵ
ֹהן ַ
טעט דש זױלכי גְזֵירָה ור שטױרט וואױרד :דא גידוכט דער כהן הגדול
איצונדר וויל איך דעש זִי ְמרָה וואל אב קומן · איך וויל צו אים זגן ווען ער
צו דעם אפיפפיור וויל אונ' וויל ור דיא יודן פִיטן דש ער זױלכיש ווידר
שפרעך זא וויל איך אים מײן טוכֿטר געבן :זא ווערד אין דער אפיפפיור
טױטן · זא קום איך זײנר אב · דש הורט זײן טוכֿטר · זיא גידוכט איך
וויל אין וורנן · אונ' דא מן אין דיא שול גינג · הינג זיא דיא הנד צוועל ווידר
הרױש · דא דר זך עש זִי ְמרָה · אונ' גינג צו איר · אונ' זיא אנטפפֿינג אין
גר שון · אונ' זגט אים אלי זאך ווש איר ואטר אים זין העט · דער הלבן
לוש דיך ניט אױבר רֵידן דש דו ניט אום דײן לעבן קומשט · אודר איך וויל
דיר ניט הלטן ווש איך דיר ור הײשן הב · דא זגט זִי ְמרַה וויל מיר דיך
דײן ואטר געבן · זא וויל איך מײן לעבן וואגן בֿון דײנט וועגן .דא ווײנט
זיא זער · ער שפרך גיהעב דיך וואל גאט ית' ווערט מיר דש גלױק געבן .
דש מיר ניקש גישיכֿט .דא נאם ער אורלב בֿון איר מיט נאסן אווגן ·
אונ' זיא זגט ציך הין דש דיר גאט גלױק אונ' הױיל געב :דא מן נון אױש
דער שול גינג · דא נאם דער כהן הגדול זימרה אוף אײן אורט אונ' הילט
אים דיא זאך בֿױר · דא אנטוורט זִי ְמרָה וועלט איר דעם נוך קומן וויא
איר זגט · זא וויל איך מײן לעבן וואגן · ער ור היש אים ור ֵע דִים :אזא
צוך זִי ְמרָה דר בֿון אונ' זגט דער שױן ְברִיעָה ניקש מֵין דר בֿון · דא זגט
דער כהן הגדול מיר זינד דעם זימרש וואל אב קומן .ער קומט ניט
לעבנדיג ווידר · דא עש דיא טוכטר הורט דא שריא אונ' ווײנט זיא אונ'
טריב אײן גרושן יאמר אז לנג אז ער אױשן וואר :אונ' זיא ואשטט אלי
וואוך דרײא טג אונ' דרײא נכֿט דיא ווײל ער אױשן וואר :
Glossary
]pope [apifyór אפ ְיפפיֹור דער
ִ
]at with geographical designators [tsu צו
]Rome [róum רֹום
]villain/evil person [rošə / rəšóim ָר ָשע דער רשעים
140 a guide to old literary yiddish
Notes
Unlike in English, where double negatives are in most cases deemed ungrammati-
cal (*‘I don’t have no time’) and in others a zero-sum positive (‘he is not altogether
without intelligence’), in many languages the rule of negative concord obtains, i.e. a
double (or triple or quadruple) negative simply reinforces the negative sense. So,
too, in OLY, as suggested in the sentence: ‘* דער ור פיט עש זולט קײן ווײפ צו ְט ִבילָ ה גֵ יןHe
forbade that no woman go to the ritual bath.’ The word ‘ קייןno’ in the context of the
prohibition is, thus to be understood as ‘any.’ Likewise, double negatives in the
lesson sixteen141
strict sense are common in OLY, such as ( ניא קײנרBZ11) *‘never none = no one,’ or
( כײנן וויש מוכטא מיר דש ני ג̌שחןJtR21) *‘no way could that never be successful for me =
I was quite incapable of bringing it about.’
The ongoing reduction of the case system in early Yiddish is illustrated by the
clause מן שריב עש דיא יוֻ דן, which seems quite like modEY, in that the dative plural
definite article is here דיא, as opposed to the normative earlier OLY form [ דןden].1
The nominative, accusative, and dative forms of the plural definitive article have
thus here coalesced. A second indicator of case form reduction is illustrated in the
genitive noun phrase דעם זימרש, i.e. a masculine genitive singular form, with the
expected ־שsuffix on the proper noun, but with what superficially seems a mascu-
line dative singular form of the definite article ( )דעםin place of the expected geni-
tive ()ד(ע)ש. It seems then that the OLY case system has already moved directly
toward the form also known in the modEY system, in which precisely that same
structure ( דעם+ noun with ־סinflection) is genitive in the masculine/neuter singu-
lar of nouns.
The phrase ‘ בֿון דײנט וועגןfor your sake’ illustrates the idiomatic construction
through which this concept is expressed for any and all beneficiaries of an action,
with that beneficiary substituted for דיינט: i.e. ‘ בֿון מיינט וועגןfor my sake,’ בֿון זיינט וועגן
‘for his sake,’ ‘ בֿון אירט וועגןfor your sake,’ etc.
Translation
After these things had come to pass, there was a pope in Rome who was a great
villain. He forbade women to go to the ritual bath, boys to be circumcised, and Jews
to come into his presence. If one were to do so, he was to be killed. And the Jews
were informed by letter, and the high priest was asked to pray that such evil decrees
be rescinded.
The high priest thought: “Now I will get rid of Zimro. I will tell him, if he will go
to the pope and plead for the Jews, so that he [Zimro] opposes [or: he (the pope)
rescinds] such [a decree], then I will give him my daughter’s hand. Thus the pope
will kill him, and thus I will be rid of him.” His daughter heard this and thought:
“I will warn him.” And when people went to the synagogue, she again hung out the
towel. Then Zimro saw it and went to see her, and she welcomed him very warmly
and told him everything that her father had planned. “Therefore do not let yourself
be persuaded, so that you do not lose your life, or I will not keep the promise that
I made to you.” Then Zimro said: “If your father gives you to me in marriage, then
I will risk my life for your sake.” Then she wept piteously. He said: “Farewell! God,
blessed be He, will grant me good fortune, so that nothing happens to me.” He then
took his leave from her with moist eyes, and she said: “Go forth, and may God grant
you good luck and good fortune!”
Now when people had left the synagogue, the high priest took Zimro aside and
laid the proposal before him. Then Zimro answered: “If you would follow through
on what you propose, then I would risk my life.” He took an oath to him before
1 Cf. the same dative plural form later in this passage in the prepositional phrase: ור דיא יודן.
142 a guide to old literary yiddish
witnesses. Thus Zimro went forth and told the beautiful Briyo nothing more about
it. The high priest then said: “We are rid of Zimro! He will not come back alive!”
When his daughter heard that, she shrieked and wept and lamented bitterly for as
long as he was away; and every week that he was away she fasted three days and
three nights.
Grammar
Prepositions
While in modEY all prepositions govern the dative case, in OLY the situation
was somewhat more complex (although already somewhat simplified in com-
parison with earlier stages of Germanic languages), with some prepositions
governing only accusative, some only dative, some either dative or accusative
depending on the specific usage and meaning, and a very few seeming to gov-
ern genitive. Here follows in tabular form the most common prepositions,
divided according to the cases that they govern, and with examples from the
readings.
Dative:
דש ער בי איר לעגא with/by [bi/ba(y)] )בי(י
אונ' נים אײן שינדיל אודר שטרוא בֿום טאך from [fun] בון
'דש מיר דיזא מישטוט צו דער זילא ניכט אנטוכט to [tsu] צו
דש אישט אימא מין חרצא ויל אושר מושן הולט beyond [óusər] אושר
'מיט זינן וורטן אלזא ער אײן לנט ̌שולדא בריכט with [mit] מיט
Accusative:
Genitive:
2 Case governance is difficult to determine here: historically, the idiom would require accusative, but
the preposition here may already have moved toward the dative ( )איםas the generalized prepositional
object case; or, on the other hand, it may be that, as in modEY, איםis the generalized form of both
accusative and dative.
3 One might just as easily identify this preposition as governing the dative, especially as the genitive
and dative coalesce: ֿפון וועגן דען הױלן וואשיר.
4 If the object is a person, the construction is the regular preposition + object, as seen later in this
passage with ‘ אן איםin him’ and ‘ ֿבון אירfrom her.’
144 a guide to old literary yiddish
דש דו מכשט דש דיר בֿור דיין ביט קומט דײן ווײפא די דיר בשירט אישט ·· תתת''ד
נים אײן קרױט דש הײשט פֿפונג דש מוש מן ברעכֿן ֵאיא די זון אױף גיט · אונ' נים אײן
שינדיל אודר שטרוא בֿום טאך · אונ' ערדא אונטר דער הױיז שווֵ ילן · אונ' ווען דו דיך ליגן
ווילט זא ליג דש קרױיט אונטר דײן הײבט .אונ' די שינדל אױף דיך · אונ' די ערדא זע בֿור
דײן ֵביט · אונ' שפריך אלז · שינדל דו מיך דיקשט פֿפונג דו מיך וויקשט איך בשוויר דיך
בשם השם אלקי ישראל דש דו מיר ברינגשט מײן ליפא דש איך זול טרינקן מיט איר מעט
אודר קולן ווײן אײן אינגיל דער זי ברינגט צווין די מיר זי ווײזן ווי זי געשטלט זײא אין אל
איר גשטלט אז זי גיט אױף דער ערדן · זא קומט זי צו דיר ·· אונ' ווען דו איר ווילט ווידר
אורלופא געבן זא שפריך דא בשוויר איך זי דש זי גיא בֿון מיר בשם מיכאל רפאל גבריאל
אמן · זא גיט זי ווידר הין ··
Glossary
]bed or: bidding [bet ביט דש
]to your bed/at your bidding [for/far dayn bet בֿור דיין ביט
)perennial herb: brooklime (veronica beccabunga פֿפונג
][(p)fung
]pluck/break scv3 [breχən ברעכֿן
]sun [zun זון דיא
]rise (sun) ir.spv [óufgon אױף גון
]shingle [šindəl שינדיל דיא
]straw [štro שטרוא דש
]roof [daχ טאך/דאך דש
])earth/soil/dirt (wn) [erd(ə ערד(א) דיא
]groundsill/ground timber wn [švel שווֵ יל דיא ־ן
]lie (down) sv1 [ligən ליגן
]lay [legn ליגן
]cover/roof [dekən דיקן
]wake [vekən וויקן
]conjure [bəšverən בשווירן
in the name of God, the Lord of Israel H בשם השם אלקי ישראל
][bəšém hašém elokéy yisróəl
]love/beloved [libə ליפא = ליבא דיא
]mead [met מעט דער
]cool [kïl קול
]angel [engəl אינגיל דער
]two [tsven צווין
]show/indicate sv7 [vayzən ווײזן
]place/position/arrange/form [štelən שטעלן
]shape/figure/form [gəštált גשטלט דיא
]go ir.3s.pr.subj.irv [ge גיא < גון
lesson sixteen145
in the name of Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, amen H בשם מיכאל רפאל גבריאל אמן
[bəšém miχóəl rəfóəl gavríəl ómeyn]
go away spv.irv [hin gon] הין גון
Translation
No. 1204: To make the wife who is destined for you come to your bed [or: at your
bidding]: take an herb that is called brooklime; it must be plucked before sunrise.
And take a shingle or straw from the roof, and soil from under the threshold of the
house-door. And when you want to lie down, then lay the herb under your head,
and the shingle on top of you, and strew the soil in front of your bed, and say the
following: “shingle, you that cover me; brooklime, you that wake me; I conjure you
in the name of the Lord God of Israel that you bring me my beloved, so that I drink
mead or cool wine with her: one angel who brings her to me; two who show her to
me as she is shaped in all her form as she walks on the earth.” Thus she will come to
you. And when you again wish to take leave of her, then say: “here I conjure her that
she go away from me in the name of Michael, Raphael, and Gabriel. Amen.” Then
she will go away.
Lesson Seventeen
דער זימרה צוך אז לנג ביז ער גֵין רֹום קאם צו דעם אַפִיפְפֿיור · ער
ֿיפְפיור קומן · דא זגטן זיא וואו
וראגט דיא יוֻדן וויא ער קױנט צו דעם אַ ִפ
ער ור אין קעם זא טױט מן אין · דא שוויג ער שטיל אונ' גינג אין דין
וויכשיל וועכֿשילט ור צֵיהן גױלדן אײטיל גרושן · גינג אזא אין דיא בורג ליש
ויל גרושן ואלן · דיא טֹור הױטר לישן אין גין אונ' קלױבטן געלט אוף · דא
כעהורִים אונ' גרופֿן אים אנטגֵיגן · ער גר אין הוף קאם דא גינגן אים ֵ
אונ' וואלטן וראגן ווש מנש ער ווער · דא ליש ער אבר געלט ואלן · זיא
קלױבטן אבר אוף אונ' לישן אין גֵין · אזא קאם ער בר דען אפיפפיור הינײן ·
דא וראגט אין דער אַפִיפְפיור ווש מנש ער ווער דא שפרך ער איך בין
אײן יוֻד · דא דער שרק דער אַפִיפְפיור דז ער אזא הינײן קומן ווער אונ'
ווער אים ניקש גישעהן · אונ' די טרבַנטן וואלטן אין טױטן · דא ביואליך
ער מן זולט אין לעבן לושן .אבר ער וועלט דיא טור הױטר אל טױטן לושן :
דא זגט דער אפיפפיור נון זג אן מײן ליבר יוד ווש אישט דײן ביגער · זא
וויל איכש אן הױרן · זינד דש דיר גאט דש גלױק געבן הוט דש דו ור
מיך בישט קומן אֹן גישעדיגט · דא זגט זִי ְמרָה אֵיר ווירדיגר הוך גילובטר
הער איך וועלט אױער אֵיר ווירדיגי גינוד אײנש אונ' צווײא וראגן · אונ'
אױער גינוד זול מירש ניט ור אױביל הבן · אונ' וועלט עש מיר בישײדן ·
דא זגט ער ורוג ווש דו וויל נױיערט ניקש בֿון דען יוֻדן · דא זגט ער איך
וויל אױך אײן ורוג בֿון דֵין יוֻדן ורעגן · דש אױך אײן דינשט אישט · דא
זגט דער אפיפפיור זא ורוג · דא זגט זימרה ליבר הער · ווען איר ױינד
הט · וועלט איר ליבר דש זיא שוואך ווערן · אודר שטרק · דא לכֿט דער
ָאפִיפְפֿיֹיר אונ' שפרך וויא גר קינשטליך ורעגשטו · העט איך ױינד ווער
מיר ניט ויל ליבר זיא ווערן שוואך · דען שטרק · נון ליבר זג מיר ווש
מײנשטו דר מיט · אונ' ווארום ורעגשטו אזא נערש :דא זגט זִי ְמרָה וועלט
איר מירש גיוואונן געבן · זא וויל איך עש אױך זגן · אונ' בין אווך בֿון אױערט
ווֵיגן הער קומן · אונ' איר הט רעכֿט גיהעט · אבר אױערי רױט רוטן
אױך ניט רעכֿט מיט טרױאן · דען דיא יוֻדן זינד אױער ױינד אונ' קײן
קרענקר אונ' שוואכֿר ואלק איז אוף ערדן דֵין די יוֻדן · דען מן בישנײדט
זיא צו אכֿט טגן · זא דש בלוט בֿון אים קומט זא ווערט ער שוואך · אבר
זא ער ניט בישניטן איז זא שלגט אײן יוֻד צֵיהן קרישטן .אונ' איר ור
פיט דש מן קײן יודן זול מֵין בישנײדן · אין צֵיהן יארן ווערט אױער לנד
אלש בול יוֻדן זײן · דא זגט דער אפיפפיור דש אישט וואר :ווש אישט
נון דיא אננדר וראג :דא זגט זימרה ליבר הער ווען איר ױינד העט
148 a guide to old literary yiddish
וועלט איר ליבר עש ווערן ויל אודר וועניג · דא לכֿט ער אבר אונ' זגט
איך וועלט ליבר עש ווֵירן וועניג דען ויל זג מיר ווש מײנשטו דר מיט ·
דא זגט ער איך ווילש אױך זגן · איר הט ור פיטן דיא יודן ווײבר זולן ניט
ְטבִילָה גֵין וואו ור אײן יוד אישט גיבורן ווארן · ווערן איצונדר ויר גיבארן
ווערדן · ווען בֿון דעם קלטן וושר דר שרעקן דיא יוֻדנש · אונ' ווערן ניט
בלד טרגן אױך דרפֿן זיא ניט בײא דֵין מנן ליגן · ווען זיא אבר ניט אין
דש קלט וושר גֵין · ווערן זיא ור אונ' בֿױר בײא אירן מנן ליגן · זא ווערן
ֶה · אונ' ווערן אײן שטרײט מיט כן יְִרב איר אז ױל אז זנט אים מער ֵ
אױך מכֿן · אונ' ווערן אױך צו טוט שלגן · דא זגט דער אפיפפיור יוד דו
הושט וואֹר גיזגט איך הב ניט ױל גישײדר יודן גיהױרט אליש דו בישט ··
דער הלבן וויל איך דיך וואל ביגובן · אונ' ווידר הײם לושן ציהן · מיט
ת אונ' אײן גוטן בריף דש וריד · אונ' גב אים ויל ָממֹון אונ' ְא ָבנִים טֹובֹו ֿ
דיא גְזֵירָה זולט ְמ ַבטֵל זײן · דא ליש דער אפיפפיור דיא טור הױטר אל
כין יֹאבְדוּ ·טױטן · די אין הינײן הט לושן גֵין ֵ
Glossary
]ask [frogən וראגן
]can, here could subj.prt-pr [kënən קױנן
]come 3s.pr.subj [kemə קעם > קומן
]kill 3s.pr.subj [tëtə טויט > טויטן
]money exchange office [veχsəl וויכשיל דער
]exchange (money) [veχsəln וועכֿשילן
]strict/pure/simple/nothing but [eytəl אײטיל
]groat [grošən גֹרושן דער ־
]porter/gatekeeper [tórhïtər ֹטור הױטר דער
]gather/collect spv [óufklaÿbən אוף קלױבן
]money [gelt געלט דש
]? Gentile aristocrat [kehər /kehurim כֵ עהור דער ־ים
]count/earl [grof גֹרוף דער ־ן
]toward/against [antgegən אנטגֵ יגן
]but/here: again [obər אבר
]come inside/enter spv.sv4 [hináynkumən הינײן קומן
]guard/servant/infantryman [trabánt טרבנט דער ־ן ַ
]]order scv3 [bəfelən bəfaləχ ביועלן [ביואליך)
]listen to spv [ónhërən אן הױרן
]because [zind dos זינד דש
]safely/unharmed [óngəšèdigt אֹן גישעדיגט
]honored/dignified/worthy [érvirdig ֵאיר ווירדיג
]high(ly) [houχ הוך
]praise [lobən לובן
]grace [gənód גינוד דיא
]one and two = a couple of things [eyns un tsvey אײנש אונ' צווײא
lesson seventeen149
Notes
It is all but impossible to determine what a late sixteenth-century Ashkenazic
author living in northern Italy might have imagined as the real-world value of a
named European coin in his fictional narrative set in ancient Israel and Rome.
Attempting to calculate the supposed purchasing power of such fictive literary or
mythical money would seem futile. Thus the OLY term —גױלדיןdenoting coins
which, as the name implies, were originally gold, but at least by the seventeenth
150 a guide to old literary yiddish
Translation
Zimro traveled as long as it took him to come to the pope in Rome. He asked the
Jews how he could get to the pope. They told him that if he came before him, he
would be killed. He then held his peace and went to the money exchange and
changed ten guilders into nothing but groats. He then went into the castle and
dropped a lot of groats on the ground. The gatekeepers let him enter while they
were gathering up the coins. When he entered even into the courtyard, Gentile
aristocrats and counts came toward him and wanted to ask who his lord was, so he
again dropped money on the ground. Once again, they gathered it up and let him
pass. Thus did he come inside into the presence of the pope. The pope asked him
who his lord was. He then said: “I am a Jew.” The pope was then shocked that he had
entered in this manner and that nothing had happened to him. And the guards
wanted to kill him. He [the pope] then ordered that he [Zimro] be allowed to live,
but he [the pope] wanted to have all the gatekeepers killed.
The pope then said: “Now, tell me, my dear Jew, what do you want? For I will at
least listen to it, since God has granted you the good fortune to come before me
unharmed.” Zimro then said: “Most worthy and lauded sir, I would like to ask your
honorable grace for two things, and may your grace not take offense but grant me
the requests.” So he said: “Ask whatever you want, just nothing concerning the
Jews!” He then said: “I want to ask you a question concerning the Jews, which will
be of service to you.” The pope then said: “Then go ahead and ask!” Zimro then
said: “My dear sir, if you were to have enemies, would you prefer them to be weak
or strong?” The pope laughed and said: “That is a very clever question. If I were to
have enemies, would I not prefer that they be weak rather than strong? Now, dear
fellow, tell me what your point is and why are you asking such a perverse question!”
Zimro then said: “If you will indulge me a moment, I will tell you, for I have come
to you for your own sake. And you were right, but your counselors are not giving
you good advice in good faith, for the Jews are your enemies, and there is no weaker
or more feeble nation on earth than the Jews, for they are circumcised at the age of
eight days so that he (!) bleeds, which makes him weak. But if he is not circum-
cised, then one Jew can defeat ten Christians. And you forbid the Jews to practice
circumcision any more. In ten years your entire land will be full of Jews.”
The pope then said: “That’s true! What is then your other question?” Zimro then
said: “My dear sir, if you were to have enemies, would you prefer that there were
many of them or few?” He then laughed again and said: “I would prefer that there
were few rather than many. Tell me what your point is!” Then he said: “I will tell
you. You have forbidden Jewish women to go to the ritual bath. Where earlier one
Jew was born, now four will be born, for the Jewish women are shocked by the cold
water and do not soon become pregnant again. They are also not permitted to lie
with their husbands. But if they are not allowed to go into the cold water, they will
lie with their husbands sooner and passionately, so there will be as many of them as
the sands of the sea—(so may they multiply!)—and they will wage war against you
and will kill you.”
Then the pope said: “Jew, you have spoken the truth. I have never heard many
Jews more clever than you. Therefore, I will give you presents and allow you to
return home in peace.” And he gave him a great deal of money and jewels and a fine
document which rescinded the evil decree. Then the pope had all the gatekeepers
killed, who had let him enter (so may they perish!).
Grammar
Formation of the subjunctive
The present active subjunctive is formed on the basis of the third person singular,
preterite tense form, and thus its form in strong and weak verbs is distinct. In weak
verbs, the present subjunctive is indistinguishable from the preterite. In strong
verbs, on the other hand, in addition to the inflectional endings that distinguish the
first and third person singular of subjunctive and preterite, those vowels subject to
Umlaut display that vowel shift (which makes the strong subjunctive distinct from
the preterite in most verbs).
The endings are:
plural singular
[-ən] ־ן [-ə] ־א 1
[-ət] ־יט [-əst] ־שט 2
[-ən] ־ן [-ə] ־א 3
Thus the subjunctive of the anomalous verb ‘ זייןto be’ is formed on the basis of the
third person singular of the preterite, וואר, whose vowel is subject to Umlaut. Add-
ing the appropriate endings yields the following paradigm:
152 a guide to old literary yiddish
plural singular
[ver(ə)n] ווירן [ver(ə)] )וויר(א 1
[ver(ə)t] וויר(י)ט [ver(ə)st] וויר(י)שט 2
[ver(ə)n] ווירן [ver(ə)] )וויר(א 3
A variant form, in a jussive sense, appears in the 3s.pres.subj form ‘( וועזטlet X be. . .’).
The formation of the strong verb (example ‘ קומןcome’ sv4; 3s.prt.ind > ק(א)ם3s.pr.
subj )קעמאis:
plural singular
[kemən] קימן/קעמן [kemə] קימא/קעמא 1
[kemət] קימיט/קעמיט [keməst] קימישט/קעמישט 2
[kemən] קימן/קעמן [kemə] קימא/קעמא 3
plural singular
[redətən] רידטן [redətə] )רידט(א 1
[redətət] )רידט(יט [redətəst] ריד(טי)שט 2
[redətən] רידטן [redətə] )רידט(א 3
Further examples:
would have 3s.pr.subj [hetə] העט
would lie 3s.pr.subj [legə] לעגא
would commit 3s.pr.subj [bəging(ə)] 'בגינג
might/could 3s.pr.subj [mëχtə] מוכטא
would burden 3s.pr.subj [antëχtə] 'אנטוכט
ought 3s.pr.subj [šoldə] ̌שולדא
would 3s.pr.subj [voldə] וולדא
‘ זונדר ער זול דרום עשן אונ' טרינקן דש אים זײן לײבא וריש אונ' גיזונדא אונ' שטרק בלײבאHe should
rather eat and drink, so that his body remain fresh and healthy and strong.’
‘ דוך זול ער זיך װאל הױטן דאש ער ניט צו ויל טרינקIndeed he should take care that he not
drink too much’
‘ אונ' צו דער װירדיגן מעלה קאן נימנט קומן ער נעם דען אל מצוֿת אן זיךAnd no one can attain to
the worthy level (of virtue), unless he take the commandments on himself.’
In the last case, it is not clear from the orthography whether the form is the stan-
dard subjunctive (preterite [ נםnam] > subjunctive )[ נעמ(אnem(ə)] or the alternate
form (present > נמןsubjunctive )[ נעמ(אnem(ə)].
In the first and last cases, one of the last vestiges of the English subjunctive may
still be used (subjunctive ‘remain’ for indicative ‘remains’ and subjunctive ‘take’ for
indicative ‘takes’). The reader need only recognize this form, which otherwise
might seem aberrant, as a subjunctive.
The perfect tense of the subjunctive is structurally in principle formed as is the
indicative, by means of the appropriate (subjunctive) conjugated form of the per-
fect auxiliary + past participle of the main verb, e.g.: ‘ ווען זיא ניט שױן ווֵ אר גיוועזןif she
had not (already) been beautiful . . .’).
auxiliary verb וואורד. The fact that the standard present subjunctive of weak verbs is
identical to the preterite tense may have given preference to the periphrastic sub-
junctive in weak verbs there, as well.
Supplemental reading: ' 'אדיר הוא/ ' 'אלמעכטיגר גוט/ “Mighty is He”
(fifteenth century)
This originally Hebrew-language hymn of praise from the Passover celebration is
extant in Yiddish translation in a fifteenth-century Haggadah (Paris, Bibliothèque
Nationale, Hebr. 1333, fol. 39v). As is traditional in the Hebrew text, the Yiddish
translation also includes an alphabetical acrostic, formed by the initial letters of the
adjectives designating the attributes of God ( סand תare lacking in both versions).
This supplementary reading is presented here in the script forms found in the
manuscript, with square script as the “display script” to make the acrostic distinc-
tive, while the remainder of the text is in mashket.
אייניגר גוט נון בוייא דײן טעמפיל שירי אלזו שיר אלזו שיר א[י]ן אונזרין
טאגן שירי נון בוייא נון בוייא נון בוייא נון בוייא נון בוייא נון בוייא דיין
גרעכטר גוט דימויטגר: ברם הערציגר גוט: יא שירי: טעמפיל שירי
: חענטר גוט: זענפט מויטיגר גוט: הוך גלבטר גוט ווירדגר גוט: גוט
מעכטיגר גוט: יוידן גוט· כרעפטיגר גוט· לעבדיגר גוט: טרווייטר גוט
· קויניגליך גוט: פארכטצומר גוט צימליכר גוט: עיביגר גוט: נאהטר גוט
רייכר גוט שטרקר גוט
Glossary
unique [eynig] אײניג
build [bóuən] בױיאן
temple [tempəl] דער ־/טעמפיל דש
quick(ly) [šir(ə)] )שיר(י
merciful [barmhertsig] ברם הערציג
just [gəréχt] גרעכט
humble [démïtik] דימױטג
glorious [hòuχgəlóbt] הוך גלבט
worthy [virdig] ווירדג
mild [zénftmï̀tig] זענפט מױטיג
gracious [χeynt] חענט
faithful [tróut(ə)] טרװײט
Jewish God [yḯdəngòt] יױדן גוט
strong [kreftig] כרעפטיג = קרעפטיג
living [lébədig] לעבדיג
powerful [meχtig] מעכטיג
proximal/near [nohət/noχət] נאהט
eternal [eybig] עיביג
lesson seventeen155
Translation
Unique God, now build Your temple quickly, so quickly, so quickly, in our days,
quickly, now build, now build, now build, now build, now build, now build Your
temple quickly, yes quickly! Merciful God, just God, humble God, glorious God,
worthy God, mild God, gracious God, faithful God, God of the Jews, strong God,
living God, powerful God, proximal God, eternal God, fearsome God, honorable
God, kingly God, rich God, strong God.
Lesson Eighteen
Glossary
]inn [hérberig הערבריג דיא
]earlier [farhin ור הין
]say goodbye/farewell [gəzégənən גיזעגנן
]to one’s home(land) [héym tsu land הײם צו לנד
]everyone [ídərman אידרמן
]delighted [dərfréyt דער ורײט
]particularly/especially [bifrát ִב ְפ ַרט
]soul/life [nəšomə נְ ָש ָמה דיא
]think [meynən מײנן
158 a guide to old literary yiddish
Notes
While the reader has by now certainly become accustomed to the common varia-
tions in OLY word order (even without overt commentary in the notes), the usage
דש אים שיר דיא נְ ָש ָמה אױש וואר גנגןshould at least be noted as slightly unusual, with the
finite auxiliary verb intervening between the separable prefix and the truncated
past participle.
The common OLY idiomatic construction דש ניט צו שרײבן איז, lit. *‘which is not to
write,’ is to be understood not in this active sense but instead as a quasi-passive:
‘which is not to be written,’ i.e. ‘which is so extreme that it cannot be described.’ The
construction of negative + infinitive is common, and commonly to be understood
as a negated passive infinitive: ‘not to understand’ = ‘not to be understood’ = ‘too
extreme to be understood’; ‘not to find’ = ‘not to be found’ = ‘too extreme ever
otherwise to be found.’
As a quasi-hyper-superlative, English has a construction (as do other languages),
‘the X-est of all,’ as is found in Wh6, and is here also illustrated by the phrase זיין אלר
‘ ליבשטןhis most beloved of all,’ with what was originally most likely the genitive
plural of אל, but which has by this point simply become an integrated element of
the idiom without case identity.
The idiom ‘* זיא ויל אים אום זײן הלזshe fell to/on him around his neck = she embraced
him’ has a biblical tone but exhibits a common OLY syntactic structure.
In the phrase ‘ דא זײא גאט בֿױרbe God in front of it = may God protect against it =
God forbid,’ the collapsed and inverted prepositional phrase with a demonstrative,
discussed earlier (דרום/)דארן, appears in slightly more convoluted form: בֿױר... דאfor
דא(ר)בֿױר.
In the clause דא וואר גר אײן גרושן יאמר אונ' קלגone would expect יאמר אונ' קלגto be
predicate nominatives after the verb ‘to be,’ but here they seem to have been attract-
ed into the accusative case (as indicated by the masculine accusative singular form
)גרושן, perhaps simply because they are in the predicate.
Translation
And Zimro took his leave from the pope and returned to the Jews, to his lodgings.
Then he told them how he had nullified the evil decree and showed them the money
lesson eighteen159
and the document that the pope had given him. Then the Jews also wanted to give
him a great deal of money, but he did not want to take anything, because he had
already received enough. He said farewell and rode back home to his country.
There everyone was pleased, especially his most beloved Briyo. But the high priest
was so shocked that he almost gave up the ghost. He had indeed thought that they
would have killed him. Good Zimro showed the document, and everyone was
happy that the evil decree was rescinded. Then Zimro said: “Now give me what you
promised me.” The high priest refused him and once again did not want to give him
his daughter’s hand. “Even if I were to lose my life because of it.” Zimro then said:
“May God, blessed be He, have mercy.” And he said: “For what purpose then were
the great hardships and treachery/danger that I have endured? And now it is again
for nothing.” And he was quite miserable, indeed beyond description.
The good but miserable Zimro waited until people went into the synagogue, and
then he again went to his beloved Briyo. She welcomed him most beautifully and
lovingly with many joyous words, and he told her how her father had again reneged
on his promise to him. Then they both wept and lamented a great deal, and she
embraced him and kissed him and said: “My dear Zimro, may God hear our lament!
I well know that I must die of grief.” Then Zimro said: “May God forbid it,” and he
kissed her, and she kissed him, and there was such kissing that if she had not already
been beautiful, she would now have become beautiful. And he left her thus.
As soon as he had left her, she died of grief. For that reason, no one should kiss
another person when leaving. But Zimro did not know that she had died. There was
great lamenting and wailing, and she was honorably buried.
Grammar
Periphrastic verbal constructions
Many languages have periphrastic verbal constructions, which generally include
two components: a so-called “delexical,” “light,” or “semantically bleached” verb
(Jacobs 2005: 210) and an invariant component, such as English:
modal verb + the Semitic component + זיין. The second example is a pluperfect
tense construction, with the preterite of the perfect auxiliary ( )הון+ the Semitic
component + גיווע(ז)ן, the past participle of זיין, which may initially strike the reader
as an unusual combinations, since otherwise הוןand זייןare not combined in com-
pound tenses in Yiddish. Once again, the reader need only note the construction
and further recognize that this category of OLY periphrastic verbal constructions
(i.e. consisting of a Semitic component + )זייןis the only such construction that so
forms its perfect tenses. The basic tense structures are as follows:
1 In this context, הטis thus best construed as [hatə], the pluperfect auxiliary. Incidentally, this usage
is to be distinguished from that of the clause later in the passage—‘ דש די גִ זֵ ָירה מבוטל ווארthat the evil
decree was rescinded’—in which ‘ מבוטלrescinded’ (the Hebrew passive participle) is either strictly
adjectival or a stative passive construction.
lesson eighteen161
nuances of the issue in Yiddish, but the example of the use of Latin in English may at
least give some slight indication of its contours. Fluent speakers of English (legiti-
mately) imagine the following as a normal English sentence (in a certain context):
‘The per capita income of wage-laborers has risen less than one percent per annum
in service industries (e.g. among restaurant and hotel workers, janitorial workers,
etc.), i.e. among employees generally without higher education.’ But this English
sentence includes three full Latin phrases and three further abbreviated Latin
phrases, and of the remaining words, more than 25 per cent are Latinate (i.e. either
directly borrowed from Latin or indirectly borrowed from Latin through French).
Probably a minority of users of such abbreviations would be able to expand the
abbreviated phrases into their correct Latin forms ‘e.g.’ = exemplī gratiā ‘for example,’
‘etc.’ = et cētera ‘and other things = and so forth,’ ‘i.e.’ = id est ‘that is.’ In addition, the
pronunciation of all of these forms has been Anglicized in idiosyncratic ways, such
that ‘e.g.’ is read either as [i:dʒi:] (ee-gee) or even simply read as ‘for example,’ ‘i.e.’ as
[aii:], and ‘et cētera’ as [etsétərə] or in common colloquial speech in the US more
often simply as [sédərə].2 Cicero would understand not a word of his native tongue
in these spoken Latin phrases, for they have—naturally, normally, and legitimately—
been borrowed into and made an integrated part of the English language: they are,
to employ momentarily the terms of Yiddish linguistics, now “merged Latin.” When,
however, a journalist opines on the editorial page about a decisive move by a politi-
cian that cannot be retracted or undone—alea iacta est ‘the die is cast’—citing the
words attributed (by Suetonius) to Caesar as he crossed the Rubicon river,3 that
Latin phrase is not English but Latin quoted in English: it is (again adapting the
terms of Yiddish linguistics) “whole Latin”; and no matter what Anglophone pro-
nunciation might be used, Cicero in a generous mood would likely understand it
(perhaps with a smirk). One final example: when a university literature student
discovers that a friend has joined others in betraying her trust and confronts him
with ‘Et tu, Brute,’ then it is a difficult call whether the phrase is merged or whole
Latin, since hundreds of thousands if not millions of Anglophone secondary-school
students worldwide have been forced to read, perform, and view live and filmed
performances of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar and often, strangely, remember that
particular line of the play (and no others) and its contextual meaning even decades
later. The phrase is certainly not as common as ‘etc.,’ but in the proper social context
would be comprehended often enough almost to be imagined as merged, at least in
the linguistic register of moderately educated speakers.
On the whole, mutatis mutandis, the situation in Yiddish is similar, except that
Hebrew and Aramaic permeate the language: hundreds of originally Hebrew-
Aramaic words and phrases are available for use, and one or more may occur in
essentially any utterance, whether in learned discourse or a conversational context.
2 Or rather, since those who would use the pronunciation [sedərə] are generally not satisfied with
one iteration: [sédərə sédərə sédərə].
3 He thus led his army into Roman territory proper and thereby overtly committed to armed revolu-
tion. Most likely Caesar was actually quoting Menander’s Ἀνερρίϕθω κύβος ‘let the die be cast’ (or
rather misquoting him; or perhaps Suetonius was simply mistranslating Caesar, who, like most edu-
cated Romans, would have normally spoken Greek in the presence of other Roman army officers (and
thus fellow aristocrats), and certainly would have done so on such a momentous occasion.
162 a guide to old literary yiddish
It is not simply the case that an extensive number of Hebrew-Aramaic words and
phrases have been borrowed into Yiddish (merged); there additionally exists a vast
further pool of Hebrew-Aramaic words and phrases from the massive storehouse
of sacred texts that can appear as whole Hebrew in a broad range of contexts. While
it would be an exaggeration to insist on the point, it often seems that essentially any
such word or phrase may be cited (whole Hebrew) in normal Yiddish speech or
text, as an example, as a prooftext, seriously, ironically, etc., and, depending upon
one’s interlocutors/readers, will be understood, or not.
The issue is more vexing for the learner of the language, because in fact the native
speaker’s pronunciation of merged Hebrew and whole Hebrew are generally quite
distinct, just as—to return for a moment to the example of Latin in English—is the
case with merged Latin and whole Latin: English speakers may say [etsétərə] or
[sédərə] for ‘etc.,’ but when they say alea iacta est, there will necessarily be some
attention to pronouncing the Latin words as Latin words (even if no attention is
given to Ciceronian pronunciation). So, too, with merged Hebrew and whole
Hebrew, where the primary (not the only) distinction is in vowel quality: merged
Hebrew words follow the rules of Yiddish word accent and vowel reduction in unac-
cented syllables, while whole Hebrew words and phrases follow the rules of Ashke-
nazic Hebrew pronunciation (never Israeli Hebrew pronunciation): thus for the
name of Moses’ mother יוֹכֶ ֶבדJochebed, [Ashkenazic] whole Hebrew has [yoxéved]
(as it would be pronounced, for instance, in Jewish divorce proceedings], while
merged Hebrew has [yóxvəd] or even [yóxe] (as the name would be pronounced in
daily usage).4 Thus, in order to know how to pronounce a Hebrew-Aramaic word
or phrase in an OLY text, one must know whether it is merged or whole Hebrew,
which, obviously, requires the nuanced component sense of a native speaker of
OMY, which, obviously, no one now living has or can approximate. The modern
reader of OLY is thus forced into even more compromises in pronouncing the
Semitic component of the language than in pronouncing the Germanic component.
In this volume’s glossaries a plausible pronunciation has been suggested for what is
here judged to be merged Hebrew. Most of that which is in the present restricted
corpus judged to be whole Hebrew consists of biblical quotations, which are pro-
vided with full Masoretic vocalization in the glossary; the reader can thus attempt to
approximate an Ashkenazic (or indeed any other systematic pronunciation), once
again bearing in mind that the now standard Israeli pronunciation would have been
altogether foreign and probably as incomprehensible to speakers of OLY as conver-
sational Ashkenazic Hebrew would now be at a Tel Aviv soccer match.
4 The example is from Weinreich (1973: vol. 2, 6). On merged and whole Hebrew phonology, see also
Jacobs (2005: 41–4).
lesson eighteen163
ליבי ורונדין דו ליבי קרון איך כתבן די[ר] ויל דו ענטוו[ערשט] מיר ניכציט אוב דו ניט
כתבן קנשט און די עינױם איך ווער מורגן מיט דעם עירונ[י] רידן אוב איך דײן זך קונט
צו גוט אױש מכן שיק די הױב ווידר הערױ[ש] הײש דש לוך דאהרן ור מכן זוך רײן
פולבר אין אײנם אפיל הושט וואל ה ימים שרײב גוט דױצש נײ אײן
Glossary
crown = most superlative/beloved [króun] קרון דיא
write < H [kəsavən] כתבן
answer/reply [entvern] ענטווערן
nothing [niχtsət] ניכציט
perhaps/[I wonder] whether [óub] אוב
torture [inə /inúim] עינױ דיא ־ם
164 a guide to old literary yiddish
Notes
The word ורונדיןprovides an example of the common ־(י)ן-informative suffix that
changes a noun designating a male being into one designating a female being.
The seeming abstraction of the clause אוב איך דײן זך קונט צו גוט אױש מכןis almost
certainly illusory, and the phrase is quite idiomatic and concrete: ‘whether I can
resolve your case’ or ‘ameliorate your situation.’
The word זוךis a semantic crux, i.e. it makes the sense of the sentence in which it
occurs difficult to construe. Solomon Birnbaum (1960: 456) has suggested that the
initial letter זbe emended to ק, yielding ‘ קוךcook,’ which indeed renders the sen-
tence itself perhaps slightly more comprehensible, but does nothing to clarify its
meaning in the larger context.
The phrase ה ימיםis a whole Hebrew expression, and the pronunciation provided
in the gloss is an approximation of Ashkenazic Hebrew pronunciation of the period;
but it seems possible that, while this expression is written in Hebrew, the words
would have been pronounced as Yiddish []ֿפינף טעג, much as ‘e.g.’ and ‘i.e.’ are (as
noted above) often pronounced as their equivalent English phrases.
With respect to the word דױצש, one should note that it was not until the nine-
teenth century that Yiddish was, in Yiddish, frequently called ײדיש,ִ and not until
the twentieth century that that designation became common. Many names were
used for the language before that time, including the very common [ טייטשtaytsh],
as here, in its OLY reflex.
Translation
Dear friend, my dearest, I write to you often; you answer me nothing. Perhaps you
cannot write, without torture. Tomorrow I will speak with the official; perhaps I
can bring about some betterment in your case. Send the bonnet back out; request
that the hole in it be mended. Seek/cook [??] powder in an apple. You probably have
five days. Write good Yiddish. Sew in . . .
Lesson Nineteen
אײניש טג גינג דער זימרה ור דען אלטן אונ' יונגן מלך דא וואר ער שון
בון אינן אנטפפנגן · דא ער בֿון דער בורג קאם ביגעגנט אים זײן ואטר ·
אונ' זגט ליבר זון איך וועלט דיך גערן עטווש ורוגן ווילשטו ניט דר שרעקן ·
דא זגט ער נײן איך וויל ניט דר שרעקן · דא זגט ער דו הושט דיך ור
הגָדול ניט הוט וועלן דיר זײן טוכטר ֹהן ַ
גיהיבט דש דיר דער כ ֵאױביל ֵ
גיהיב דיך נוך אױבלר דען זיא אישט גישטורבן .ור לײד געבן איצונדר ֵ
דר הלבן דר שריק ניט · דא זגט ער ווארום זולט איך דר שרעקן ווש
גאט ית' טוט דש אישט וואל גיטון · אבר וויא זײן הערץ וואר קאן אײן
איטליכר וואל גידענקן .דא ער הײם אין זײן קמיר קאם דא טריב ער
אײן יומר אונ' רײס זײן הור ור לײד אױש זױלכר יומר אישט ניט צו שרײבן ·
נוך זױלכם יומר גינג ער ווידר אױש זײנר קמר אונ' וואושט זײני אווגן .
דש מן עש ניט מערקן זולט · דש טעט ער וואל אכֿט טג אן אננדר ·· :
·· · נוך דער צײט דש דער קױניג אלט ווש .דא זנט ער נוך זײני יו ְעצִים
אונ' הערן · זיא זולטן קומן ער וועלט זײן זון קרױנן בײא זײנום לעבן ·
ד[ש] גישך אונ' ער מכֿט אײן גרושי סְעודָה · דער זִי ְמרָה וואר וואל אם
יונגן מלך דא זגט דער יונג מלך צו זִי ְמרָה מײן ואטר הוט מיר דש
קױניגרײך אױבר געבן נוך זײנום טוט צו ביזיצן קום מיט מיר צו מײנום
הערן ואטר דעם קױניג אונ' ור זײני יו ְעצִים זא וויל איך דירש אױבר
ענטוורטן נוך מײנום טוט · דש דו עש זולשט ביזיצן · דער הלבן ווארט
אײן קלײני ווײל זא מושטו מיט מיר אוף דש שלוס רײטן · דער זִי ְמרָה זגט
יוא אונ' רושט זיך גר שױן מיט קלײדונג אונ' מיט אלין דינגן · ער וורטיט
אײן קלײני ווײל · די ווײל וואור אים צו לנג · אונ' גינג אל גימך ור זיך ער
גידוכֿט ער ווערט מיך וואל אױבר רײטן · דא ער אבר דען בערג הינױף
גינג · ער הוב אן מױד ווערדן · דען דער בערג ווש גר הוך · אונ'
שטונד אײן ווײל שטיל דא זאך ער גר אײן שױן פפֿערד ור אים לפֿן גר
וואל גיצירט מיט רױשטונג דש ער אל זײן טג ניט הױפשר גיזעהן הט ·
אונ' עש טעט אליש וועלט עש דען בערג הינב לפֿן · דא גידוכֿט ער
קױנט איך עש ונגן איך וועלט דען בערג הנױף רײטן · ער גינג אים
אנטגֵיגן · דא שטונד עש שטיל אליש בלד ער אוף דש פפערד קאם דא
ליף דש פפֿערד אױבר בערג אונ' טַל אז ווען עש דער טױיבֿיל ווער · אונ'
ליף מיט אים אין אײן גרושן וואלד · דא וואוכֿש מענכרלײא קרוײטר אינן ·
דר נוך קאם ער אוף אײן וויז · דא ווארן וילרלײא וואורצילן אוף · דא שטונד
166 a guide to old literary yiddish
דש פֿפערד שטיל · דא וואר ער ורוא אונ' שטיג אױש דעם זטיל אוף דיא
'וויז · אונ' וואלט זיך אײן ווײל דר מײאן דא ליף דש פפערד הין וועק · אונ
דש ער ניט וואושט וואו עש הין קומן וואר. ור שוואנד אים ור זײן אווגן
· דא וואושט ער ניט וואו ער וואר · ער שריא אונ' גיהוב זיך אױביל:
דש ניט צו שרײבן איז · ער שריא אומרדר לײד אױבר לײד · אונגלױק וויא
הושטו מיך אום ונגן · ווש איך דוך ניט אױש נוך אײן · אונ' בין אזא ווײט
בֿון מײנום ואטר אונ' ורױנדן · אונ' זיך אונ' הױר קײן מענש נוך הױז נוך
· שטט וואו בין איך אודר ווש איז מיר גישעהן
Glossary
meet/encounter/come across [bəgegən] ביגעגן
anyone/everyone/each one [eyn ítləχər] אײן איטליכר
chamber/room [kamər] קמיר דיא
rip out/tear out spv.sv7 [óusràysən] אױש רײסן
wipe [višən] וואושן
notice/perceive [merkən] מערקן
sequentially/in a row [on-/an- ənandər] אן אננדר
time/period [tsayt] צײט דיא
send ir.wv [zendən zantə] זענדן זנט
counselor/advisor [yóuəts / yóu(ə)tsim] יועץ דער יוֹעְ צִ ים
crown [krënən] קרױנן
during his lifetime [bay zaynəm lebən] בײא זײנום לעבן
kingdom/realm [këʹnigràyχ/kḯnigràyχ] קױניגרײך דש
hand over/pass on spv.scv2 [ḯbərgebən] אױבר געבן
possess/own sv1 [bəzitsən] ביזיצן
transfer [ïbəréntferən] אױבר ענטוורן
time/interval/period [vayl] ווײל דיא
prepare/equip/arm oneself refl [rïstən ziχ] רושטן זיך
clothes/vestments [kleydung] קלײדונג דיא
thing [ding] דינג דש ־ן
unhurried/leisurely [álgəmaχ] אל גימך
overtake/catch up by riding sv7 [ïberaytən] אױבר רײטן
mountain/hill [berg] בערג דער
go up/ascend spv.ir.sv [hinóufgon] הינױף גון
tired/fatigued [mid] מױד
run/(gallop) sv12 [lafən/lóufən] לפֿן
adorn/decorate [tsirən] צירן
equipment/gear/(harness) [rïstung] רױשטונג דיא
in all his days/his whole life [al zayn teg] אל זײן טג
run down spv.sv12 [hinóblàfən/-lòufən] הינב לֿפן
catch sv9 [fangən] ונגן
ride up spv.sv7 [hinóufràytən] הנויף רײטן
go toward spv.ir.sv [antgégəngòn] אנטגֵ יגן גון
lesson nineteen167
over hill and dale = a far distance [ïber berg un tal] אױבר בערג אונ' ַטל
devil/demon [taÿvəl] טױיבֿיל דער
forest [vald] וואלד דער
various pl [ménχərley] מענכרלײא
meadow/pasture/clearing wn [viz] וויז דיא
many kinds of [fílərley] וילרלײא
herb [vurtsəl/vortsəl] וואורציל דיא ־ן
alight/dismount spv.sv7 [óusštaygən] אױש שטייגן
saddle [zatəl] זטיל דער
rejoice/be delighted in (natural beauty) [dərmeyən] דרמײאן
run away spv.sv12 [hinvéklàfən/-lòufən] הין וועק לֿפן
disappear sv5 [fəršvindən] ור שווינדן
come/get to/arrive spv.sv4 [hínkumən] הין קומן
continuously/constantly/steadily [úmərdàr/ímərdàr] אומרדר
misfortune [unglïk] אונגלױק דש
embrace/surround (spv)sv9 [úmfangən/umfángən] אום ונגן
know prt-pr [vas veys] ווש = ווײש > ווישן
far [vayt] ווײט
Notes
Among the uses of the genitive case is the simple marking of an adverbial, such as
an expression of time, as in modern English ‘she works weekends/evenings/days,’
with a fossilized genitive -s (perceived by most English speakers as a plural marker).
In this lesson’s reading passage, a related construction appears: ‘ אײניש טגone day’
(where one might have expected an genitive marker not just on the article but also
on the noun).
The bracketing, inverted prepositional phrase with a demonstrative object,
explained earlier, reappears in this passage in further examples: אינן. . . דארי(נ)ן = דא
and אוף. . . דארוף = דא.
The idiom ווש ניט אױש נוך אײן, literally ‘know neither out nor in’ may here seem a
rather poignant expression of the disorientation that such grief and desperation
bring, but it is nonetheless a common idiom.
The compact syntax of the clause עש טעט אליש וועלט עש דען בערג הינב לפֿןseems
intent on blocking interpretation, but the context might guide the reader here,
again: ‘it (sc. the horse) did as if ( אלישshould be construed as “ אלשas” not “all”) it
would wish to gallop down the mountain.’
Translation
One day Zimro went before both the king and the prince and was well received
by them. When he left the castle, he was met by his father, who said: “My dear son,
I would like to ask you something, if only you will not be overwhelmed by it.” He
then said: “No, I will not be overwhelmed.” Then he said: “You were miserable
because the high priest refused to give you his daughter in marriage. Now you will
168 a guide to old literary yiddish
be even more miserable, for she has died of grief. Do not let it overwhelm you.”
Then he said: “Why should I be overwhelmed: that which God, blessed be He, does
is well done.” But what was in his heart, everyone can well imagine. When he got
home and went to his room, he lamented and tore out his hair because of his grief.
Such lamentation cannot be described. After such lamentation he again left his
room and wiped his eyes, so that no one would see it. This he did perhaps for eight
days in a row.
When the king had become old, he summoned his counselors and lords, for he
wanted to have his son crowned king while he was still alive. That took place, and he
had a great banquet. Zimro was close to the young king, and the young king said to
Zimro: “My father has given over the possession of the kingdom to me after his
death. Come with me to my lord father, the king, and, with his counselors as wit-
nesses, I will transfer it to you after my death, so that you will possess it. For that
reason, wait for a little while, and then you must ride with me to the castle.” Zimro
agreed and got himself ready with beautiful clothes and all other necessary things.
He waited for a little while, but it was taking too long for him, so he went ahead at a
leisurely pace, thinking: “He will overtake me riding.” But as he went up the hill, he
began to get tired—for it was a very high hill—and he stopped and stood still for a
while. There he saw a most beautiful horse running before him, quite well capari-
soned with harness more beautiful than he had ever seen in his life. And the horse
acted as if it wanted to ride down the hill. He then thought: “If I could catch it,
I would ride up the hill.” He went toward it, and it stood there still. As soon as he
mounted the horse, it galloped away helter-skelter, as if it were the Devil himself, and
it galloped into a great forest with him, where a multitude of herbs was growing.
Thereafter he came to a meadow on which grew a multitude of roots. There the horse
stopped. He was happy and climbed down from the saddle onto the meadow and
wanted to enjoy himself for a while. Then the horse galloped away and disappeared
before his very eyes so that he did not know where it had gone. Then he did not know
where he was. He shrieked and was so miserable that it cannot be described. He
yelled again and again: “Grief on top of grief! Misfortune, how you do grip me! I do
not know which way to turn and am so far from my father and relations, and see and
hear neither person nor house nor city. Where am I, or what has happened to me?”
Grammar
Final syllable reduction
Two instances of the reduction of final syllables require comment. As already noted
(Lesson Ten), final [ ־א-ə] often seems to be deleted in verbs, whether as the distinc-
tive inflectional marker of the 3rd sg preterite of weak verbs (דא שריא אונ' ווײנט זי,
BZ16 ‘then she shrieked and wept’), or as one of the inflectional markers of the
3rd sg present subjunctive ('[ בגינגbəging] ‘would commit’ instead of the expected
form [ בגינגאbəgingə], JtR4).
A second instance is the loss of final [ ־ן-n-] in verb forms, primarily infinitives,
such as ( דש איך דיך אין דער מוס וואלט נענהPaV 291,6) ‘that I make this request on your
behalf ’; ( בֿױר יאמר קונט ער ניט ראשטן נוך רואהPaV 273, 7) ‘he could find neither rest nor
lesson nineteen169
repose because of his misery’; ( ווען דאז מײני גיבײן נױמר מין טונהPaV 274, 8) ‘if my body
were ever to do that’1 '( אונ' מיט זינן וורטן אלזא ער אײן לנט ̌שולדא בריכטJtR16) ‘and with his
dignities like one who should be the ruler of a land.’ Sometimes this reduction
seems due to exigencies of rhythm or rhyme in poetry; sometimes it seems likely
that it is a representation of actual speech instead of the more archaic or elevated
literary language. The reader need only recognize the underlying form and its
grammatical function.
Future tense
The future tense in OLY is constructed by means of a finite form of the future aux-
iliary verb ווערן+ the infinitive of the main verb: ‘ זיא ווערן קומןthey will come.’ An
alternate auxiliary verb וועלןis also frequently found: ‘ זיא וועלן קומןthey will come,’
which sometimes additionally connotes a wish, will, or intent to do something:
The two auxiliaries appear in future usage in a single sentence in the Friday Courier
(Cou25): זוא באלד אז דיא פֿרנצי קריגש שיפֿן ווערן קומן אונ' אלגיר בומברדירן זוא וועלן דיא טירקן אל
‘ דיא גיפֿנגיני פֿרנצן אין דיא גישטיק ארײן לאדןas soon as the French warships [*will] come
and bombard Algiers, the Turks will (~ intend to) load all the French captives into
the cannons.’2
1 This sentence also displays that seemingly illogical phenomenon of a positive statement via a nega-
tive, i.e. “hypernegation” or “pleonastic negation,” which extends across clausal boundaries in inher-
ently negative predicates, conditioned by comparatives, ‘before’ clauses, or verbs of fearing. It is found
idiomatically in French, Italian, Russian, German, e.g. Nein, ich kann nichts sagen, bevor ich nicht mit
dem ungehorsamen Kinde gesprochen habe ‘No, I can say nothing, before I have spoken with the disobe-
dient child.’ The structure was common in earlier periods of English, but now survives only informally:
Don’t be surprised if it doesn’t rain—i.e. ‘if it does rain.’
2 In the first instance, English grammar not only does not require but indeed does not permit a future
auxiliary, which is thus here bracketed in the translation, while in the second instance the possible
connotation of desire/will/intention is noted.
170 a guide to old literary yiddish
: קלו אײן משל בֿון אײנם אלט מאן מיט צוויא ווײבר אײני יונגי אונ' אײני אלטי
אײן בײא שפיל מן דרף קײן בעשרן נארן אז ווען אײן אלטן מאן דז
· ווײב שטערבן
: דרום זול ער און ווײב בלײבן · וויל ער אנדרש ניט גאר ור דערבן
Glossary
Notes
The periphrastic verbal construction consisting of the finite form of ( טוןespecially
in the subjunctive) + the infinitive of the main verb seems to have become a collo-
quial option early in Yiddish: ‘ די אלט הט אים די געל האר אױש ראפֿן טאןThe old one did
rip [= ripped] out his blond hairs’; here the structure appears in the perfect tense:
האט טאן ראֿפן, of a presumable present tense form: טוט ראֿפן.
In the clause אז ווען אײן אלטן מאן דז ווײב שטערבן, the noun phrase איין אלטן מאןis dative
and quasi-possessive (or perhaps the dative is to be understood as quasi-deprivative:
the wife dies away/off from the old man), while the verb שטערבןis simply ungram-
matical: either it is present indicative plural where a singular is required for agree-
ment with the singular subject דז ווייב, or an auxiliary verb such as ( טעטas above,
l. 10) must be imaginatively (and extra-textually) supplied by the reader.
The reversed order of noun/adjective in the noun phrase יונגי זערis simply a mat-
ter of the demands of the style (verse form), specifically to place the rhyme word at
the line end.
Translation
No. 136: A fable about an old man with two wives, one young, and one old. An old
man made his way rather deeply into old age and did not want to be without a wife.
He married a very young one; he had great difficulty with her. He married another,
elderly one, in addition. Then more than ever was he discomfited, for the young one
tore all his grey hair out, since she would have preferred to see that he had a blond
and curly beard. The old one ripped out his blond hairs. Thus he had no beard at all.
A cautionary tale: there is no greater fool than an old man whose wife dies; for that
reason he should do without a wife, if he does not otherwise wish to go to ruin.
Lesson Twenty
גיהיבן · הונגרט אין גר זער ער ונד ניקש צו עשן נוך זױלכם אױביל ֵ
דען דיא וואורצילן אונ' קרױטר · אונ' טרנק וושר · אונ' גינג אזא לנג אוף
דער וויזן אודר הײד אונ' ור מײנט ער וועלט ווידר הײם קומן · אבר אי
לענגר ער גינג · אי לענגר ער ור אירט וואר :לסוף קאם ער אן אײני
שױני בַך · דא שטיג ער אײן דען זיא וואר ניט טיף דא ונד ער ויל
ת דיא נאם ער אונ' טעט ויל אין בוזם · דער בַך וואר ואלר ְאבֹונִים טובֹו ֿ
ת אונ' גינג אױש דעם גַן ֵעדֶן · ער צוך זיך אױש אונ' גינג ְא ָבנִים טֹובֹו ֿ
דורך דש וושר עש וואר גר שטרענג אונ' שטרק · ער קאם דר דורך ·
אונ' קם אוף אײן שױני שטרוס · דא זאך ער ור אים אײן גרושן שטײן
אונ' דארײן גיגוסן אײן שווערט · אווך וואר אן דעם שטײן אײן רַד דש
אום שלוג אלי וועג אונ' שטעג דש ער ניט קונט ווײטר גֵין ווען עש וואר
תפִֿילָה דש גימכֿט צו הױטן דען וועג אין דש גַן ֵעדֶן · דא טעט ער ְ
רַד שטונד שטיל אונ' ליש אין גֵין · ער גינג ווײטר אונ' קאם אוף אײן הײד
דא וורן אײטיל שרזך אוף · דיא שנײדן אױבר זיך גיווענד · דא טעט
תפִילָה דא צור טײלטן זיך דיא שאר מעשר אונ' גינג דר דורך · ער אבר ְ
דא קאם ער אוף אײן ועלד דא שטונד ור אים אײן קלײן הױזלין · ער וואר
גר ורא אונ' גינג הינײן · דא זַאשן ויל לױט אינן אונ' אסן אונ' זאהן אין
שלום ער דנקט אין אונ' וואר ורא · דש ער הורט דש עש אן גבן אים ָ
יודן וורן · ער גינג אונ' וואלט זײן הענד וועשן אונ' וואלט אווך עשן · דא
שריאן זיא אין אן ניט וועש דיא הענד אונ' הױט דיך דש דו ניקש אן
רױרש · דא זגט ער ווארום · דא זגטן זיא מיר זײן אײטיל טוטן לױט ·
אונ' איז אונש וועדר וואל נוך ווֵיא · אונ' מױשן אײן גנץ יאר הינן בלײבן ·
דר נוך אז ער ור שולד הוט . :ליבר זִי ְמרָה ביט ור אונש · מיר ווישן
וואל ווש דו היא טושט .נעכֿטן הורטן מיר וואל דש מן נוך דיר וואורד
שיקן · ער וראגט זיא ויל אבר זיא וואלטן אים ניקש זגן · אזא גינג ער
ווידר בֿון זיא · דא זאך ער זיך בז אום דא זאך ער זײן שױני אונ' ליבליכֿי
ְברִיעָה אונטר דען שטיגן זיצן .דא דער שריק ער אונ' שפרך אווֵיא
לײדר ליבי ְברִיעָה ווש טושטו היא · דא שפרך זיא ליבר אױש דר וועלטר
תפִילָה אום מיך זימרה היא מוש איך זיצן נוך אכֿט טג · אבר טושטו ְ
זא קום איך בלד הרױש · ליבר זימרה איך הב קײן זױנד גיטון אוף ערדן .
דען דש איך דיר דר לאבט דש דו מיך קוסן זולשט · ער גינג צו איר
אונ' וואלט זיא אבר קוסן .דא זגט זיא הױט דיך אן דײנום לײפ אונ'
רױר מיך ניט אן · אודר דו מושט שטערבן דא שפרך ער איך ווש ניט
174 a guide to old literary yiddish
וואו איך בין · אודר וויא מיר גישעהן איז · אודר וואו איך הין זול · איך
וויל דיך קױסן זא שטירב איך אונ' בלײב בײא דיר היא · דא זגט זיא
נײן בײא דײנום לײבא · גֵיא בֿון מיר אױבר דיא הײד זא קומשטו ווידר
הײם · דא גינג ער ווידר בֿון איר מיט גרושם לײד מיט ווײנן אונ' שרײאן ·
דא ביגיגנט אים אוף דער הײד אײן אלטר גרואר מן מיט אײנום לנגן
בָרט · דא זגט דער אלט · דש אישט אײן זעלצומר מן אן דיזם אורט ·
דא זגט זִי ְמרָה דש אישט ווארליך וואר ווש ניט וואו איך בין אודר וואו
איך הין זול · ליבר ְרבִי צײגט מיר וואו איך הײם קום · אונ' זגט מיר
ווש הב איך דוך גיטון · דש מיר אײן זױלכי ִמְקרָא ווידר וארן אישט דא
שפרך ער דו הושט קײן זױנד גיטון · דען דש די בריעה בֿון דײנט
וועגן גישטורבן איז · נון דו זולט ווידר הײם קומן · דא זגט זימרה ליבר
הנָבִיא · דאְרבִי זגט מיר ווער איר זײט · דא זגט ער איך בין ֵאלְיָהוּ ַ
זגט ער ליבר ר' בענשט מיך · דא זגט ער איך וויל דיך איצונדר ניט
הײם קומן ·
בענשן · איך ווײש וואל דו מושט ווידר ֵ
Glossary
Notes
The object of the preposition נוךin the prepositional phrase גיהיבןֵ נוך זױלכם אױביל
*‘after/in addition to such bother-causing/discomfort’ consists of a compound
nominalized infinitive גיהיבן
ֵ אױביל, reminding us that an infinitive by definition may
176 a guide to old literary yiddish
function as a noun (e.g. ‘to die is a certainty,’ where ‘to die’ is the subject of the verb,
just as that grammatical slot could taken by the semantically parallel noun ‘death’
in the same sentence = ‘death is a certainty’).
The correlative comparative (‘the bigger . . . the better’) is expressed with the
doubled conjunction אי. . . אי, each instance of which is followed by a comparative,
as in the (albeit semantically rather awkward) expression in this passage: אי לענגר ער
‘ גינג · אי לענגר ער ור אירט ווארthe longer he walked, the longer he was lost.’
As has already occurred in earlier passages, one might here note that while the
reflexive pronoun is in general clearly distinct from the personal pronoun in OLY
(and in modEY the form זיךfunctions as the reflexive for all genders and numbers),
there are relatively frequent exceptions in OLY, as here: דא זאך ער ור אים אײן גרושן שטײן
‘There he saw before him[self] a large stone,’ where the expected third person
reflexive זיךdoes not appear but is replaced by the third person singular masculine
dative pronoun ;איםthe reflexive meaning is, however, unaltered.1
In a sentence such as he heard by their speech that it was Jews there, in English
idiomatic usage the verb was agrees with the subject it and not the predicate nomi-
native Jews. In idiomatic Yiddish usage, it is just the opposite: ער הערט דש עש יודן וורן.
It is difficult to know how to describe the usage דש דו ניקש אן רוירש, where one
would expect a final ־טon the verbal inflection: is it scribal inattention or a variant
form? The latter seems more likely, since the same form occurs later in this text
(BZ21).2
A reader’s momentary confusion about final ־ןsuffixes attached to what seem to
be singular nouns most often results from not recognizing that the noun in ques-
tion is a weak noun (cf. the discussion of the weak noun declension in Lesson
Eight), as in this passage: אוף ערדן. There are, however, examples of a kind of flexibil-
ity in the use of the ־ןinflection, especially in adjectives, which are sometimes
confusing, such as in the clause: מיר זײן אײטיל טוטן לױט, where there is no discernible
grammatical reason for the ־ןinflection on an unpreceded and thus presumably
strong adjective form, which should thus be טוטאbut is not. With further practice
the reader may be expected to develop a compassionate tolerance for the inflec-
tional flexibilities of OLY.
Clearly the verb ביטןsignifies ‘pray’ and was likely pronounced [bitən], i.e. it was
an OLY cognate of early NHG bitten ‘request/pray’ and not of the neologism beten
‘pray.’
Translation
In addition to such discomfort, he was very hungry. He found nothing to eat except
for the roots and herbs, and he drank water, and walked for a long time on the
meadow or moor and thought that he would get home. But the longer he walked, the
longer he was lost. Finally he came to a beautiful stream. He stepped into it, for it was
not deep. There he found many jewels, of which he took many and put them inside
1 Cf. the MHG use of the personal pronoun as the dative reflexive (Lexer 146c).
2 The past participle ור שולדin this passage also lacks the normative ־טinflection, which is here
assimilated to the final ־דof the verb stem.
lesson twenty177
his shirt. The stream was full of jewels and flowed out of Paradise. He undressed and
walked through the water, whose current was fast and strong. He got across and
came to a fine road. There he saw before him a large stone in which a sword had been
cast.3 There was also a wheel on the stone so that it rotated and struck at every path
and passage, so that he could not go on, for it was so constructed to guard the
entrance to Paradise. Then he said a prayer, and the wheel stopped and let him pass
by. He went further and came to a meadow which was full of shearing blades with
their sharp edges turned upward. There he again said a prayer, and the shearing
blades parted, and he passed through. Then he came to a field where a small house
stood before him. He was very happy and went inside. There were many people sit-
ting inside eating who looked at him and greeted him with “Peace [be with you].”4
He thanked them and was happy to hear that they were Jews. He went and wanted
to wash his hands and eat, too. They shouted at him: “Do not wash your hands, and
beware lest you touch anything!”5 Then he said: “Why?” They then said: “We are all
dead and are neither joyful nor miserable, and we must stay here a whole year, each
according to his sins. Dear Zimro, pray for us! We well know what you are doing
here. Yesterday we heard that you would be summoned.”
He asked them much, but they did not want to tell him anything. So he again left
them. Then he looked around more carefully and saw his beautiful and loving Briyo
sitting under the stairs. He was startled and said: “Alas, what are you doing here,
dear Briyo?” Then she said: “My dear and most distinguished Zimro, I have to sit
here for eight more days, but if you pray for me, I will get out soon. Dear Zimro,
I committed no sin on earth, except that I allowed you to kiss me.” He went to her
and wanted to kiss her again. She then said: “Beware for your life, and do not touch
me, or you will have to die!” Then he said: “I do not know where I am or what has
happened to me or where I should go. I want to kiss you, so that I will die and stay
here with you.” Then she said: “No, on your life! Get away from me—across the
meadow—thus will you get home again.”
Full of grief and weeping and wailing, he then left her. Then on the meadow he
met an old, gray man with a long beard. Then the old man said: “Now that is a
peculiar man in these parts!” Then Zimro said: “That is true indeed: I do not know
where I am or where I am to go. My dear rabbi, show me how to get home, and tell
me what I have done that such a tale/incident has happened to me.” Then he said:
“You have committed no sin, except that Briyo died because of you. Now you should
go back home.” Then Zimro said: “My dear rabbi, tell me who you are!” Then he said:
“I am the prophet Elijah.” Then he said: “My dear rabbi, bless me!” Then he said:
“I do not wish to bless you now. I well know that you must return home.”
Grammar
Preterite present verbs
This class of verbs is so designated because it is clear that in language prehistory
(proto-Germanic) the strong preterite tense forms of this particular verb class
developed a present meaning, which then pragmatically necessitated the develop-
ment of new preterite forms to replace those shifted forms.6 The new forms are of
the weak category. The result is a present tense system consisting of strong preterite
forms that are present in meaning (there is thus no [ ־ט-t] inflection in the 3rd sg.
present) and a preterite system consisting of weak preterite forms. Otherwise the
conjugational system is regular. This class of verbs is relatively small, but includes
some of the most common verbs used in the language, including of the group of
so-called “modal” verbs: ‘should,’ ‘ought,’ ‘must,’ ‘can,’ ‘may,’ ‘wish’:
Among the preterite present verbs, the modal verbs have further peculiarities: in
OLY, as in English, modal verbs require a main verb (in the infinitive form but
without the otherwise obligatory preposition צו/to) to complete their sense: ‘I must
work’; ‘they can swim.’ As noted earlier, verbs of motion may be omitted after a
modal verb, if the sense is obvious (cf. archaic English ‘I must away’).
The perfect tense of modal verbs is regularly formed with the perfect auxiliary
verb הון+ past participle of the modal: ( זיא האבן גיוואלט נאך דען שווײצר לנד ציהןCou25)
‘they wanted to go to Switzerland’; דער זעלביגי שיפֿר האט גימוזט זײני צווײא מאשט בײמר אב
( האקןCou23) ‘the aforementioned mariner had to chop off his two masts.’ There is
an alternate perfect construction, in which the the infinitive is substituted for the
past participle: ‘ דער כ ֵֹהן ַהגָ דוֹל ניט הוט וועלן דיר זיין טוכטר געבןthe high priest did not wish
to give you his daughter’ (BZ19); אונ' הוט זיא װאלן בֿור זוכֿן אוב זיא זיך הוט װעלן לושן ור בֿױרן
( בֿון װעגן לײבש לושטSM, Appendix 4, text 2) ‘and wished to test, whether it [the soul]
wanted to let itself be seduced for the sake of physical lust.’
If the sense of the perfect tense pertains to the main verb and not the modal, the
construction is slightly more complicated: finite form of the modal + perfect infini-
tive (= infinitive of the perfect auxiliary + past participle of main verb): וואש דר זעלביגי
( (פריסטר) זאל ביגנגן האבןCou24) ‘which the aforementioned priest is supposed to have
committed’ (present tense); ‘ זיא מיינטן זיא וועלטן דר דורך גיגנגן הוןthey thought that they
would have passed through there’ (perfect tense) (BI27.3, Appendix 4, text 5).
The verb לושןgenerally means ‘let/leave/allow,’ but it can also have a quasi-modal
sense of ‘have something done/get something done,’ in which case it is constructed
6 It is possible to locate the development of this phenomenon in proto-Germanic, i.e. the period even
before the split into East Germanic (e.g. Gothic), North Germanic (e.g. Norse), and West Germanic
(e.g. Yiddish, English, German), because all of the languages display this feature, which can be detected
in the 3rd sg present tense form: English standard present tense ‘she sings’ (which displays the conven-
tional /-s/ marker of that form, vs. preterite present present tense ‘she will_ / can_ / may_’ which lack the
inflectional /-s/ and thus look like strong preterite forms (‘sang’) that never have /-s/.
lesson twenty179
with an infinitive, just as is a modal verb: [זי] לישן אין אזא אוֹן ביגרבן אוף דעם ֵבית ַה ַחיִ ים
ֵ (BZ21) ‘[they] left him thus standing (= remaining) unburied in the cemetery.’
שטין
Supplemental reading: חד גדיא/ “Song of the Kid” (anon. 15th century)
This Neo-Aramaic song has for centuries been part of the traditional Ashkenazic
Passover celebration. The song comprises ten stanzas, in each successive one of
which a further narrative detail is added. Generally, the song has been interpreted
allegorically as having to do with Israel’s hope for the Messiah. The relations of this
song to the internationally well-known folkloristic motif that lies at its base have
not yet been established. The age of the Jewish song is unknown, but the earliest
transmitted text witness is found in an illustrated fifteenth-century Ashkenazic
Haggadah manuscript (Jerusalem, Museo U. Nahon Di Arte Ebraica Italiana,
Hagaddah Sereni, fos. 46v–47v), where both the Yiddish and the Aramaic versions
are entered together. Chone Shmeruk has argued that the song was originally com-
posed in Yiddish, and that the Aramaic is an attempt not exactly to translate but
rather to approximate (as was customary in bilingual Ashkenazic texts) that origi-
nal. Presented here is only the final stanza of the Yiddish text, which, due to the
progressively repetitive structure of the content, includes the entire “plot” (47v).
The orthography of the text consistently represents initial [f] as ווnot ֿפor ו, as is
generally the case in texts read thus far, e.g. [ ווערלעשןfərlešən] ‘extinguish.’ As so
often in OLY, it is not clear whether the orthography reflects the pronunciation of
the scribe and the scribe’s community, or is simply an idiosyncratic orthographical
practice. The fact that unequivocal [v] is also represented by ( ווe.g. )וואשרלייןmay or
may not be relevant to the issue, since, as the reader has already come to expect,
OLY often represents distinct sounds with identical spellings.
דא קאם הקבה אונ' שעכטיט דען מלאך המות דער דא האט גישעכט דז גיהרגיט
שוחטלײן דז דא האט גישעכט דז עקשלײן דז דא האט גיטרונקן דז וואשרלײן דז דא
האט ווער לעשט דז ווײערלײן דז דא האט ווער ברענט דז שטעקלײן דז דא האט
גישלאגן דז הינטלײן דז דא האט גיבישן דז קעצלײן דז דא האט געשן דז מײזלײן דז דא
האט געשן דז ציקלײן דז האט גיקאֿפט דז גיהרגיט וועטרלײן אײן ציקלײן אײן ציקלײן
Glossary
one goat Ar [χad gádye] חד גדיא
the Holy One, blessed be He = God [hakódeš bórχu] הקבה = הקדוש־ברוך־הוא
slaughter [šeχtən] שעכטן
Angel of Death [máləχ (h)amóvəs] מלאך המות דער
kill/murder/ravage [hárgənən gəhargət] הרגנן גיהרגיט
(little) ritual slaughterer [šóuχətlayn] שוחטלײן דש
(little) ox [ekslayn] עקשלײן דש
180 a guide to old literary yiddish
Note
The past participle of the verb עשןis irregular insofar as the vowel of the participial
prefix גי־coalesces with the initial vowel of the verb stem: *[gə-esən] > [ געשןgesən].
The forms were similar in MHG: ëʒʒen/gëʒʒen. In modEY and NHG the forms are
no less irregular, as a result of the quasi-reduplication of the participial prefix:
געגעסן/gegessen.
Translation
One goat, one goat. Then God came and slaughtered the Angel of Death, who there
had slaughtered the worn-out little ritual slaughterer, who there had slaughtered
the little ox, which there had drunk up the little pool of water, which there had
extinguished the little fire, which there had burnt up the little rod, which there
had beaten the little dog, which there had bitten the little cat, which there had eaten
the little mouse, which there had eaten the little goat, which the worn-out little
father had bought: one little goat, one little goat.
Lesson Twenty-One
אונ' טרוגן אין אז וואל ביליך וואר · דען ער הט נוך ניא קײן זױנד גיטון · אונ' ברוכֿטן
ֶן · צו זײנר ליבשטן ְברִיעָה · אונ' מכטן אײן הױפשי ברױיליפֿט אין אין דש גַן ֵע ד
אַהרֹןֹשה אונ' ְ ָכה · אונ' דיא ַמל ִ
ֿים ווארן דיא לֵצָנִים מ ֶ
ְָאכ הקב''ה מכֿט דיא ְבר ָ
כלָה אונטר דיא חוּפָה דר נוך אַס מן · אונ' טרנק · אונ' טניץ · תן אונ' ַ
בֿורטן דען ֵח ַ
שבַע ְברָכות ·
ה ֶמלֶך בענשט דיא ֶ שלָמָה ַאונ' ְ
ְהילָה
עש וואר אײן זױלכֿי קױשליכי ברױיליפֿט דיא ניא איז אין קײנר ק ִ
גיוועזן : :
נון איר ליבי לױט הט איר וואל אין דעם בױכֿלן גילעזן :
ווש דיא גרוש ליבשפט ברענגט ·
דער הלבן אײן איטליכר זיך ור וואל בידענקט ·
5ווש דרױש מױכֿט ווערדן .
עש זינד נוך ויל הױפשי אונ' ורומי לױט אוף ערדן ·
דיא אים מױכֿטן ווערדן צו טײל ·
הוט ער אנדרשט דש גלױק אונ' הײל :
דא מיט וויל איכש ולענדן ·
10גאט ית' זול אונש אווך דען אלטן גרואן מאן זענדן ·
ח צוואר · אונ' מיט אים ברענגן מ ִ
ַשי ַ
אמן דש זול גישעהן אין דיזם יאר ·
גישריבן אים יאר כי ́ש ́ם ́ה אקרא וכו'
דש פיט איך דער שרײבר יצחק בר יודא ז'ל רױטלינגן
Glossary
]forget scv2 [fərgesən ורגעסן
]seem ir.wv.impers + acc [dunkən דונקן
]carress/cuddle/nuzzle/fondle [halzən הלזן
]Satan [sotən שׂטן דערָ
]incite spv [ónreytsən אן רײצן
]speech/tale/justification [reyd ֵריד דיא
טו(א) = דו
]chair/seat [štul שטול דער
]wait sv7 [baytən בײטן
]yes/indeed/after all [yo יא
]silver [zilbər זילבר דש
]cleanse/purify/sanctify refl [réynigən רײניגן זיך
טיך = דיך
]certain(ly) [gəvís גיוויש
]truly [far vor ור וואר
]here: if [zo זא
]lead/guide [fïrən בֿױרן
lesson twenty-one183
Notes
The common distinction in modEY between this world and the next, i.e. די וועלט
‘this world’ and ‘ יענע וועלטthat (other) world,’ also appears in this passage, although
the terminology in this particular instance differs slightly: ‘ בײא מײנום לעבןduring my
life’ vs. ‘ יעני וועלטthat (other) world.’
An aberrant form seems to occur in דר נוך אַס מן · אונ' טרנק · אונ' טניץ, where the first
two verb forms are 3 sg preterite indicative forms of strong verbs, while the last,
טניץ, presumably from the weak verb טנ(י)צן, lacks the final ־טor ( )־טאto mark the
preterite. Perhaps a scribal error? Or perhaps the scribe conflated that [-t] with the
phonetically related affricate [ צts].
While the word געלטliterally means ‘money,’ its use here juxtaposed in a single
phrase with ‘ זילברsilver’ seems almost certainly to be a slip, for the idiom ‘silver and
gold ( ’)גולטseems more likely than ‘silver and money.’
The marks of the kind found in the sentence וו''ערש נ'יט ג'לב ד''ער ''איז א'ױך א'ײן י'וד
commonly indicate that the letters are also to be read as numbers and thus specify
the year (of the text’s composition, copying, or publication) or that they constitute
a name. Here it seems perhaps that neither is the case; the problem still remains for
a clever reader to solve.
Pre-modern manuscript texts rarely have anything like a title page that provides
information about the book’s title, author, and date of composition or copying.
Some, however, do provide some of that information at the conclusion of the text,
in a so-called colophon. Jewish texts very often additionally express a wish for the
coming of the Messiah as a component of the colophon. The colophon of “Briyo
and Zimro” in fact includes all these components: the year in which the text was
copied is identified, as was common practice in Jewish texts, through the citation of
a biblical text ( ֶא ְק ָרא,‘ כִּ י ֵשׁם יְ הוָ הfor I will proclaim the name of the lord’ Deut. 32:3),
the numerical value of whose marked letters totaled the designated year, in this
case: = שמה345 = [5]345 = 1585 ce. As is commonly the case with such whole Hebrew
citations in OLY, this one too is written in Hebrew square script. The manuscript
was “written” by Yitskhok, son of Judah of Reutlingen, but that does not necessarily
indicate authorship; it most likely simply identifies the scribe who copied this par-
ticular manuscript from a previous examplar. It is often difficult to interpret the
terms relative to scribal practice and/or/vs. authorship in OLY texts. In the preface
to his Bovo d’Antona, for instance, Elye Bokher/Elias Levita, identifies himself in one
line as ‘ ֵאלִ יָ ה ַה ְמ ַח ֵברElye the author’ (although he seems to take the term ‘ ַה ְמ ַח ֵברauthor’
as a general identifier of who he is—i.e. in this context as a quasi-name—without
specific reference to that particular book), while in another line he identifies him-
self as ‘ דער שרײברthe writer/scribe,’ although as part of the cliché that includes the
corresponding rhyme ‘ דינר אלר ורומן ווײברthe servant of all honorable women,’ and
the need for the rhyme may well dictate the term chosen rather than vice versa.
Finally, he uses the word ‘ מאכֿןmake/produce’ to designate the specific work that he
performed which resulted in the book itself: compose, translate, adapt. So, did
Yitskhok b. Judah compose “Briyo and Zimro” or simply copy the manuscript?
Who can say with certainty?
In the final rhymed lines of text (ll. 4–8 of the numbered lines) there seems to be
an interpretive crux that may indeed result from corruption in the text, i.e. the
lesson twenty-one185
Translation
He had forgotten that he had not prayed for Briyo. When he now returned, he
went into the house to his Briyo. It seemed to him that someone was with her with
both her breasts in his hands. Then he said: “My dear Briyo, who is embracing
you?” Then she said: “My dear Zimro, do not be alarmed! Satan wants to tempt
you.” And he went to his Briyo, and she said: “Beware! Do not touch me until I have
finished speaking!” Then he said: “So, say what you want to say!” Then she said:
“So, my dear Zimro, do you want to share a throne/seat with me, or would you
rather wait longer?” Then he said: “I do not want to wait longer.” Then she said:
“Then go back home and tell your father and my father! Whether they like it or
not, you will indeed have me. He did not want to give me to you while I was alive.
So, he will have to endure it—without silver and money—that you have me in the
afterlife. And go to the ritual bath and purify yourself and say farewell to your
relations! On the third day you will certainly be dead. I tell you truly: on the third
186 a guide to old literary yiddish
day you will certainly die, if you touch me.” He said: “I want to touch you, even if
it were to cost me my life a second time.” And he embraced and kissed her and
thereafter went away.
Then the old, gray man again came to him and said: “Come here, my dear Zimro!
I will lead you home and will meanwhile prepare for your wedding.” Then he
blessed him. Then he prayed for his dear Briyo to be released from beneath the
stairs and from the cottage. That was done, and she entered the luminous Paradise.
Whoever does not believe it is nonetheless still a Jew.
Then Zimro returned home. The king was angry that he had been away so long.
Then he told him everything that had happened to him and how he was to die, and
the king was quite miserable about Zimro’s death. Thus it was that Zimro came to
his father and Briyo’s father and said what Briyo had commanded: that he would
have to die on the third day. All of his relations were quite miserable about Zimro’s
death. He said that when he was dead, they were not to bury him; they were to lay
him on top of his grave and leave him there and go back home.
Thus he went to the ritual bath and purified himself and said farewell to every-
one. There was a great wailing and weeping that was heard throughout the city.
The same was true of the high priest, who now sorely regretted thus losing his
daughter.
The conclusion is: on the third day, the good and honorable Zimro died, may
God have mercy on him. His relations did as he had commanded them. They
mourned greatly for him, more than one can describe. Then, after long wailing and
weeping, everyone went home and left him thus unburied in the cemetery. Then
the angels Michael and Gabriel came and took him and carried him—as was
proper, for he had never committed a sin—and brought him to Paradise to his
most beloved Briyo and had a noble wedding for them. The Holy One, blessed be
He, gave the blessing, and the angels were the jesters; Moses and Aaron led the
bride and groom under the wedding canopy. Then there was eating and drinking
and dancing, and King Solomon recited the seven blessings.
It was such a splendid wedding, as there has never before been in any Jewish
community. Now, you dear people, you have indeed read in the little book what
great love brings, for which reason, let each individual well consider in advance
what might be the conclusions to be drawn therefrom: there are many other noble
and honorable people in the world to whom it [sc. Heaven] might be granted, if
they otherwise have fortune and good luck. With that I would like to end. May
God, blessed be He, send the old, gray man to us, too, and with him indeed bring
the Messiah. Amen. May it happen in this year.
Written in the year 345 [= (5)345 = 1585], I—the writer/scribe Yitskhok b. Judah
(may his memory be for a blessing) of Reutlingen—pray for that.
Grammar
Overview of auxiliary verbs
At this point it might be useful to provide a systematic overview of the basic auxil-
iary verbs of OLY that have been introduced.
lesson twenty-one187
All irregular weak verbs that occur in this volume are listed in Appendix 2.
Calendar
Days of the week (all masculine nouns):
The year
The various world practices of identifying a year by means of counting from a tradi-
tionally significant starting date are historically grounded, i.e. those practices them-
selves necessarily began some time after that actual start date.4 Most likely around
2 To account for the difference between the 360-day year of the lunisolar Jewish calendar and the
365¼ days of the solar year, an extra (intercalary) month is added to the calendar when necessary, in a
19-year cycle.
3 Beginning of Jewish year ( ראש השנהrosh hashone).
4 The traditional dating of the birth of Jesus of Nazareth gave rise to the Christian reckoning of the
year from that date (anno domini = ad). That practice did not gain widespread use until the 8th century,
but has now become the de facto civil reckoning in most of the Western world, now often quasi-
secularized as ce = common era (as opposed to bce = before the common era).
lesson twenty-one189
1,000 years ago the Jewish practice began of identifying a year as reckoned from the
traditional dating of the creation. Since Maimonides’ codification of the practice in
the year 1178 ce, it has spread and become generalized in traditional Jewish usage.
In Jewish texts the year is of course expressed by means of the alphanumerical
signification of the letters (cf. Lesson Fifteen). As indicated earlier in the discussion
of the numerical system in OLY, a given sequence of alphanumerics (letters) is
often identified as a numeral—as distinguished from a word—by means of addi-
tional markings: a “double apostrophe” may precede the final alphanumeric (e.g.
= תשע''ו776), the alphanumerics may be overlined ( = תק̅נ̅ב552), or, if the numeral
includes an indication of thousands, a single apostrophe may follow the alphanu-
meric that designates the thousands ( = ה'תשעו5776). Or sometimes on title pages of
books, the year of publication may be set off from the surrounding text by means of
a square-script hand/font slightly larger than the surrounding mashket text. Such
is, for instance, the case on the title page of Elia Levita’s אַנֹטונא ָ ָבּ ָבֿא ְדBovo d’Antona,
where the year of publication is identified as אלִ יָ ה ַה ְמ ַח ֵבר,ֵ which in this case does not
consist of alphanumerics in sequence, larger to smaller from right to left; instead
the alphanumerics form actual words that are logically relevant to the context, in
this case ‘ ֵאלִ יָ ה ַה ְמ ַח ֵברElia the author.’ The numerical values of the letters of the words
are then simply added together to determine the total: = א1, = ל30, = י10, = ה5, = ה5,
= מ40, = ח8, = ב2, = ר200, totaling 301, which is reckoned, as indicated in the same
line of the title page: איז גלײך דש פרט, i.e. designating the Jewish year in the “small
count,” i.e. without notating the thousands: 301 = (5)301 = 1541–1542 ce, in this case
1541. This “small count” is often also indicated by the Hebrew abbreviation לפּרט קטן
= ‘ לפ''קaccording to the small count/era.’
One converts between the Jewish and civil reckonings by adding 3760 to the civil
year or subtracting 3,760 from the Jewish year. The year 2016, according to the civil
calendar, is thus, according to the traditional Jewish calendar, the year 5776. Since
the sixth Jewish millennium began in 1240 ce, and since few OLY texts date from
before that year, almost all dates that will be found in OLY texts are from the sixth
millennium. It is important for the reader to keep in mind that most indications of
the year in OLY texts are in fact in the “small count,” i.e. omitting the indication = ה
5000. In order to convert between the Jewish year in the “small count” and the civil
year, one simply adds 1240: for instance, with a year such as רנב: = ר200 + = נ50 + ב
= 2 = 252, which is then converted to the civil year: 252 + 1,240 = 1492 ce.
Often one encounters more specific dates in OLY texts, including designations of
the month and particular days of the month. In order to convert those dates to the
civil calendar, more complex reckoning is required, because of the incongruities of
the Jewish and civil calendars, year by year, and since, depending on when and
where those dates obtain, one might find equivalents in either the Julian or Grego-
rian civil calendars.5 There are currently numerous calendar conversion websites
available that conveniently convert the day/month/year of the Gregorian and Julian
calendars to and from the Jewish calendar, e.g.:
5 The Julian calendar was the Western civil calendar before its reform in 1582; the Gregorian calendar
has gradually been adopted as the civil calendar over the course of the subsequent centuries in most (but
not all) cultures worldwide.
190 a guide to old literary yiddish
http://www.calendarhome.com/calculate/convert-a-date/
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/calendar/
· אבר וויא דאש דער פֿרנצעזישר גימאכֿט וואש אױף דען זעלביגן שיף זײן גיוועזן
(יענראל) האט פֿר נומן זוא איז ער מיט זײני ארלאך שיפֿן נאך דר זעלביגן טירקישן
שטאט (זאלעה) גיפֿארן · אונ' הט דיא שטאט גיוואלט בילעגרן אבר דיא טירקן הבן
זיך מיט אים פֿר טראגן אונ' זיא האבן דאש גירױבטי שיף ווידר לוז גיגעבן אױך האבן
דיא טירקן אלי דיא פֿרנצעזישי (שלאבֿן) פֿרײא גילאזן · אױך הבן דיא טירקן דען
(קאפיטען) איבר דיא רױבר לאזן דען קאפפֿא אב שלאגן ווײל ער דאש פֿרנצעזיש שיף
: )האט גירױבט אונ' האט קײן (ארדר) ניט גיהאט פֿון דער שטאט (זאלעה
Glossary
Courier periodical title [kurantən] קורנטין דיא
France geo [frankrayχ] פרנקרײך דש
Le Havre (= Havre de Grace) geo [havrə də gratsə] האבֿרע דע גראצע
after conj [noχ dem] נאך דעם
Turkish [tirkiš/tïrkiš] טירקיש
robber/here: pirate [raÿbər] רױבר דער ־
Salé (Moroccan port city) geo [zalé] זאלעה
French adj [frantseziš] פֿרנצעזיש
ship [šif] שיף דש
loot/plunder/capture [roubən] רױבן
Turk [tirk/tïrk] טירק דער ־ן
French (person) [frants] פֿרנץ דער ־ן
slave [slavə] שלאבֿא דער ־ן
but as/when; here: as soon as [ober vi] אובר ווי
general mil [yen(ə)rál] יענראל דער
hear/perceive/become aware of scv3 [fərnemən] פֿרנעמן
capable/admirable/proper [erləχ] ארלאך
besiege/lay siege to [bəlegərn] בילעגרן
make an accord/settlement sv6 [fərtrogən] פֿרטראגן
loose/free [lóuz] לוז
set free spv.sv2 [lóuz gèbən] לוז געבן
free [fray] פֿרײא
set free spv.sv10 [fráy lòzən] ֿפרײא לאזן
captain [kapitén] קאפיטען דער
strike off spv.sv6 [óbšlogən] אבשלאגן
order/command [ordər] ארדר דיא
Note
The date is indicated in the Courier using a variety of methods: the day of the issue
itself is indicated as either Tuesday or Friday, followed by the indication of the year
according to the “small count” of the Jewish reckoning (i.e. omitting the specifica-
tion of thousands), the day of the Jewish month, and finally the day of the secular
month, using Hebrew alphanumerics in each case (often the final forms of letters
192 a guide to old literary yiddish
are used non-finally). Within the news articles themselves, the date is generally
secular only and employs the accusative to indicate a particular day/date: דען זיבנטן
‘ אױגוסטthe seventh of August.’
Translation
Friday Courier, 26 Av/16 August 1686.
France. 7 August, Le Havre. After the Turkish pirates from Salé seized a French
ship, and the Turks enslaved all the French who were on that same ship—as soon as
the French general became aware of it, then he sailed to that same Turkish city, Salé,
with his own ships, and planned to besiege the city. But the Turks made a settle-
ment with him, and they released the captured ship. The Turks also freed all the
French slaves. The Turks also had the pirate captain beheaded because he had
seized the French ship without orders [to do so] from the city of Salé.
Lesson Twenty-Two
“Rashi” script/font
While, as noted earlier, most OLY texts were written in mashket script and printed
in a font based on that script, the so-called “Rashi” font was used in some early
printed editions of OLY texts. At the outset one should note that that script/font
was not invented or even used by Rashi, the famed Ashkenazic scholar and com-
mentator on the Torah and Talmud, ( רבי שלמה יצחקי1040–1105). It derives instead
from a Sephardic semi-cursive script. When the Belgian-born Christian printer
Daniel Bomberg published editions of the Torah and Talmud, he typeset and
printed the focal texts in Hebrew square-script font, while Rashi’s commentary on
those texts was visually distinguished from them on the page not just by its periph-
eral placement but also by Bomberg’s use of the distinctive font based on the Sep-
hardic semi-cursive script. These monumental sixteenth-century Venetian editions
became the model for all subsequent editions of the Mikraot gedolot (Bible with
multiple commentary traditions printed on the same page) and the Talmud with
multiple commentaries, and thus the font used by Bomberg for Rashi’s commen-
taries came to be known as “Rashi script/font.”
While OLY manuscripts were, as far as I know, never written in “Rashi script,”
since it was not after all an Ashkenazic hand, and while the “Rashi” type-font never
saw widespread use for OLY printed editions, it does occur. The earliest extant
edition of פאריז אונ' וויענהis, for instance, rather surprisingly printed entirely in a
“Rashi font,” for which reason the font is introduced here, so that readers can
become accustomed to it. The reader is once again referred to Appendix 1, where all
fonts used in this volume are presented in tabular format. As with the the use of the
mashket font in earlier lessons, here too square script will continue to be used for
notes and glossaries. The “Rashi” font is as follows:1
1 This particular font, designated “Mekhorot rashi,” is from the Open Siddur Project (http://opensiddur.
org/tools/fonts/).
194 a guide to old literary yiddish
ת ש
ת ש
As with the mashket font introduced in Lesson Eleven, there are in the “Rashi” font
several groups of letters which resemble each other closely enough that they might
initially cause trouble for the reader, who is thus cautioned to note the small distin-
guishing differences even now:
2 While there had long been no edition of the poem for scholarly use, now there are two—a facsimile
of the edition of Verona 1594 (Marchetti, Baumgarten, and Salomoni 1988), and the definitive edition by
Chone Shmeruk (1996). The text presented here is based directly on the facsimile edition of the poem.
3 As e.g. Timm and Beckmann (1996: cxxxvi–cxlv).
lesson twenty-two195
(rhymed ABABABCC), and in general like that earlier text this one also partici-
pates in the northern Italian cultural milieu of the late Renaissance. In Pariz and
Viene, however, the anonymous author has transformed the source text into a
masterpiece of Renaissance narrative in ten Ariostan cantos. The hackneyed plot of
the vassal’s son denied the hand of his lord’s daughter until he has somehow tran-
scended his social status by means of heroic deeds is here transformed into an
intellectually stimulating and morally instructive tale of dramatic and (in a limited
sense) even socially progressive action. The selection here—the entire fifth canto—
focuses on the social implications of the mismatched romance. Characteristically
for the canto proems of this text—dependent as it is on the tradition of Ariosto’s
Orlando furioso—the excursus preceding this canto reflects on the narrative’s sig-
nificance in a larger social and moral context.
Immediately upon beginning work on Pariz and Viene, the reader will realize the
altogether different level of linguistic and intellectual complexity involved, in com-
parison with all texts thus far introduced in this volume. One can only counsel
patience and systematic work: the reward in comprehension and reading ability
will follow.
The late sixteenth-century orthography, while still remaining within the bound-
aries of OLY, nonetheless inconsistently indicates some attention to changing
orthographic standards, e.g. in the representation of Umlaut: in the space of only a
few lines, one finds [ גינוגןgənïgən], which duplicates the representation of the [ü]
inherited from the German component by the same means as found in the Cairo
manuscript over two centuries earlier, but also [ הוילףhïlf], i.e. the quasi-standard
OLY representation of inherited [ü], as well as [ פֿיגןfïgən], the representation of the
unrounded vowel that was perhaps pronounced as such from the beginning of Yid-
dish and that would eventually become the standard spelling in Modern Literary
Yiddish. In the Lesson glossaries such divergent representations are preserved as
spelled in the original text, without alteration toward any standard.
The book is abundantly illustrated with woodcuts; four such illustrations appear
in canto five (one of them is printed twice). As with the introduction of the mashket
font earlier, here too the first reading selection will be presented in both square
script and the font-type of the original text, here “Rashi” font, in order to ease the
first encounter of some readers with the unfamiliar font. As generally in OLY texts,
square-script font was used as the distinctive font for titles, page headers, whole
Hebrew, etc., and such is also the case here, in the title of the canto, its invocational
couplet, and the first word of the first stanza.
Since the excerpt here is the fifth of ten cantos, the narrative is already far
advanced by this point, and more than a word or two of narrative context is neces-
sary for the reader’s orientation:4 Pariz is the son of Count Yakomo, a vassal of King
Dolfin of Vienne (south of Lyons), who has a daughter named Viene. Pariz is the
typical young courtier of Renaissance romance narrative, excelling in intellectual
pursuits, as well as in hunting with hawks and hounds, singing and musicianship,
and jousting in tournaments. He is well attended by his boon companion, Odoardo.
Viene, likewise, is the typical princess of the genre, meaning that she is beautiful,
refined, noble, and also the constructed object of male attentions; she is well
attended by her nurse and boon companion, Isabele. In his dealings at court, Pariz
sees Viene and falls in love with her, which leads to his recurring incognito serenad-
ing of her (accompanied by Odoardo) at night beneath her castle window, entranc-
ing her, the king, and indeed the entire court. All attempts to identify the musicians
fail, including an armed royal ambush with which Pariz and Odoardo deal in
lethally heroic fashion in effecting their escape. The king attempts to cure Viene’s
depression (caused by her inability to identify her admirers, as well as the deaths of
the king’s henchmen which weigh heavily on her conscience) with a tournament,
which Pariz in disguise easily wins, taking the prizes. Yet, with no possibility of
winning his beloved, Pariz seems on the verge of death, as does Viene in her con-
tinued depression at not even knowing who her serenader might be.
At that point the king of France stages a tournament to determine who is the
most beautiful lady in the world, among the choices, naturally, Viene, whom Pariz,
again in disguise, once more champions; he predictably wins and takes home the
prizes. Later, when Pariz has gone abroad to try to assuage his love-sickness, his
father falls ill, and Viene and her entourage visit the sick man and are given a tour
of the count’s palace, including Pariz’s room, where they engage in a bit of snooping
and find his secret cache of incognito armor and tournament prizes, some of which
they stealthily take with them when they leave the palace. Viene now knows the
identity of her secret lover and decides to bring the matter to a head. Eventually
Pariz returns home, discovers the theft, and fears for the consequences of his
unmasking. Viene employs the local bishop (who has become the confidant to both
Viene and Pariz, separately) as her go-between. Then follows canto five.
דש זיא ביי דען ואטר וואר גיוועשט אין זיינר קרנקיט :
דש זיא ביי דען ואטר וואר גיוועשט אין זיינר קרנקיט :
Glossary
part/piece, here: canto [teyl] דער/טייל דש
wisdom [vaysheyt] וויישהייט דיא
cognition/insight/reason [fərnúft] ורנופט דיא
human being [menš] מענש דער ־ן
court, play the courtier; here: be arrogant [hofirtən] הופֿירטן
spirit/courage [mut] מוט דער
action/deed/work [verk] ווערק דש
delight/succeed [bəglïkən] ביגלויקן
property [gut] גוט דש
oppress [untərdrïkən] אונטר דרויקן
often [oft] אופֿט
disintegrate/fall to pieces scv9 [tsəfalən] צו ואלן
luck/fortune [mazəl] מזל דש
piece [štïk] שטויק דש ־ן
turn/reverse refl [vendən ziχ] ווענדן זיך
be absent/lacking prv [felən (zayn)] )ועלן (זיין
he lacks/is deprived of [in felən zayn] אין ועלן זיין
descend spv.sv4 [óbkumən] אב קומן
bottom [grund] גרונד דער
Hell wn [hel] העל דיא
thus [azodər] אזודר
also [aχ / óuχ] אך = אויך
on the other hand/in turn [vídər herúm] ווידר הרום
never again/not [nímer mèn] נומר מין
despair/lose hope [fərtsogən] בֿור צאגן
bad(ly) [šlim] שלים
awry/crooked(ly) [krum] קרום
hope [hofən] הוֿפן
here: because . . . when [ven . . . ven] ווען. . . ווען
suitable/proper [ebən] עבן
lesson twenty-two205
5 The root of the preterite of the verb ends in an intrusive -s-, as here; cf. DWB: vol. 2, col. 1586:
“turren.”
206 a guide to old literary yiddish
Notes
The reader will note in numerous lines of Pariz and Viene that rhymes seem as
skewed as might be found in modernist poetry, e.g.: דורט/הורט, גיצוגן/ורוגן, לוייגן/ביצוייגן.
The reader is encouraged to appreciate the flexibility of the conception and practice
of rhyme in OLY, rather than imagining error either on the part of the poet or in the
editor’s suggested pronunciation (although as previously cautioned, the latter is
always a possibility). In stanza 264 (Lesson Twenty-Three), for instance, שטרוס,מוס,
and גרושare rhymed, thus slanting the ambiguous [o/a] vowels of the first two
words toward [o], since the third word could only have that vowel.
It seems likely that the word אוןin the invocation of canto five is a printer’s error
for 'אונ, i.e. that the author is asking God for both wisdom and reason, rather than
wisdom without reason.
lesson twenty-two207
A common syntactic deformation occurs in the sentence פריז דער וואר דער ריד גאר
( ורואPaV 254, 5) ‘Pariz, he was quite delighted by her words.’ It seems an example of
fronting, i.e. moving a sentence component to the front of the sentence for the sake
of emphasis (or the exigencies of the verse form), but it is not clear that there is any
emphasis or verse-conditioned consideration involved. In fact, this left dislocation
(as linguists term the phenomenon, although in a Hebrew-alphabet text it would of
course technically be right dislocation) is quite common in both OLY and modern
English: ‘Sarah Cohen, she’s my professor’ instead of the simple ‘Sarah Cohen is my
professor,’ here clearly topicalizing (calling direct attention to a new topic) Sarah
Cohen before proceding to the statement about the new topic. One might imagine
a similar topicalization in the OY sentence: ‘It was Paris who was quite delighted by
her words.’ But that emphasis might just as easily be lacking.
The construction ( אין דוֿכטPaV 254, 6) is another of the common impersonal
constructions in OLY: the verb lacks a subject but has an accusative object: ‘(it)
seems (to) him’; the archaic English construction ‘methinks,’ i.e. ‘it seems to me,’ is
a perfect syntactic analogue.
The verb שענקןbelongs to the small but important class of irregular weak verbs
(discussed in Lesson Twenty-One), whose preterite tense and past participles dis-
play both a vowel change characteristic of strong verbs and the dental suffix char-
acteristic of weak verbs: גישענקט/שענקן שאנקטא גישאנקט.6
Translation
Canto Five May God give me wisdom and reason so that I can also compose the
fifth canto.
(249) No one should let his spirit become arrogant when he is successful in all his
endeavors. If he already has a great deal of money and property, he ought not there-
fore to oppress other people, for it often happens that whatever one does, his good
fortune falls to pieces; and it often comes to a reversal and loss, so that he descends
to the depths of Hell. (250) Thus likewise, on the other hand, one should not despair
when his fortune turns adverse and calamitous. He should rather lament his sin; let
him put his hopes in God and just be honorable; let him bear it with a good will. For
in a short while, when God deems it suitable, He will raise him from the mire into
Heaven.
(251) Indeed, regard Pariz, the poor fool: had he suffered much misfortune? You
know whether she—who had cut out his heart—was stuck in his craw. He had been
devastated by the loss of the garments that she had taken from him. Now, in a single
day, in a single hour, he found everything together. (252) You well know how she
drew him aside there into a corner, so that the bishop could not hear them. Like-
wise the young man asked no further questions. Now she began with her sweet
words, when he dared not, because of his embarrassment. She began to tell him
quickly why she had sent for him. (253) She did not immediately explain that he had
wounded her heart so severely, only how she had been with his father when he had
been ill and how she had taken his gear and how and where she had found it, and
how she had just simply carried it away, that it pleased her well, but now she regret-
ted it. (254) She said: “I will no longer keep it thus—let it not cleave to my soul—I
do not have it with me here. Otherwise I would give it to you on the spot.” Pariz was
quite delighted by her words. It seemed to him that she breathed life into him, and
he thanked her with great courtesy for visiting his father during his illness.
(255) He answered her: “Now, the garments, keep them all, with my permission.
I was initially quite angry; about that you can certainly believe me! I could have no
greater joy than that it fell into your hands. At first the loss was quite bitter for me;
recently a foreign knight gave it all to me as a present.” (256) When the noble lady
heard that—that he would not reveal himself—she put aside her shame and said to
him with a sweet voice: “I know that you are also burned by a flame and have now
for a long time concealed it. Conceal it no more, my dear beloved, reveal your heart
to me, joyfully and clearly. (257) Tell it to me, so that the noble Creator will make
you rejoice with your father and mother, so that God will delight you with your
beloved. Tell it to me, my beloved, so fine! If you tell me that, with all that goes with
it, your life will be ever calmer. Tell me, was it you who all those times so often
played me to sleep with sweet string music? (258) Are you the one who won the
shield with a white garment, horse and lance and who, with his might, preserved
me in great honor in Paris? Your dignity resonates and resounds, even if you prefer
to conceal it. Here you are, and if you deny it, then you have to be lying, for the
garment is proof of it all for me.”
Grammar
Overview of genitive case function
Generally, the genitive is said to mark possession, but its use is far more extensive
than that, in showing a broad range of relationships. While in the case of John’s
book, it is indeed a matter of John’s possession of the book, it is not really possession
that is represented by John’s love, and even less by John’s murder. This last case intro-
duces another complication, for the phrase could designate the death of John by
means of murder (objective genitive) or a murder committed by John, e.g. John’s
murder of Paul (subjective genitive).
Additionally, the partitive genitive has already appeared: ( דער מעשר אײנשJtR46)
‘one of the knives.’ The normal word order for the partitive genitive (designating
some part of the whole) in modern English and OLY is: head noun (the part) +
genitive (the whole), e.g. ‘some + of the group’/‘three + of my friends.’ In JtR46, that
normal order is reversed: ‘ דער מעשר אײנשof the knives + one’ = ‘one of the knives.’
Some verbs also take genitive objects: ( אלי יוֻ דן ווערן מײנר שפוטןBZ13) ‘all Jews will
ridicule me’; ( דא לכֿט דער קױניג אונ' אל זײן ואלק דעש אורטײל בֿון זִ ְימ ָרהBZ10) ‘The king and
all his people then laughed about Zimro’s verdict.’ Just as with the phrase דעש פױאר
‘ טוכטרthe farmer’s daughter’ in the Riddle from Lesson Eight, where the masculine
singular noun lacked the expected genitive inflection, here the same is true of the
neuter singular noun. The genitive marker on the definite article makes the case
function clear, however.
lesson twenty-two209
Additionally the genitive case may mark an adverbial, such as an expression of
(BZ19) ‘one day’ (again lacking the genitive marker on the noun).אײניש טג time:
מאשקווע
דען פֿירטן יולי · אלהיר איז איין טאטרישר אב גיזנטר אן קומן · אונ' ביגערט פֿון דיא
צווייא (צארן) אדר פֿירשטן דאש זיא דען פֿר גלייך צווישן (פולן) ניט האלטן זאלן · דר
קיגן וויל דער (חם) אדר דר פֿירשט איבר דיא טאטרן אל דיא טריבוטן אונ' צינזן נאך
לאזן וואש אים זונשטן דיא צווייא גיברדר אונ' מאשקאוויטרישי פֿירשטן שולדיג זיין
צו געבן · אויך פֿר שפרעכֿט דער פֿירשט איבר דיא טאטערן דען מאשקוויטר צו שיצן
ווידר אלי זייני פיינד · אבר דיא רידן זיין עטוואז צו שארף גיוועזן אונ' מאן הט דען
טאטרישן אב גיזנטן דר ווייל אין איין ביהאלטינוז גינומן ·
אין (מאשקווה) איז בישלאסן ווארדן דאש דיא צווייא גיברידר אונ' פֿירשטן מיט איר
שוועסטר דיא פֿירשטין (זאפֿיא) זאלן זעלב דריט רעגירן אונ' קיניגן · אונ' דיא
פֿירשטין זאפֿיא זאל אליז אונטר שרייבן :
210 a guide to old literary yiddish
דער (מאשקאוויטר) טוט זיך זער שטארק רישטן אונ' וויל דאש אנדרי יאר דיא
דיזי וואוך הט דער (מאשקוויטר) איין: (קרימישי) טאטרן אין איר לנד אריין פֿאלן
אב גיזנטן צו דען קיניג פֿון (פולן) גישיקט דר זעלביגי אב גיזנטר זאל אליז שליכֿטן
· אונ' פֿון דורטן זאל דער וואש נאך צווישן (מאשקווה אונ' פולן) צו שליכֿטן איז
(מאשקוויטרישי) אב גיזנטר נאך (ווין) פֿר רייזן צו אירי קיסרליכֿי (מיישטעט) פֿון
: וועגן פֿיל גיהיימי זאכֿן
Glossary
Italy geo [itályen] איטליען
Venice geo [vənétsyen vənédig] פֿענעציען = פֿענעדיג
right here/in said place [alhír] אלהיר
storm/tempest [gəvitər] גיוויטר דש
occur/come about/finish spv.sv4 [óuskumən] אויז קומן
Romance language, usually Italian [velš] וועלש
mile [mayl] מייל דיא
around [um] אום
dreadful(ly)/awful(ly) [šrekləχ] שרעקליך
damage [šodən] שאדן דער
wind [vind] ווינד דער
knock down/overturn spv.scv3 [úmverfən] אום ווערֿפן
tree [bóum beymər] בוים דער ביימר
root [vortsəl vortslən] ווארצל דיא ־ן
rip/tear out spv.sv7 [aróusraysən] ארויז רייסן
news/tidings [tsaytung] צייטונג דיא
arrive spv.sv4 [ónkumən] אן קומן
Alexandria geo [aleksándriə] אלעקסנדריא
Cairo geo [kayro] קאירא
week [voχ] וואוך דיא ־ן
die scv3 [šterbən] שטערבן
plague [pest] פעסט דיא
one hundred thousand [tóuzənt mol hundərt] טויזנט מאל הונדרט
Moscow geo [moskvə] מאשקווע
Tatar [tótəriš] טאטריש
ambassador [óbgəzàntər] אבגיזנטר דער
desire/wish/request [bəgerən] ביגערן
tsar [tsar] צאר דער ־ן
prince [first] פֿירשט דער ־ן
reconciliation/settlement/treaty [fərgláyχ] פֿרגלייך דער
Poland geo [póulən] פולן
in return for that [dərkegən] דר קיגן
khan [χam] חם דער
Tatar [totər] טאטר דער ־
tribute [tribút] טריבוט דער ־ן
interest/fee/toll/tribute [tsinz] צינז דער ־ן
lesson twenty-two211
Notes
Various lengths were assigned to the “Welsh mile” in the Middle Ages and early
modern periods, ranging from 1,500 to 2,100 meters.
The Egyptian cities of Alexandria and Cairo were Turkish only insofar as they
belonged to the Ottoman Empire.
The phrase בייא טויזנט מאל הונדרט טויזנט מענשןpresents a problem. There seem to be
three interpretive possibilities: (1) with the word בייאmeaning ‘among/from/out of,’
and thus ‘a thousand out of a hundred thousand’ (= one per cent), which would
seem newsworthy only for the plague’s lack of virulence; (2) with the word בייא
meaning ‘approximately,’ and thus the syntactically but not demographically plaus
ible ‘approximately a thousand times a hundred thousand’ = a hundred million; or
(3) there is a printer’s error: as Hilde Pach notes (private communication, 11 August
2014), the Dutch source text of the Courier, the Oprechte Haerlemse Courant (17
August 1686), reports: Met een schip van Alexandria is tyding, dat in 72 dagen omtrent
1000000 Menschen te Grand Cairo aen de Pest gestorven zijn ‘with a ship from Alex-
andria news has come that in seventy-two days approximately one million people
212 a guide to old literary yiddish
died of the plague in Great Cairo,’ thus suggesting that the Yiddish should have
reported ‘a thousand times a thousand,’ not ‘a thousand times a hundred thousand.’
My translation reflects this option, excising after the fact the troublesome הונדרט.
The verb שפרעכןwould generally have a stem-change in 3rd pers.sg.pres. ()שפריכט,
but here retains the root vowel ע.
Translation
Tuesday Courier, 1 Elul/20 August 1686.7
4 August, Venice, Italy. There was a great storm here, and for about a hundred
Welsh miles around Venice there was dreadful damage. The wind knocked down a
great many fine houses and uprooted many trees, and several hundred people lost
their lives. News has also arrived here from the Turkish city of Alexandria that in
the Turkish city named Great Cairo in the course of ten weeks a million people died
of the plague.
4 July, Moscow. A Tatar emissary has arrived here, and desires that the two Czars,
or princes, not honor their treaty with Poland. In return for that, the Khan, or
prince of the Tatars, will abrogate all the tribute and tolls that the two brothers and
Muscovite princes are otherwise obligated to pay him. The Tatar prince also prom-
ises to protect the Muscovite from all his enemies. But the words were somewhat
too harsh, and in the meantime the emissary has been put in prison.
In Moscow it has been decided that the two brothers and princes with their sis-
ter, Princess Sophia, are to rule and reign as a threesome, and Princess Sophia is to
sign everything.8
The Muscovite is arming/preparing intensely and intends to invade the territory
of the Crimean Tatars next year. This week the Muscovite sent an emissary to the
King of Poland. The aforementioned emissary is to arbitrate everything between
Muscovy and Poland that can be arbitrated, and from there the Muscovite emissary
is to travel to Vienna to His Imperial Majesty for the sake of many top secret
matters.
קנעכט
ֿ אונ' נעמט מיך נויירט בויר איין
נישט מין בין איך ֿבור אויך ביגערן ·
רעכט
ֿ וויענה שפרך עז איז וואל
214 a guide to old literary yiddish
גיבאלט
וואז אלן בידן וואל ֿ
שפרוכן ·
ֿ זיא דו גיגן אננדר
און אלי שאנט נאך הינטר הלט
גיברוכן ·
ֿ דען אייז דען הט מן נון
ער זאגיט נון וואז אים דו גאלט
גישטוכן ·
ֿ דש ער בויר זיא האט וריי
אונ' זורג אונ' אנגשט דיא ער האט ויל גיליטן
מוכט זיין צו שניטן :
דש ער צו קלייני שטויק ֿ
ליבשפט זו זויסן
ֿ דיא הולד גרוש אונ' דיא
: רעכט צו בוסן
ֿ הופונג אירן לושט מיט אירן
ֿ מיט
Glossary
be stupefied ir.sv. [dərštán] דרשטאן
(lightning) strike [blitsən] בליצן
thunder [dundər] דונדר דער
separately/in particular [bəzundər] ביזונדר
begin sv5 [bəginən] ביגינן
melt/soften [dərveykən] דר וואייקן
to be valuable/useful/good (prt-pr) [tóugən / tagən] טאגן
deny [léyk(ə)nən] לאייקנן
merciful/gracious [gənedig] גינידיג
be wrong [unreχt hon] אונרעכֿט הון
free of +gen [ledig] לידיג
blind [blind] בלינד
cause/incur [fəršultən] בֿור שולטן
misfortune [šedig] שידיג דיא
worthy [virdig] ווירדיג
sole (of foot)/foot [zol] זול דיא ־ן
no one [niməts] נימץ
grace/favor/affection/love [huld] הולד דיא
perceive/become aware of prv [gəvór vèr(ə)n] גיוואר ווערן
coal/ember [kóul] קול דיא ־ן
confess/admit ir.wv [bəkenən] ביקענן
besides/additionally [dərnebən] דרנעבן
folly/foolishness [torhe(y)t] טורהט דיא ־ן
אונש = אונ' דש
dangerous [bəsakonə] בסכנה
to be keen to/to be focused on [drán zàyn] דראן זיין
save/spare/treat with care [šonən] שונן
honest/righteous/upright/able/stalwart [bidər] בידר
pay attention/heed [aχtən] אכֿטן
lesson twenty-three217
Translation
(259) Whoever has seen a stupefied person when lightning strikes, followed by a
great thunderclap, let him come and also have a look at Pariz now—by these words
he was thus stupefied. While she was saying all these things to him and was certain
of it all, item by item, then his heart began to soften. He said: “There is no longer a
reason for me to deny it.” (260) He said to her: “My noble beloved, I implore you,
have mercy on me. I know well that I have done wrong in not remaining free of you.
But love, blind love, has done it to me. I have caused a great misfortune. I am not
worthy to wash (the soles of) your feet. For that reason, too, have I always kept it
hidden. (261) No one has yet noticed my love, except for Odoardo, to whom I
revealed it. Otherwise it was hidden in my heart which it burned to embers. Since
you know everything about it, I will indeed also confess it. It is all true, and much
more besides. I beg you: forgive my foolishness, (262) and if you only take me as a
servant, I will desire no more from you.” Viene said: “It would be proper for you to
be my noble lord.” She answered him in few and simple words, although she would
have liked to say more, but the time and place were dangerous. They also wanted to
spare the bishop any trouble from it.
(263) She said to him: “My strength, my might, my blood, my flesh, my body so
distinguished, be on your way, my heart, and pay attention that you again come to
the place when it is time.” They decided on a place for themselves; there was never
a better one, before or since: in a deep cellar at a grate, so that neither mother nor
father could notice it. (264) Thus did they all go on their ways. How quickly did he
find Odoardo and tell him how his deeds and affairs stood. He was now therefore
quite delighted, for their lives were bound to each other. Pariz now sharply admon-
ished him that he was to help him with a pure heart. (265) He promised him much
and did it, too. His comradery was a great support for him. He had held him dear
for a long time, and their amity was renewed every day. And if they had been born
from the same hole, they could not have been more loyal to each other. He gave him
counsel in every moment of need, and stood by his side at all times with body and
soul.
(266) Thus did Viene also do with Isabele, her nurse. Never had one seen such a
friendship; they were never apart, and when the maiden said four words, three of
lesson twenty-three219
them were the name of the young man. If one were but to mention Pariz, it seemed
to her that she was up in Paradise.
(267) Meanwhile Pariz came to the place that she had earlier identified for him—
so secret and so quiet that no living person knew of it. Now he went there as much
as was pleasing to him and as was appropriate for him, and that was all his desire
and his comfort—that he could there chat with his beloved, (268) which well
pleased them both—they there spoke with each other without any shame or deceit;
the ice had now been broken. He told her now that which was then important for
him: that he had nobly fought as her champion, and he had suffered much worry
and fear that he might be cut to tiny pieces. (269) And she also recounts her part
concerning her favor and her longing, and how she had been bound by a cord that
had stretched her heart inside her body, and she never imagined that she would
again be healthy. Now she praised God who had shown her that her redeemer was
the handsome Pariz.
(270) They often came to that same place and chatted with each other. With heart
and soul, each single word, with joy, with words, they delighted each other. The
desire and delight that was there at that time—what money or what property could
equal it in value? The great affection and the love so sweet, hoping to atone for their
desires with their rights. (271) The honeyed words, the noble gestures—I do not
now want to mention them all to you, for when I think of them, then I must lament
my own infelicity: how I give my heart and soul and do not even get a thank-you in
return. Therefore I want to write about the mistakes—the wicked ones—for I have
to take comfort only in wicked things.
Grammar
Syntax
As noted in Lesson One, the underlying word order of the declarative sentence in
OLY is:
That order is often altered by the fronting of an element of the sentence, which
shifts the subject to the position following the verb:
Common to all these possibilities is that the finite verb remains in second position,
which is the primary constant in OLY syntax.
There are further possibilities for syntactic variation, including the use of quasi-
impersonal subjects, a topic addressed earlier, which receives more attention here.
There are examples in English such as it is raining or has it really come to this? where
220 a guide to old literary yiddish
it denotes in fact nothing definable but merely functions grammatically as the sub-
ject of the sentence, a “dummy” subject, as it were. In OLY (as in many other lan-
guages), this kind of impersonal structure is more widespread and includes such
sentences as ‘* עז גינג איין פויארit went a farmer . . . ,’ i.e. ‘a farmer went . . . ’ (already
encountered in Lesson Eight), in which there is no logical necessity for a dummy
subject, since a farmer in the nominative case could already serve perfectly well as
the subject of the sentence. It is, instead, a stylistically conditioned syntactic varia-
tion that signals the narrative mode: the reader immediately recognizes that a story
is being told. Once this structure has been seen a few times, it should present no
difficulty for the reader. And, the reader should note, even in this impersonal con-
struction, the finite verb takes the second position.
An experiment with another sentence that occurs in the Riddle (Lesson Eight)
will demonstrate:
Elements 1, 3א, 3ב, and 4 are mobile, such that each of them can occupy the first
syntactic position in the sentence. If the adverbial דוis fronted (moved to first
position), there are essentially no semantic consequences, i.e. there is no change in
meaning. If either of the objects (#3 in the example sentence) is fronted, then that
object will generally be emphasized (although in poetry, such syntactic variation is
often a result of the exigencies of meter or rhyme). Consider these possible
structures:
‘It is here that I write fine riddles for you’ ב) דו שרייב איך דיר היפשי רענטניש
‘It is for you that I write fine riddles here’ ג) דיר שרייב איך היפשי רענטניש דו
‘It is fine riddles that I write for you here’ ד) היפשי רענטניש שרייב איך דיר דו
Each of these sentences is perfectly idiomatic and syntactically normal, with differ-
ing syntactic and thus semantic emphases (although such emphasis may well be
very slight).
Sometimes a slot is filled by a complete adverbial phrase:
אונ' צו איינום ראש השנה זאש דער מלך אוף זיינום שטול
‘And on one Rosh Hashone/sat/the king/on his throne’ (BZ10)
While the verb is the sixth word of the sentence, it nonetheless fills the second
syntactic slot, since ‘and on one Rosh Hashone’ consists of a coordinating conjunc-
tion (see below) and a single adverbial (albeit in the form of a full prepositional
lesson twenty-three221
Having then established the general rule that the finite verb takes the second
syntactic position in a clause, it must be noted that there are four fundamental
exceptions to that rule: (1) commands, (2) yes/no questions, (3) a particular type of
conditional sentence, (4) some dependent clauses.2 In the first three cases, the finite
verb occurs in first position.
The command, with initial finite verb in the imperative mood:
̌שװט װערדן ורװן
‘look, worthy ladies’
The second exception is the yes/no question:
הן װיר ̌שדן אדר ורומן אנ̌פנגן
‘did we suffer loss or make a profit?’ (EYT 5, Ab61,4)
Third is the conditional sentence, with the finite verb in the subjunctive mood:
װיר עש אוך ניכט צו לנק
were / it / to you / not too tedious = ‘were it not too tedious for you’
There are, however, abundant exceptions to this rule (especially in poetry), already
gesturing toward the rule of SVO syntax in dependent clauses in modEY: װען ער װאר
( אײן ריכטרBZ9) ‘for he was a judge.’
One should also note that unlike such subordinating conjunctions as ווייל, דש,ווען,
which often do affect the word order of the subsequent clause, coordinating con-
junctions such as '‘ אונand,’ ‘ אודרor,’ and ‘ אוברbut’ are also generally in initial posi-
2 One might also add a fifth case in deliberate deformation of standard word order for the sake of
style (especially in poetry).
222 a guide to old literary yiddish
אונ' מאן העט זיא דאז tion in a clause but are not reckoned as filling a syntactic position:
אבר זיא האבן גיזאגט ) ‘and one would have spared their lives’ (Cour23לעבן גישענקט
’(Cou23) ‘but they said.
נידר לנדן
(אמשטרדם) · דען צווייא אונ' צוונציגשטן אויגוסט · שיפֿר (אברהם שעפמאז) איז
גיקומן פֿון (זנט עפֿשטאציוס) צו פֿארן · אונ' איז אויך צו (סורינאמה) גיוועזן אונ' דער
זעלביגי שיפֿר האט אין דען (קאנאל) צווייא טירקישי רויב שיפֿן דר זעהן אונ' איטליכֿיז
רויב שיף איז אויז גירישט גיוועזן מיט פֿירציג שטיק גישיץ · אונ' דער זעלביגי שיפֿר
איז זוא גידיכֿט פֿאר די צווייא טירקישן רויב שיפֿן פֿאר בייא גיפֿארן דאש ער איר
גישטיק האט קענן צעלן · אבר דיא רויב שיפֿן הבן ניט גיקענט בייא אים קומן פֿון וועגן
דען הוילן וואשיר וועלכֿיז אויך האט גימאכֿט דז ער זיא נאך אנט קומן איז · דאש
הארטי וועטר האט אין דיא הולנדישי האבֿן זער הויל וואשיר גימאכֿט דר דורך דער
זעלביגי שיפֿר האט גימוזט זייני צווייא מאשט ביימר אב האקן אונ' איבר (בארט) ווערפֿן ·
אונ' זיין שיף איז דאך גלייך וואול נ[א]ך אין דען (טעסל) אריין גישלעפט ווארדן ·
Glossary
]Portugal geo [pórtugal פארטוגל
]Lisbon geo [lísabon ליסאבון
]here: wealthy [rayχ רייך
]Portuguese (person) [pórtugiz פארטוגיז דער ־ן
]suspicion [fərdáχt פֿרדאכֿט דער
]suspect id [in fərdáχt haltən אין פֿרדאכֿט האלטן
]secret(ly) [heymləχ היימליך
]Jewish [yïdiš יודיש
]creed/faith/religion [glóubən/glaÿbən גלויבן דער
]give/bestow, here: spare ir.wv [šenkən שענקן
]God forbid! [χás vəšòləm ח''ו = חס־ושלום
]deny/renounce [fərléyk(ə)nən פֿר לייקנן
lesson twenty-three223
3 Unlike some languages (e.g. Turkish), which require a nominal qualifier for numbered items
(e.g. ‘five head of cattle’), Yiddish (like English) uses them rarely. Here ֿפירציג שטיק גישיץlit. ‘forty pieces/
items of cannons,’ simply means ‘forty cannons’; cf. similar usage in sixteenth-century German (DWB:
vol. 20, col. 208: “stück,” II.B.2.b); in both German and English (“piece”), that qualifier alone then came
to be used to designate the weapon itself.
224 a guide to old literary yiddish
Translation
Friday Courier, 3 Elul/23 August, 1686.
Lisbon, Portugal. 25 July. Three wealthy Portuguese were here suspected of secretly
practicing their Jewish faith, and their lives would have been spared, had they
renounced their Jewish faith (God forbid!). But they said: “We were born (of) Jews;
we will also die as Jews.” And they were all three burned. But God is a just judge. In
his time He will know (where) to find the innocent blood that was shed. Amen.
Selah.
Amsterdam, Holland. 22 August. The merchant Abraham Shefmaz arrived from
Sint Eustatius, and had also been in Surinam. And the aforementioned merchant
saw two Turkish pirate ships in the English Channel, and each pirate ship was equi-
ped with forty cannons. And the aforementioned merchant passed so close in front
of the two Turkish pirate ships that he was able to count their cannons. But the
pirate ships were unable to catch him because of the rough seas, which also enabled
him still to escape them. The severe weather caused very rough seas in the Dutch
harbors, so that the aforementioned mariner had to chop off his two masts and
throw them overboard, and nevertheless his ship still managed to be towed to Texel.
Lesson Twenty-Four
דרבליכט
ֿ דיא מייד דיא וואז דער ריד
זיא שפרך דוא הושט צו מיר קיין טרוייאן ·
שפריכט
ֿ דוא מיינשט דרום דש מן שטעץ
אויף וראוון ווארט איז ניט צו בוייאן ·
בריכט
ֿ מיין לייב נוימר מער אן דיר
וואז איך דיר זאג ווערט מיך ניט רוייאן ·
הופיט איך ניט מיין עט זולט מיך ביווערן
ֿ
די זאך די וואלט איך ווערליך אנדרש קערן ׃
Glossary
]wait in line spv.ir.sv [onšten אן שטין
]grief/sadness [bətrïbnis ביטרויבניש דיא/דש ־א
]behavior/gesture/movement [gəbérd גיבערד דיא/דש ־ן
]month [monət מונעט דער ־א
]sniff out/test [bərïχtən ברויכֿטן
]count/earl [grov גרובֿ דער
]truly [on al gəverdən און אל גיבֿערדן
]activity/negotiation/business [gəšéft גישעפֿט דש/דיא ־ן
]join/couple [heftən העפֿטן
]stab/prick [štiχ שטיך דער
2 Rhymes with ֿפריידן/ביליידן, and thus unlikely to be pronounced [šadən] in this instance.
230 a guide to old literary yiddish
Notes
Viene’s reference to what she supposes her ‘ גיבייןskeleton/body’ might or might not
do is an extremely concrete means of saying simply: ‘I.’
lesson twenty-four231
The rhymes רוייאן/טרוייאן/ בוייאןagain push the limits of flexibility of rhyme in OLY,
or perhaps suggest cross-dialectal pronunciation that is otherwise inaccessible to us.
The past participle in the phrase ‘ דיא וואז דער ריד דרבליכֿטshe turned pale at these
words,’ דרבליכֿט, requires further comment. In MHG there existed both the weak
verb bleichen ‘turn pale’ and the strong verb blîchen ‘gleam.’ In early NHG the pro-
nunciation of the two verbs coalesced, and only the former persisted semantically.
The OLY verb here displays some evidence of contamination of the same two cog-
nate forms, with a weak participle that ends with the expected ־טbut also has a
quasi-strong vowel shift. If it is a strong verb, then the root vowel of the infinitive is
likely [ay]; if weak then likely [ey]. The reader will notice that it is included in the
class 7 strong verb table (Appendix 2).
Translation
(272) I will let the good deeds wait; listen now to grievous events: for three full
months or more, the worthy lovers talked with each other.
Now, one day Pariz heard from a count in all earnest that the king was involved
in great negotiations to contract a marriage between Viene and a man. (273) When
the noble lad heard that, it was as if he had been stabbed with a dagger. He thought
to himself: “Alas, I was afraid of this, and now it has happened.” And certainly I
believe him, that the words were for him like wounds. He could find neither rest
nor repose because of his misery before he told his Viene the story. (274) He told
her, that fine warrior, with his head bowed. She said: “My beloved, do not be dis-
heartened. If I were to be unfaithful to you, may God torment me. I know that no
marriage will take place—my father will also ask me about it. May I then suffer a
violent death, if my body were ever to do that. (275) I will not say ‘I do’ to anyone
except you, you bold warrior.”
Pariz was indeed delighted by these words—that he saw her so resolute. None-
theless he spoke to her thus: “I have always known your good will; all your will,
however, will not recompense me, that I see the customs of this world. (276) I am a
poor youth; you are the daughter of a noble king, and how can a low threshold be
comparable to the high mount? Unfortunately I see clearly and plainly that you will
stride off with a king. I implore you only this—neither more nor less—that you take
me with you as a servant.”
(277) The maiden turned pale at these words. She said: “You have no faith in me.
You think this, because it is constantly said that a lady’s words are not trustworthy.
My body will never be unfaithful to you: I will never repent for what I say to you. If
I did not hope that my father would support me in this, I would indeed have tried
to bring it about in a different manner.” (278) Pariz did not give her an answer to
that, because he did not wish to burden her any further. He said: “Until I become
completely dumbfounded,3 I am at your command in love and joy.” And with a sigh
and a moan they took leave of each other. Viene called after him, that he ought to
pay attention to whether anything new came of the matter. (279) And off he went
on his way and came to his comrade greatly troubled, and they took counsel about
how the matter might now be brought to an honorable conclusion.
Not long thereafter, not more than five or six days, it was publicly proclaimed
that the king had espoused his daughter to a noble duke’s son from Meissen. (280)
It was thus said everywhere, so that it also came to her ears. It was as bitter as gall
for her; it caused her pain and grief and anger. Pariz, however, sneaked inside and
came to her quite forlorn, until she revived him with her words. She said: “My
dearest, do not be alarmed at this. (281) Now I want to see what you are worth, if
you can devise some means of aid.” He said: “The affair is too difficult, so that my
reason and wits do not suffice. If it were to be settled with the sword, I could not
imagine a better way to resolve it. I would win you with my might, or death would
deliver me from my pain. (282) Now I know of nothing else to do than to spend all
my days in lamentation and to leave you in your honor, as I have long feared.” She
said: “No, no, my dear beloved, I do not wish thus to be left hanging. Not everything
can be won with the sword. For there is counsel for all things, except for death.
(283) If you will now do what I tell you—no matter whether it is easy or difficult for
you—so I hope and promise you that we will succeed in the affair. I tell you now,
and I am certain of it, that my father will grant me with body and soul and good will
all things that he could even imagine that I would want. (284) Therefore it is my
command and my plea that you not leave it thus, and consider and ponder what
one might do in order that one prevent the marriage and consult with my father so
that he give me to you in marriage. And your father would be best for that, for he is
the most beloved whom he has in the fortress. (285) I know that he loves him well.
He will not reproach him for his words. And if that should not succeed, then we will
aim for it in another way. Therefore, make an effort now so that we soon get an
answer, for in a single moment one can lose what one cannot find in three or even
four years.”
Grammar
Interrogatives
JtR30 ווי מוכטא אונש אײן יודלין זא רעכטא וול גבֿלן how ווי
BZ12 ווש אישט דײן אן ליגן what ווש
Ab91,1 (EYT5) װאו אישט אװר זון where וואו
Wh1 וואו זאל איך הין whither וואו הין
Wh1 וואו זאל איך הער whence וואו הער
BZ9 ווען זיא אוף גינגן אים יאר צום ֵרגֵ ל when ווען
Ab42,1 װער הוט דיר ביש חר גהולפֿן who ווער
Indefinitive pronouns
one indec [mən] מען
all [alə] אלא
no one [keynər] קיינר
lesson twenty-four233
(1) If one object is a pronoun and the other noun, the pronoun precedes the
noun:
איך וויל אוך וונדר זינגן
(2) If both objects are pronouns, the accusative precedes the dative object:4
איך װיל זיא אוך זינגן
(3) If both objects are nouns, the dative precedes the accusative object:
איך װיל דן מענשן װנדר זינגן
Contractions
The reader will have noticed that contractions are rather common in OLY, espe-
cially of a verb with a pronoun or of one pronoun with another:
4 But cf. the variation: ‘ דש דו מיר זיא גיווערשטthat you would grant it to me.’
234 a guide to old literary yiddish
Conditional
Conditional sentences express factual implications or hypothetical situations and
their consequences. They usually consist of two clauses, one expressing the condi-
tion itself (protasis), and the other expressing the consequence (apodosis): ‘if it
rains, the match will be cancelled.’ The order of the clauses is generally a matter of
style. In OLY, as in many other languages, there is a grammatical distinction made
between factual and counterfactual conditions.
In the first two cases, the condition is a matter of discernible fact (whether the
content of the glass is sea water or not); in the third case, the condition does not
apply and thus the issue is a matter of hypothesis. While OLY can use the subjunc-
tive for all conditionals, in the case of factual conditions, the indicative is common
in statements (the imperative occurs where appropriate). In counterfactual condi-
tions, the subjunctive is the rule.
Factual:
איך בין מיך ניט ֹטועֶ ה · ער איז זיך צו מיר ניט ִמ ְת ַח ֵתן
‘(if) I am (indicative) not mistaken, he is (indicative) not [of the appropriate
status] to become my in-law’ (BZ12)
הוט ער ניט צו טרינקן זא זול ער ֵאיא אױף די הנט שפײאן
‘if he has (indicative) nothing to drink, then he should (indicative) spit onto
his hand before’ (Rec12)
איש עש אײן מאן זא גיב אימש בֿון אײנם זכר
‘if it is (indicative) a man, then give (imperative) it to him from a male [bone]’
(Rec11)
Counterfactual:
וויר עש אוך ניכט צו לנק/ איך וויל אוך וונדר זינגן
‘I wish (indicative) to sing marvels for you, if it were (subjunctive) not too
tedious for you’ (JtR1)
העט איך ױינד ווער מיר ניט ויל ליבר זיא ווערן שוואך
‘If I had (subjunctive) enemies, would it not be (subjunctive) preferable to me
that they be (subjunctive) weak rather than strong?’ (BZ17)
דיא ריד וואלט איך דיך רעכֿט מאכֿן גירוייאן/ העט דיר ניט ור הײשן אױף טרױיאן
‘if (I) had not granted (subjunctive) you immunity’/I would (subjunctive)
make you quite regret this speech’ (PaV 300, 7–8)
The reader should keep in mind that the strict uniformity of the examples selected
here will not be found ubiquitously in the corpus of OLY literature.
lesson twenty-four235
Glossary
]England geo [éngəland ענגילנד
]London geo [londən לונדן
]distinguished/noble [fórnèm פֿארנעם
]person [peršóun פערשון דיא
]art, here: device/artifice [kunst קונשט דיא
]devise/invent/fabricate spv [óustraχtən אויזטראכֿטן
]leak [lek ליק דש
]hole/breach [loχ לאך דש
]get/acquire/obtain sv8 [krigən קריגן
]quarter [firtəl פֿירטל
]flow into/fill up spv.sv5 [ónrinən אן רינן
]Dublin geo [dublən דובלין
]constable [kónstabəl קנשטאבל דער
](Roman Catholic) priest [pristər פריסטר דער
]arrest/take into custody prv.wv [gəfangən zetsən גיפֿנגן זעצן
]commit ir.sv [bəgón ביגון
]fem servant [dinstmeyd דינשט מייד דיא
236 a guide to old literary yiddish
Notes
The numerical indicator of the date, ח'י, reverses the standard order of the numerals.
As noted earlier, the syntactic phenomenon of fronting or topicalization is a
common means of placing emphasis on particular syntactic units, e.g. ‘Sarah
Cohen, she’s my professor.’ In this passage, there is a slightly unusual topicalization,
since the fronted unit is the subject of the sentence that would already have occurred
as the first unit of the sentence: אבר עטליכֿי גוטי פֿריינד פֿון דען גיפֿנגינן (פרישטר) דיא זעלביגי
האבן בייא דער נאכֿט דעם הערן (קונשטאפל) אין זיין אייגן הויז מיט זיינר פֿרויאן אונ' זיין דינשט מייד אום
‘ גיבראכֿטBut several good friends of the arrested priest, these same ones killed the
honored constable in his own house with his wife and his female servant.”
Translation
Friday Courier, 10 Elul/30 August, 1686.
London, England. 21 August. A distinguished person here invented a device with
which two people can remove all the water from the ship in an instant, if the ship
has a leak or a hole and would be full of water in a quarter of an hour. In an emer-
gency, the device can save the lives of many people.
Tuesday Courier, 5 Adar/18 February 1687.
London, England. 11 February. In the city of Dublin a constable had a priest arrested
because of a number of delicts that the aforementioned priest was alleged to have
committed. But several close friends of the arrested priest, these same ones killed
the honored constable in his own house with his wife and his female servant.
Thereafter they set his house afire on four sides, so that his four children were
burned alive with all the people who were in the house and were still asleep.
Lesson Twenty-Five
זויפץ דא ליש
פריז איין גרושן ֿ
ער זאך אונ' מערקט דאז בויז ענדן ·
דעניכט ער איר אל דינג ור היש
ֿ
ליבשפט וואר אין בלענדן ·
ֿ ווען דיא גרוש
זיין יומר ער אין זיך ור ביש
אונ' גינג נון היים באלד אונ' ביהענדן ·
זויפצן אונ' זארגן
נכט וור ער ֿ
די זעלביג גנץ ֿ
ביז דז דו ווידר קאם דער אנדר מורגן :
Glossary
דעניכֿט = דענוכט
]blind [blendən בלענדן
]repress sv7 [fərbaysən ור ביישן
]worry/be aggrieved [zorgən זארגן
]bed//plea/request [bet בעט דש
]father [tet טעט דער
]deny/refuse [fərzogən ור זאגן
]otherwise/in addition [zïst זוישט
]preliminary concoction = preamble [fárgəbray ואר גיברייא דש
]improper behavior [untsuχt און צוכֿט דיא
]folderol/nonsense [fírləfay פירל פייא דער
]adhere/stick, here: hang [klebən קלעבן
]ethical/moral/proper [zitləχ זיטליך
]shirk/shun/renounce sv7 [fərmaydən בֿור מיידן
]point/spot [punt פונט דער
]conclusion/resolution/end [bəšlḯs בישלויס דש
]fervid(ly)/ardent(ly) [heysləχ הייסליך
]desire/crave [ónbəgerən אן ביגערן
242 a guide to old literary yiddish
Notes
The form ( השט = העבשטst. 290,7; 2nd sg.pres.ind) represents an alternate verbal
root for הון.1
Pariz provides us with some insight into the vocabulary of cotemporal corporal
punishment with the admission: ( אויבר דען ארש צוך איכֿז זעלבשט די רוטן293,4).
The spelling ( וואר297,3) masks the subjunctive required by the sense of the pas-
sage, as well as the rhyme.
The form ( טויגליק299,7) is almost certainly a printer’s error for טויגליך, as the fol-
lowing rhyme word would suggest.
There would seem to be an alternate pronunciation for אויגן, such that it can
rhyme with טאגןand ( זאגןas is revealed in the orthography of the word later in this
canto: ( אגן297,2).
The word ‘ שטימןvoice’ in the sentence וויא וואל אים ציטרט דיא שטימןis a problem. It
is a weak noun, and thus the ending ־ןcould indicate any of the singular oblique
cases (acc/dat/gen) or the plural. Since it must obviously be the subject of the verb,
however, it must be nominative case, and thus the only possibility with the final ־ן
is nominative plural, which would rather improbably provide Yakomo with plural
voices. But in any case the verb ציטרטis singular. One might try to construe the
noun as an infinitive (something like ‘making a sound’), but Yiddish infinitives are
neuter, which would clash with the singular feminine or plural definite article דיא,
used here. A problem, but not a large one. One might simply suggest that the
author added the anomalous ־ןfor the sake of rhyme with גרימןand גלימןlater in the
stanza, although unlike many other poets, this author’s poetic skills rarely compel
him to stoop to dubious grammaticality in order to accommodate rhyme.
The omission of the subject pronoun is common in languages in which the verb
form includes an unambiguous identification of the subject (e.g. Latin), but such is
not the case in OLY, where only a few verb forms are strictly unambiguous. Thus
the omission of the subject איךin st. 300,7 is unusual, especially since the verb form
in question העטis in fact not unambiguous. Perhaps the thus syntactically incom-
plete (quasi-ungrammatical) sentence reflects the king’s sputtering apoplectic rage
in response to the presumption of one of his vassals in proposing a wedding match
of the princess with the vassal’s own son.
A recurring idiom in OLY is ( ער צוואגט אים וואל דען קופף און לאג302,1) ‘he thoroughly
scoured/ scrubbed his head without lye/soap’ = ‘he gave him very rough treatment.’
The imperative of the final line of the passage (אונ' וואלט איר הוירן מין זא קומן דען ווידר,
302,8) ‘and if you would like to hear more, then come again,’ seems a mistake for
קומט, for otherwise one would need to construe it as evidence for a shift toward the
3rd pl. as the polite imperative, which is found in no period of Yiddish (and does
not even appear in German for centuries after the date of this text).
The gender of the word ( טיילtag line of the canto) seems condemned to ambigu-
ity: in modEY it is either masculine or feminine, while in OLY it is either masculine
or neuter. Lest one imagine that this issue is found only in Yiddish, it should be noted
that in medieval German, from which Yiddish derived one of its components, the
corresponding word teil/deil also varied between masculine and neuter—a distinc-
tion that lingers in NHG, which is generally claimed by modern linguists as seman-
tic, i.e. neuter expresses the sense of a part of a whole, while masculine expresses
the sense of a portion. In fact that tenuous distinction was already inconsistent at
best in the Old High German period and has grown no more consistent with the
passage of centuries, even up to the present. The text of Pariz un Viene maintains a
consistent neuter gender for the word, variously spelled דאז/דש/דז, except in the
concluding line of canto five, where it suddenly appears as דאר טייל, which is rather
odd, since the masculine nominative singular of the definite article is almost with-
out exception spelled דער/ דרin OLY (in this text also). Here it almost seems that the
scribe or typesetter (who either did or did not “correct” the manuscript in typeset-
ting the text) has changed course mid-word, with the first two letters heading down
the orthographic path toward neuter, only to be brought up short by the final letter
that insists on masculine, no matter what has come before. Or, it may simply be due
to a piece of wrongly sorted type, i.e. a רin the שbin. The editor of the definitive
edition of the text, Chone Shmeruk, emended the דארto דאז, apparently in order to
maintain consistency of gender. In doing so, with this word he exhibits a practice
not particularly common among Yiddish speakers, early or late, or indeed their
German-language counterparts of the past millennium.
Translation
(286) Pariz then heaved a great sigh. He saw and recognized that it would end
badly. Nonetheless he promised her everything, for his great love blinded him. He
stifled his misery and now went home boldly and quickly. All that night he sighed
and agonized until the next morning arrived. (287) Then he came to his father’s bed
with great fear and shame in his eyes. He said to him: “My dear father, you have
done my will all your life; therefore, I want to make a request of you. Do not deny it
to me. Promise me that you will do it; otherwise I will not tell you my request.” (288)
He gave him a long preamble about how he should forgive him for his improper
behavior and otherwise a great deal of folderol, so that he not leave him in the
lurch. His father said: “Now, out with it! I promise you indeed by my life, as a father
ought to do for his son; thus will I also do whatever I can.” (289) Pariz had no
patience: it cut him to the heart to say the words. He nonetheless told him all about
his love for Viene, what he suffered because of it, and how that was to blame for his
renouncing his proper mode of living. He now told all of it to the poor old man, up
to the point at which they now stood. (290) And at the conclusion of all his words,
he was quite agitated in his desire that he [Yakomo] just speak with the king about
whether he would give her to him in marriage.
When the sick, old man heard that, he would have liked to die for grief. He said:
“Dear son, as God is my witness, I fear that you have lost your mind. (291) Alas,
what has happened to your good sense? Do you not recognize yourself? Do you
think that King Dolfin would grant you his daughter Viene? I would not take half
of Vienne to make this request on your behalf: if he were to hear such words but
once from me, I would never dare go before him for the rest of my days. (292)
lesson twenty-five245
Therefore, my dear and beloved son, make requests about, and engage in, other
things, and I will do it all willingly. But this I cannot accomplish for you.” Pariz said:
“Now I see indeed that my love means little to you. I did not expect this answer
from you, insofar as you hold me for a beloved son. (293) I know it just as well as
you, that it is quite bitter for you. But I am forced to do it: I have caned my own ass.
If you do not help me, I will have no peace. Hope no more that I will ever again have
a good day. Therefore, merciful father, I wish to implore you: do not deny me your
aid. (294) Now give me all your good will and your aid and fulfill my request. Your
own son whom you love—will you slay him with your own hands?” The misery that
had long obsessed him brought the father around: he saw his son in pain, and he
thus suffered even more, as a father takes pity on his children. (295) He said: “If
indeed you want it to be done, then I will risk life and limb, and if it is not thus
settled, then I will indeed have lied.” Pariz said: It is not a matter of my having
conceived it by myself, and I am doing what my Viene asked of me, and your love
and loyalty may thus be recognized.”
(296) Deeply aggrieved by such things, one day, when it seemed to him the
proper time, he went up to the king and bowed to him from afar. The king wel-
comed him cordially and wanted to have him sit down beside him. “No,” said the
poor old man, “I do not wish to sit: first, I would like to expose my folly. (297) But I
wish to implore you, with a breaking heart and tear-filled eyes: if I say something
that seems improper to you, pardon my transgression. The relationship that I have
with my lord reassures me that I can say it to you. I say it and likewise know—may
dysentery befall me!—that it is not possible and even less proper. (298) I know that
it is not proper, but the love of my son Pariz has forced me to do it—the folly of the
poor lad.” The old man, the poor fool, sniffled for fear; his tongue would barely
move. The king said: “Tell me what you want to have. I will certainly forgive you for
it—have no worries.” (299) First he constructed an entryway, which I do not wish
to describe for you at present. Because of his great fear and because of his great
horror, he could scarcely stay on his feet. In the end, the substance of the matter
came forth. He said: “I desire your beautiful and capable daughter as the lawful wife
of my son Pariz, if it were possible.”
(300) He wanted to continue his speech, although his voice was quavering, but
the king interrupted him with a monstrous rage and ferocity. Indeed it was no
illusion: one saw the fire smoldering in him. He said: “If I had not granted you
immunity, I would make you quite regret this speech. (301) You rogue and thief and
miscreant, how dare you show yourself before me? You are not good enough, you
are not worthy to bow to me. My throne or my crown is after all worth more than
all that you possess. Would you now set your son, in possession of a single castle,
on a par with my daughter and an entire kingdom?” (302) He gave his head a good
scouring without any soap. Indeed he was incensed. And his [Dolfin’s] greatest
complaint was that he [Yakomo] was in comparison with himself [Dolfin] quite
poor.
I do not wish to sing any more of that, for I take pity on him. Therefore, I will
close my canto here. And if you would like to hear more, then come again.
Here ends the fifth canto.
246 a guide to old literary yiddish
Grammar
Kinship terms
The terminology of kinship is complex in many languages. The kinship terminol-
ogy of OLY shares much but not everything with modern Yiddish, as the following
list indicates.2
2 The list is supplemented from OLY texts beyond the scope of the present volume, but is nonetheless
obviously still incomplete.
lesson twenty-five247
]be in the/a mood/temper irv [tsu mútən zayn צו מוטן זיין
]yield/capitulate/grant/indulge sv2 [gəvunən gebən גיוואונן געבן
]arrest/take into custody [gəfangən zetsən גיפאנגן זעצן
]arrange/bring about/engineer ir.wv [tsu vegən brengən צו וועגן ברענגן
Anomalous verbs
were provided in Lessons Eight and Seventeen.זיין The forms of the anomalous verb
, the first threeהון , andשטון ,טון ,גון There are also other anomalous verbs, such as
of which were in the Germanic classification “root verbs,” while the last was a con-
tract verb. None of them has been provided with a full paradigms in these pages, since
that full range of forms does not occur in the corpus of texts included in the present
volume. Each such form that occurs has, however, been so identified in the g lossaries,
whenever the form itself made its immediate identification otherwise problematic.
דיא פֿרנצן · אל דיא פֿרנצן וועלכֿי פֿון דיא טירקן אויף דער זיה גיפֿנגן ווערדן דיא זעלביגי
ברענגט מאן נאך (אלגיר) אונ' דיא טירקן זאגן זוא באלד אז דיא פֿרנצי קריגש שיפֿן ווערן
קומן אונ' אלגיר בומברדירן זוא וועלן דיא טירקן אל דיא גיפֿנגיני פֿרנצן אין דיא גישטיק
אריין לאדן אונ' ארויז שיסן · פֿינף קריגש שיפֿן האבן דיא טירקן פֿון (אלגיר) דען גרוישן
הערן צו הילף גישיקט · פֿיר אונ' דרייסיג אלגירישי גרוישי רויב שיפֿן אונ' בייא צוונציג
קלייני שיפֿן זיין אויז גיפֿארן אום צו רויבן · אבר דיא פֿרנצן האבן איין טירקיש רויב שיף
מיט זעכֿצעהן גישטיק אן שטראנט גיאגט אונ' דען טירקישן קאפיטיין פֿון דען זעלביגן שיף
האט זיין ביין אבגישוסן אויך זיין פֿיל גמייני טירקן טויט גיבליבן אונ' גישעדיגט גיווארן · דיא
טירקן פֿון (אלגיר) האבן זיך מיט דיא ענגילענדר ווידר פֿר אייניגט · דיא נאך פֿולגנדי
הולענדישי שיפֿן האבן דיא טירקן גירויבט · אונ' נאך (אלגיר) גיבראכֿט
Glossary
]Switzerland geo [šváytsər lànd שווייצר לנד דש
]Bern geo [bern בערן
]prisoner/captive [gəfángənər גיפֿנגינר דער
]member of a Reformed Christian sect [reformirtər רעפֿורמירטר דער
]Safien Valley (Graubünden) geo [záfyer lànd זאפֿאיער לנד דש
]loose [lóuz לויז
]go/move sv8 [tsi(χ)ən ציהן
]mountain (range) [gəbírg גיבירג דש
]storm [šturəm שטורם דער
]snow [šne שניה דער
]Dromore (County Down, Ireland) geo [dromorə דרומארע
]astronomer/astrologer [štérnzè(χ)ər שטערנזעהר דער־
]sun [zun זון דיא
]be eclipsed prv [fərfinstərt פֿר פֿינשטרט זיין
]for three hours [dray štund lang דרייא שטונד לנג
](stock) animals [fiχ פֿיך דש
]at home [darhéym דר היים
]be over/past temp [farbáy פֿאר בייא זיין
]find out sv5 [bəfindən ביֿפינדן
]confidence/faith/belief/credit [kredít קרעדיט דער
]‘Barbary Coast’ geo [barbáryə ברבריא דיא
]Algiers geo [algír אלגיר
])dried salt cod < Port. bacalhau [bakəlóu(ə באקילויא (דער)
]sea/ocean [ze זיה דיא
]warship [krigsšif קריגש שיף דש ־ן
]bombard [bombardirən בומברדירן
]load (into) spv.sv6 [aráynlodən אריין לאדן
]shoot out/fire off spv.sv8 [aróusšisən ארויז שיסן
]the great lord = the sultan [der gróusər her דער גרוישר הער
]Algerian [algiriš אלגיריש
]go/drive/move out; here: sail out spv.sv6 [óusforən אויז פֿארן
lesson twenty-five249
Note
The duration of time is generally expressed simply by means of the collocation of a
succession of elements: a number, a period of time, and, optionally, the word לנג:
דרייא שטונד לנג. If grammatical case is somehow displayed in such expressions (via an
added definite article), it is generally accusative.
Translation
Friday Courier. 14 Nisan/28 March 1687.
Bern, Switzerland. 12 March. Three hundred poor members of the Reformed [Prot-
estant] sect were set free in the Safien region, and they wanted to go to Switzerland.
But as the poor people were crossing the mountain range, a great storm arose, and
the snowfall was so deep that ninety people died miserably in the deep snow.
Friday Courier. 18 Sivan/30 May 1687.
Dublin, England. 15 May. In Dromore a person has attained the age of 107, and he
has twenty-four living children and sixty-three grandchildren and seventy-five
great-grandchildren. And they were all together at one time.
The astronomers in England have said that there would be a three-hour eclipse
of the sun on 11 May, which would be good for neither humans nor livestock, and
many people took it to heart, and they kept their livestock at home, but when the
time period had passed, it was recognized that it was not true. Thus the astrono-
mers have lost much of their credit.
Friday Courier, 16 Kislev/21 November 1687.
Algiers, Barbary Coast. On 6 August the Turks here seized eight French ships
[laden] with dried salt cod. The Turks of Algiers want to make peace with the Dutch
but not the French. All the French who are captured at sea by the Turks, those same
ones are brought to Algiers, and the Turks say that as soon as the French warships
come and bombard Algiers, the Turks will load all the French captives into the
cannons and shoot them out. The Turks of Algiers sent five warships to the aid of
the sultan. Thirty-four large Algerian pirate ships and around twenty small ships
sailed out for plunder. But the French drove a Turkish pirate ship with sixteen can-
nons onto the beach, and the Turkish captain of that ship had a leg shot off, and
many common Turkish sailors were dead and wounded. The Turks of Algiers have
again entered a pact with the English. The Dutch ships following behind captured
the Turks and took them to Algiers.
Appendix 1
Hebrew Fonts and Scripts
The “Rashi” font and Ashkenazic cursive font are from the Open Siddur Project
(http://opensiddur.org/tools/fonts/), the latter designed by Raphael Finkel; the
Mashket font was generously designed by Raphael Finkel specifically for this text-
book, and has since been made available on the same website.
Appendix 2
Old Literary Yiddish Verb Classes
Strong verbs
According to the traditional system of classification, Germanic strong verbs com-
prised seven classes. Each such class is identified by the vowel gradations (Ablaut
reihen) of the four principal parts: infinitive, 3rd person preterite singular, 1st/3rd
person preterite plural, past participle. In the preface to his dictionary of MHG,
Matthias Lexer (1879: vol. 1, p. xxix) reformulated the classification system better to
describe the situation of MHG, the language with the closest relation to the OLY
verbal system. Ayzik Zaretski’s classificatory system (1926: 91ff.) specifically focuses
on modEY and thus does not reflect the classificatory categories of proto-Germanic
or OHG/MHG vowel gradation classes. As such it is extremely useful for modern
Yiddish. But since the OLY strong verb system differs from both MHG and modEY
in the number and distribution of its classes, neither of those systems is of practical
value for someone directly engaged in learning OLY. A further distinction is found
in the number of principal parts of the verb: while MHG has the four noted above,
and modEY has only two (infinitive and past participle), OLY is in a transitional
state between the fourfold system of its German component and the twofold sys-
tem of its modern reflex. OLY verbs generally seem to have three principal parts
(infinitive, 3rd sg.pret., past participle), although as the following chart demon-
strates, there is evidence that some strong verbs still retained a distinct 3rd pl.pret.
root vowel distinct from the 3rd sg.pret. No vowel of 3rd pl.pret. forms is here
included in the signature vowel series of each class.
In the following table, strong verbs are classified into fourteen classes (in addi-
tion to irregular strong verbs) and are alphabetized within each class according to
the root verb; compound verbs (verbs with prefixes, whether separable or not) are
not listed separately but rather appear under the root, thus אן זחןappears under זחן.
Each verb class is identified by number (those numbers appear in the glossaries of
the present volume as identifiers of the classes to which particular verbs belong)
254 appendix 2
and the characteristic pattern of vowels of the three (primary) principal parts. Only
forms actually attested in the present volume are listed—with the exception of
infinitive forms, which, if not attested in the present volume, are placed in square
brackets.
Since attempting to list all spelling variants would lead to unnecessary confusion
( בֿאנגן, בֿנגן, ואנגן, ונגן, ֿפאנגן, פאנגן, ֿפנגין, ֿפנגן, פנגין,פנגן, etc.), a quasi-standard has here
been imposed, as follows (where the sign ‘—’ signifies ‘represents all instances of ’):
[ — פf]
[ — עe], except in prefixes: בי־,גי־
[ — אa]
[ — שs]
2 — e-a-e1
give scv (גי)געבן גאבן גאב געבן
indicate spv/scv אנ(גי)געבן אן געבן
hand over spv אױבר געבן
dose spv/scv אײן געבן
offer/give spv דריין געבן
happen scv גישעהן גישאך גישעהן
see/gaze upon scv גיזהן זוהן/זאהן זאך זהן/זחן
look about spv/scv אומא זחן זיך
look at spv/scv אן זוהן אן זאך אנ (ג)זהן
inspect scv ביזעהן
glimpse scv דר זאך דרזעהן
be wary spv/scv פרזעהן
step scv טראט טרעטן
say scv יאך ייחן
read scv גילעזן לעזן
equate scv גימעשן מעשן
eat scv געשן אשן אש עשן
forget scv פרגעשן פרגעשן
1 2nd and 3rd s.pres. and sing. imperative, root vowel often -i-; here noted as scv.
oly verb classes255
3 — e-a-o2
order scv ביפאלן ביפאליך ביפעלן
][בערגן
hide scv פרבערגן
pluck/break scv גיברוכֿן ברעכן
break off spv/scv אב ברעכן אב בראך
give birth to גיבורן גיבערן
obtain/count scv גאלט געלטן
][דערבן
go to ruin scv פרדערבן
help scv העלפן
][ווערבן
acquire/win scv דרווערבן
become scv וורדן וורט ווער(ד)ן
throw/cast scv וואורפן ווארף ווערפן
cast up/value spv/ א(ױ)ף װערפן
scv
overturn spv/scv גיווארפן
ָ אום אום ווערפן
take scv גינומן נאמן (ג)נאם )נעמן (נים
exclude spv/scv אויש גינומן אויש נעמן
take up spv/scv אן גינומן אן נעמן
perceive scv פרנומן פרנאם פרנעמן
hide/conceal scv פרהעלן
joust/lance scv גישטוכן שטעכן
steal scv שטעלן
sneak scv פרשטאל פרשטעלן
die scv גישטורבן שטארבן שטערבן
berate scv שילטן
speak scv שפרוכן שפראך ][שפרעכן
oppose (spv). scv ווידר שפרעכן
promise scv פרשפרוכן פרשפרעכן
][שרעקן
be alarmed scv דרשראק דרשרעקן
4 — o/u-a-o/u
come גיקומן קאמן ק(א)ם קומן
get rid of spv אב קומן
occur spv אויש(גי)קומן אויש קומן
die/perish spv אום(גי)קומן אום קומן
escape אנטקומן
arrive spv אן קומן
overtake spv בײא קומן
arrive spv הין קומן
enter/attain spv הנײן קומן
carry out spv נוך קומן
2 2nd and 3rd sg. pres. and sg. imperative, root vowel often -i-; here noted as scv.
256 appendix 2
6 — a/o-u-a/o
bake באכן
[גראבן]
divert through אב גראבן
excavation spv
bury ביגראבן
grow וואכשן/וואקשן
grow forth spv אויף וואכשן/וואקשן
wash וועשן/וואשן
carry/bear גיטראגן טרוגן טרק/טרוג טראגן
deliver spv אויש גיטראגן אויש טראגן
wear spv אן גיטראגן אן טראגן
make an accord פרטראגן פרטראגן
happen spv צו גיטראגן צו טראגן (זיך)
[לאדן]
3
) Cf. the parallel irregularity in MHG beginnen, which forms an alternate (weak/anomalous
preterite and past participle on analogy with the verb gunnen.
oly verb classes257
)8 — i-o-u/o(u
bow/bend גיבוגן ביגן
bow down spv נידר ביגן
offer בוט [ביטן]
offer אנטבוטן אנטבוט אנטביטן
command גיביטן
forbid פרבוטן פרבוט פרביטן
betray ביטרוגן ביטריגן
cast [metal]/pour גיגושן גוֹש גישן
)cover (spv אויבר(גי)גושן אויברגישן
pour out פרגישן
[דרישן]
annoy/bother פרדרישן
boil זידן
tell a lie לוג לױיגן
fly פליגן
flee פלוך/פלוה פליהן
flow פלישן
lose פרלורן פרלירן
pull/draw גיצוגן צוגן צוג/זוך ציהן
pull off spv אב צוך אב ציהן
undress spv אויש צוך אױש ציהן זיך
raise/educate דרצוהן דרציהן
go one’s way spv הין ציהן
pass/end spv וועג ציהן
delay/retard פארציאן
oly verb classes259
choose קיזן
choose 4
אוישדרקורן אוישדרקיזן
get/acquire/obtain גיקראגן קריגן
][שטישן
expel/cast out פרשטושן פרשטישן
shoot שושן שוש שישן
shoot off spv אב שישן
shoot out spv ארױז שישן
][שלישן
decide/conclude בישלאשן בישלישן
enclose פרשלושן פרשלישן
9 — a-i-a
hold/keep גיהלטן הילטן הילט האלטן
halt spv אן הלטן
propose spv פרהלטן
keep/guard ביהילטן ביהילט ביהלטן
hang הינגן הינג האנגן
hang out spv אױש האנגן
fall (scv) גיפאלן פילן פיל פאלן
fall out spv.(scv) אויש גיפאלן 5אױש פאלן
invade (scv) ארײן פאלן
please (scv) גיפיל גיפאלן
interrupt spv.scv דריין פיל ][דריין פאלן
fall down spv.scv נידר פאלן
disintegrate (scv) צופאלן
catch/grasp פאנגן
catch/receive אנטפפינג אנטפפאנגן
embrace אומפנגן אומפאנגן
begin spv אן גיפאנגן אן פאנגן
10 — o-i-o
gasp/sniffle גיבלוזן בליז ][בלוזן
blow into spv איין בליז איין בלאזן
let/leave/allow גילון/גילאזט/גילושן ליש לושן
admit/let in spv אײן לושן
abate spv נאך לאשן
set free spv פרייא גילאשן פרײא לאשן
advise/counsel רוֹטן
4
The [z] / [r] correspondence actually reflects a longer chain of development: [s] > [z] > [r], first
described by Karl Verner in the 19th century (and thus identified as “Verner’s Law”), which explains
a historical sound change in Proto-Germanic, whereby voiceless fricatives are voiced when the
(Indo-European) stress shifted to the root syllable in Germanic, thus from the syllable following to
the syllable preceding the consonant in question, thus [s] > [z]; thereafter, under certain conditions,
the [z] was rhotacized to [r]. In English one sees the phenomenon in words such as lose/forlorn, was/
were. 5 3rd sg. pres. אויש פילט.
260 appendix 2
11 — ey-i-ey
be named/order גיהיישן היש ][היישן
promise/espouse פרהיישן פרהיש פרהײשן
separate/(de)part שידן שיד שיידן
assign/allocate בשידן
12 — ou/a-i-ou
run/gallop גילופן ליף לפן/לױיפן
run down spv הינב לפן
run away spv הין וועק לפן הין וועק ליף
run up spv הינויף לפן
run after/pursue spv נוך לױיפן
13 — e-o-o(u)
raise הוב היבן
lift/raise spv אויף הוב אױף היבן
begin spv אונגיהובן אן הובן אן הוב אן היבן
behave/act גיהעבן זיך
weave/bind scv פלעכטן
cling to scv פרפפליכטן
fight/fence scv פעכטן
swell scv (גי)שוואל (גי)שווילן
swear גישווארן שווערן
14 — u-i-u
call רופן
proclaim spv אויש רופן
Preterite-present verbs6
6 The signification of modal verbs is always context-specific; a general definition is offered here.
Appendix 3
Facsimiles
1. “Joseph the Righteous” ll. 1–24, Cambridge, University Library, T.-S. 10K22,
fol. 17v, Lessons 1–3.
2. Remedy, Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek, Cod. HB XI 17,
fol. 62v, Lesson 10.
3. “Briyo and Zimro,” Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, cod.hebr. 100,
fol. 67r, Lesson 9.
4. Riddle, Oxford, Bodleian Library, Can. Or. 12, fol. 215r, Lesson 8.
5. Pariz and Viene (Verona, 1594), fol לr, st. 284–7; extant: Verona, Biblioteca del
Seminario Vescovile, Fonds Venturi, no. 192, Lessons 24–5.
6. Friday Courier (Amsterdam, 1686–7), 26 Av/16 August 1686; lost, formerly:
Amsterdam, Portugees Israëlietisch Seminarium Ets Haim, Livraria Mon-
tezinos; microfiche facsimile: IDC J-261-1, Lesson 21.
264 appendix 3
Facsimile 5. Pariz and Viene (Verona, 1594), fol לr, st. 284–7
extant: Verona, Biblioteca del Seminario Vescovile, Fonds Venturi, no. 192
facsimiles269
The reader should not imagine that the texts included in this volume, whether here
or in the instructional lessons above, are intended to provide a representative
anthology of OLY. For such an anthology, one should consult Early Yiddish Texts.
The readings selected here should instead simply provide intermediate-level read-
ers with a few dozen further pages of manageable OLY, through reading which they
may gain further facility in dealing with a variety of text types from the corpus. Full
glosses for these texts appear in the glossary at the end of the volume. No transla-
tions of the individual texts are provided. All texts are edited directly from manu-
script or early printed edition (as in EYT); references to additional reliable modern
editions are provided, for those texts for which they exist.
1. ֵס ֶדר נָ ִשׁים נִ ָידה ַחלָ ה ַה ְדלָ ַקֿת ַהנֵ רWomen’s Commandments (1504)
The commandments imposed specifically on women, dealing with הדלקת, חלה,נידה
( הנרritual purity, the taking of dough, and lighting candles), are dealt with throughout
the sacred textual tradition, especially in the Talmud and medieval commentaries.
The separate treatment specifically addressed directly to women in the vernacular
was, however, strenuously opposed by rabbinical authorities. The broad textual tradi-
tion in manuscripts and early printed editions of the מצות הנשיםdemonstrates, how-
ever, that the book is to be reckoned among the most widespread of early Yiddish
books. It was composed much earlier than the first printed edition (מצװת הנשים, Daniel
Adelkind, Venice 1552), which was followed by many later editions in northern Italy
and central and eastern Europe. The manuscript excerpted and edited here (Cam-
bridge, University Library, Add. 547) is a witness of the pre-publication tradition,
which is to be attributed to the tradition of Judah Mintz. While the later tradition
formed a veritable encyclopedia of conduct and practice, based on numerous stories,
exempla, and tales drawn from the aggadic and midrashic traditions, in a hybrid form
(in part a book of customs, in part a book of moral didacticism, and in part a halakhic
manual), this particular manuscript includes practically no narrative exempla and no
added narrative material at all, thus radically differing from the later, more expanded
text types. The manuscript’s final colophon identifies the copy’s date of completion
as רסד
ֿ = ( יום ב ד' אב15 July 1504) (fos. 90v–91r), and the text’s author or scribe as מנחם
( אלדנדורףfol. 91r). As the reader will soon notice, the prose is often rhymed.
Source ׃Cambridge, University Library, Add. 547, fos. 4r–7v; Edward Fram (ed.),
My Dear Daughter ׃Rabbi Benjamin Slonik and the Education of Jewish Women in
Sixteenth-Century Poland (Cincinnati ׃Hebrew Union College Press, 2007) [edi-
tion of the later printed version סדר מצות הנשים ׃Cracow, 1585)]; EYT 32.
272 appendix 4
זײא גילובט בור אלן זאכן דש ער אונש ורְליכן הוט מאכן אנטװאכן · מיט גוב זײנר הײליגן תורה · דש
מְוגן מיר זײן איװיקליכן ורוא דרײא צעהן אונ' זעכש הונדרט גיבוט דא מיט ער אונש גיהײליקט הוט ·
בון אלר און קױשיקײט הוט ער גיהײליקט אונזרן לײפא · אידרמן הלט זיך צו זײנם איליכן װײפא · אונ' אױך
נױארט מיט איר אין גנצר רײניקײט · הלט זיך אין גנצר ורומקײט · אונ' דארום אױף אל אנדרי גיבאט · דיא
אונש גוט געבן הוט זול זי אירן מאן אױך ורֹוגן · אובנט אונ' מורגן · װיא זיא אל ִמצְות טון זול · דש גיולט
הקָ''בָה גר װאל ··
ַ
אײן איקליכי ורױא װײש װאל · װארױף זי טריפה זײן זול · וינט זי בון אירם לײב קײנר לײא דש דא אישט
רוט · אױף דעם טױך װען זי זיך ביזעהן הוט · װי קלײן עש מאג גיזײן · אז אײן זינפא קורנלײן · זו אישט
זי טריפה אין אלר מוש ·
תנָה דרײן טױט · אונ' וינט דא הער אינן שװימן בלױט · זי שָהְהױארט זיא אױבר אײן בעקן אונ' איר ַ
מױש זיך טריפה מאכן · שרײבט מאן ֵחרֶם אין דיזן זאכן · דאך זעך זיא עש אזו מענך מול · אײן רב זי
עש ורוגן זול ·
אבר וינט זי נױארט אױף אירם העמד אודר לײלוך · אײן ולעקן רוט · אונ' זי זיך אין קײנרלײא װײז טריפה
אנפפונדן הוט · עש הוט אײן אנדר רעכט צו מול · אן אידרמן זי עש הענקט װאל · העט זי איר העמד
ְת אױך ניט ליקט ביזונדר · זי פאר אימנט גיליהן · אונ' טעט עש אן און ביזעהן · דש הלט איר ֶ
ח ַבר ָ
הינגאן עש בײד אננדר · אודר אימנט בײא איר גילעגן װער · דער דא העט קרעצן אודר גשװער · װען
זיא אופן װערן דַם דרױש גינג · דארן זי דען ולעקן הינג · עש איש לעכט דרױש גילופן דא זי הוט גשלופן ·
העט · אודר גיזעשן דר בײא דער דא מיט אום אודר אוב זי מיט עטװש בלױטיג אום גאנגאן װער אונ' ֶ
גֵיט · אונ' דש אױשרש קלײט העט דש דם גיבאנגאן · זי מאג עש װאל דארן הענגאן · אונ' דש עש הלט
אױף איר צײט זײא · זינט אײן מול דש זי וינט רײן אירן לײפא דר בײא · אױש גינומן די דא װײש אן גילֵיגט
הינגאן · זי װער דען מיט עטװש בלױטיך אום הוט · אז הער נאך גשריבן שטוט · זי טאר עש ניט ֵ
גאנגאן · װער אבר דער אלר קײן · דאך אישט דער ולעקן קלײן · אישט עש אן צײטן אונ' אן שטיטן · דא
װאנצן זײן גיבונטליך · גיש אן אײנר גרושן בֹון · אישט ביליך דש זי עש הענקט דא ראן זיכרליך · אונ'
אישט דארן קײן אונטר שײט · דער ולעקן זײא לאנג קוגליך אודר ברײט · װער דש אבר ניט אונ' דאך אל
מול וְלְוך זײן · װער דש זי ניט גרושר װער װען דרײאר לינזן ברײט זײנט · זי בידארף זיך ניט ְטרֵיפָה
מאכן · ביװאר זי זיך װאל אין אנדרי זאכן ·
אוב זי זיך צו נאכט אין דער וינשטר בֹודֶק װער · אונ' ליגט דש טױך ביזונדער · אונ' וינט דעש מורגן אײן
ולעקן · אישט דש דער ולעקן לענקליך שטוט · זיא אישט ְטרֵיפה דא מיט · אישט ער קוגליך ער שאט
איר ניט · זינט אמול דא זי זיך הוט דארן בֹודֶק גיװעזן · אבר אנדרש װאו זײן זי אל בײד גלײך קוגליכט
אודר לאנג · אז איר בור האט גילעזן ·
וינט זי אבר אױף אירם ולײש דש מול · אונטר הלבן זי בור שטֵיט עש װאל אונ' עש ניט אױשר הלבן דעש
באײן װערט גיבונדן .דש אישט בְוזר װיען אױף דעם געװאנט צו אלר שטונדן · װען אױף דעם גיװאנט
מױש עש שיעור זײן אױף אײנר שטאט · אבר אױף דעם ולײש עש אױף אֵיצְלינגאן שאט · װען עש נױארט
אײנר בֹונַן גרוש אישט · מינר װען דש שאט עש נישט · וינט זי עש אוברט הלבן אונ' הוט גשפרונגאן ·
ְת גירונגאן · אודר נױליכן אם רוקן גילעגן זי זול עש אײן לערנר ורעגן ·
ח ַבר ָ
אודר מיט אירר ֶ
װען זי גיזעשן נאקיט אלײן · אױף אײנר שטאט די זי הוט בישױט רײן · אונ' דר נאך אײן ולעקן אונטר איר
װער · דרױף ורוג זי אױך די לערנער ··
additional readings273
העט זי שװערן אין אים גימעכט · אונ' אישט סֹופֵק דש דאַם קומט דר בון לעכֿט · װש זי וינט אן איר
צײט · דש זי הלט װײש דש עש בון דער מכה אױש גלײט · ְטרֵיפָה אישט זי דענוך · אבר װש זי וינט
הר נאך · צװישן אײנר צײט אונ' דער אנדרן זו װירט זי ְטרֵיֿפָה דארן · װען זי אנפפונד דש עש קעם בון
דער ערשטן שטט · אונ' קײנרלײא ולעקן איר קײן מול שאט ·
קײן ורױא װען זי ניט אישט רײן · זא אישט זי דעם מאן און גימײן · ער טאר זי ניט אן רְורן · צו דעם
זעלװיגן מאל · נאך קײן שימפפליך װארט ער מיט איר רידן זול · זי זול זיך אױך ניט גֵיגן אים מאלן נאך
וערבן · אױך הוט דיא גְ ָמרָא גיזײט דער זײן װײפא זער אן זיכֿט אין דיזער צײט · זי אישט נִי דָה אודר
װײש אן גלײט · די קינדר װערדן און גרוטן · דארום הוט גוט ור בוטן · נױארט אױש גינומן אײנר לײא אין
דיזם מול · דא ער אין אײנם חדר מיט איר טאר ליגן װאל · אױש גינומן אײן כלה אין דיזר ורישט · אז הר
נאך גשריבן אישט · אונ' דארום דש זי שטעטיקליך גיװאנליך מיט אננדר זײן · אישט אין בור בוטן מֵין
װען בײא אנדרן ֶערְות בינט אונ' דארום מושן זיא אײן וערונג האבן · איר אײנש דעם אנדרן ניכציט אין
דיא הענד טאר געבן · זי זול אים ניט אײן שינקן נאך בֵיטן אין דיזער ורישט װער ער בײ איר אין אײנם
חדר אישט אונ' ער זול ניט אױף אירם בעט ליגן אין אלר דיזער צײט · דש הלט קײן ְטרֵיפַה לײלוך דרױף
לײט · אונ' זי װײש אן גליגט הוט · אונ' אױך ניט דר בײא שטאט אױך אױף אײנר בור באנק די דא װאגילט
צו דיזם מולט · ער ניט זיצן זול · אױך טורן זי ניט אננדר רְורן ביט אירר בײד · עש מױש זײן דר צװישן אײן
אונטר שײד · אונ' ניט אױש אײנם כלי נאך עשן נאך טרינקן אױך ניט אן אײנם טיש זיצן גֵיגן אננדר דאך
װען זי אישט הינװעק גאנגאן מאג ער דש אובריג עשן אונ' טרינקן · אודר דש זי הלט דר בײא שטאט ·
אונ' אײן נאך איר גיטרונקן הוט · דש אובריג מאג דער מאן עשן אונ' טרינקן אױש · זינט אמול דש אײן
כלִי גישן אונ' בור איר טרינקן
אנדר מענש הוט גטרונקן דרױש · אונ' מאג ער עש ניט אין אײן אנדר ֵ
אודר עשן · אבר װאו ער געשן אודר גטרונקן הוט · אונ' ער ניט דר בײא שטוט · זי מאג דש אובריג
עשן אודר טרינקן · דיא ְס ָברָה איך דא ניט שרײבן קאן עש איש קײן אונטר שײט צװישן דען צװײאן
שרות לײט נױארט אן דער ְטבִילָה כְורישט · װען זיא װײש הוט אן גיליגט · אודר נאך נידה אישט · איר ַ
האבן די רבנים גילעזן · װער זי הלט בור צװײנציק יאר נִי דָה גיװעזין · קײן באדן נאך װײש אן ליגן מאכט
זי ניט רײן · נױארט די ְטבִילָה צו רעכט אלײן ·
ֶץ אים ֶפסַח אישט זי גימעשן אונ' ֵחלֶב אונ' ְטרֵיפָה אם יום כיפורי' צו עשן אונ'
חמזונדא דער נִדָה אז ָ
אז לעג ער בײא זײנר שװישטר אודר שװעשטר זײנש ואטר · אונ' אז איקליכי נִדָה אישט גיגן אירם מאן ·
אזו אישט אײן לידיגי נִדָה גיגן אידר מאן אונ' װער זיא הלט בור דרײשיק יארן ְטרֵיֿפָה גװעזן · דאך אין
אירם ַטרְפות אישט זיא נאך · עש אישט ניט גרושר אונטר שײט צװישן דען ורױאן בײדא · אײן לידיגי
ֵשת אִיש די דא הוט צו ְטבִילָה גאנגאן באר װאר דיא נידה אישט גיװעזן בור דרײשיק יאר אונ' אײנר א ֶ
חמֵץ אים פסח אונ' אם יום שבַת אישט · אונ' צװישן אײנם דער דא ָ דען צװישן אײנם דער דא מחלל ַ
כיפורִים אישט ·
ִ
ניט ויל זאגן װיא בױז דיא מידה איז · דען װער זײן גידאנקן דארױף זעצט אונ' זײן אהבֿה
אזו אן ליגט אױף עשן אונ' טרינקן אונ' אנדר לײבש לושט אז איך ואר הין גישריבן האב דער
ת גאנץ אז דער פָסוק שפריכֿט זײא דיך הױטן זעלב ואר גישט אונזרש ליבן הערן גֿוֿט י ֿ
ֿברך · אבר װער אונזר ליבן דאש דו ניט אישט אונ' װערשט זאט דש ור גישט דײן גֿוֿט ית
ת אונ' מיט מעשים ת ליבא הוט אונ' דינט אים בֿון רעכֿטר ליבא װעגן מיט מצו ֿ הערן גֿוֿט י ֿ
טובֿים דאש אישט דיא בעשט אהבֿה ׃ אונ' װער זיך נון װיל הױטן דאש אין דיא זיבן
אהבֿות דיא איז איצונד גישריבן האב ניט צו בױזא ברענגן דער מוש גרוש חכֿמה האבן ׃
אונ' דאש ער זײן ליבשאפֿט אן ליגט צו דעם בעשטן דיא אין ברענגן צו דעם דינשט הקדוש
ת דא ברוך הוא ׃ נון װעלן װיר װידר אן היבן אונ' װעלן שרײבן בֿון דען זיבן ערלײא אהבֿו ֿ
בֿון װיר איצונד גישריבן האבן · אונ' װעלן איצונד דש װידר שפיל שרײבן · אונ' װעלן שרײבן
ת צום בעשטן אן ליגן · אונ' אן װענדן זול · װיא אײן איקליכֿר מענש דיא זיבן ערלײא אהבֿו ֿ
אונ' װעלן אבר אן היבן ערשטליך מיט דער ליבשאפֿט דיא אײנר צו זײנן קינדרן הוט װיא
ער זיא זול ליבא האבן ער זול זיא ציהן אונ' גיװינן צו אונזרש ליבן הערן גוטש דינשט אונ'
ֿברך דינן זולן נוךװען אײנר שטערבן זול זא זול ער זײנן קינדרן גיביטן דאש זיא גוט ית
זײנם טוט · דען אײנר זול מער זורג האבן בֿור זײנר קינדר נשמה דען בֿור אירן לײבא · ·
אונ' זול זי ניכֿט צו ליבא האבן דאש ער אינן װאלט גישטטן בױזא אונ' און רעכֿט צו טון ·
דיא אנדר ליבשפֿט דיא ער הוט צו זײנם געלט דיא זול ער אזו אן ליגן ער זול זײן געלט
דרום ליבא האבן דש ער געלט הוט װען ער עש בידארף אונ' דש ער נימנט דארף ביטן
אודר צו בֿױש בֿאלן אום געלט אונ' דאש ער ניט אנדר לױיט געלט זול גילושטן אודר שטעלן
אודר רױבן דרף אונ' דאש ער נימנט דרף אום געלט אונרכֿט טון · אונ' ער זול זיך אױף
ריכֿטיג אונ' רעדליך מיט זײנם געלט מחייה זײן אונ' ער זול דען ענײם צדקה געבן דאש
ער ניט דארף צדקה מקבל זײן אױך זול ער זײן געלט דרום ליבא האבן דען װען אײנר געלט
הוט זא איז ער מױשיג בֿון זורגן זו קאן ער בכֿװנה תֿפילה טון אונ' תורה לערנן אונ' קאן
מיט לושט מצות אונ' מעשים טובֿים טון · ער זול אבר אום געלט נימנט און רעכֿט טון אונ'
זול ורױמדר געלט ניט ליבא הון זונדר װש זײן איז אונ' װש אים הקדוש ברוך הוא בישערט
הוט · דא מיט זול ער זיך ורײען אונ' ליבא האבן · אונ' זול זיך גױטליך מיט דעם זעלבן
בינױגן לושן אונ' ער זול ניט הופֿרטיג זײן אױף זײן געלט ער זול קױפֿן אום דש ור גענקליך
געלט אין דיזר ור גענקליכֿן װעלט אײן איװיג לעבן · דאש נױמר מער אב געט · אזו זול ער
זײן געלט ליבא האבן · דיא ליבא דער ורױען · דיא זול ער אזו אן ליגן · ער זול זײן װײבא
ליבא האבן אין זױלכֿר מאשן אונ' גישטאלט אונ' ניט אנדרש · ער זול גידענקן דש אין זײן
ת טרײבן מיט אנדרן װײבן · אונ' דש ער װײבא ביהױט בֿור זױנדן · דאש ער ניט דארף זנו ֿ
מיט זײנם װײבא קינדר גיװינט · דיא זיא אים דר ציכֿט אונ' זיא צו אלם גוטן גװינט אונ' זיא
קוכֿט אים אונ' טוט אים אל זײן בידורפֿניש אים הױז צום בעשטן · דרום איז ער מױשיג
דאש ער קאן תורה לערנן אונ' מצות אונ' מעשים טובֿים קאן טון צום בעשטן דא העלפֿט
זיא אים צו דארום זול ער זיא ליבא האבן אונ' אין קײנר אנדרן גישטאלט ׃ דיא ליבשפֿט
זײנש ואטר אונ' מוטר אונ' זײן קרובֿים זול ער אלזו ברױכֿן ער זול ואטר אונ' מוטר ליבא
האבן דארום דש זיא אין האבן דר צוהן · אונ' האבן אין לושן לערנן תורה אונ' מצות אונ'
מעשים טובֿים טון · אונ' ער זול זײן אנדריא קרובֿים ליבא האבן דרום דש זיא אים העלפֿן
צו תורה אונ' מצוה אונ' מעשים טובֿים · אױך זול ער זײן קרובֿים העלפן אונ' זול זיא
שטרופֿן צום בעשטן װען עש נוט טוט · אונ' זול זיא בֿון קײנש אונרעכֿטן װעגן ליבא האבן ·
אױך זול אײנר זײן חבֿרים ליב האבן אז אין דער האײליגן תורה גישריבן שטיט אונ' דו
זולשט ליבא האבן דײן גיזעלן אלש דיך זעלברט · אונ' װער מיט אידרמן אײנש איז אונ'
אידרמאן ליבא הוט דא בֿון קומט אים ויל גוטש אין דזם עולם אונ' אין דען עולם הבא ׃
דען װער מיט אידרמאן אײנש איז אונ' אידרמאן ליבא הוט זו הילפֿט אונ' ראט אים אידרמן
דאש בעשט אױף דיזם עולם ׃ אונ' װען אים אימנט שון װאלט לײדש טון זא הילפט אים
אידרמאן · אונ' װען אימנט װאלט בױזא בֿון אים רידן זא רױפֿן אונ' שרײען אין דיא לױיט אן
276 appendix 4
אונ' ור שעמן אין · דש ער שטיל שװײגט אונ' ניכֿש בױזא בֿון אים רעט · אונ' אידרמן
קומט אים צו הױלף אין אלן זאכֿן ׃ אונ' דאש גוט דאש אים דר בֿון קומט אין עולם הבא
דש איז דאש · װער מיט אידרמאן אײנש איז אונ' אידרמן ליבא האט דעם בֿאלגט אידרמן
נוך · אונ' װען ער דיא לױיט שטרופֿט זו נעמן זיא עש בֿור גוט אױף אונ' מן קערט זיך אן
זײן שטרוף · אונ' װען ער דיא לױיט האײשט עצװש גוטש טון זא טון זיא עש אונ' בֿאלגן אים ·
דא בֿון אנפפֿגט ער גרושן לון אױף יענר װעלט אונ' ער קאן אױך דעשטר באש לערנן אונ'
תֿפילה טון װען אײנר מיט אידרמן גליבט איז דא הוט ער אױך גוטן לון אים עולם הבה ·
אבר װער מיט דען לױיטן און אײנש איז אונ' קריגט מיט אינן דעם איז זײן הערץ ניט מױשיג ·
זא קאן ער אױך הקדוש ברוך הוא ניט דינן ׃ אבר װען אײנן אידרמן ליבא הוט זא טוט
אים אידרמן נוך אז זײן װערק דא בֿון קומן ויל מצות ׃ װיא זול נון אײנר צו דער מעלה קומן
דש אין אידרמן ליבא הוט · דאש װיל איך דיך לערנן · אײנר זול אידרמן העלפֿן אונ' רוטן
מיט זײנר חכֿמה אונ' מיט זײנם גוט נוך זײנם בֿור מוגן · מיט זײנר חכֿמה זול ער ראטן
אונ' לערנן אידרמן צום בעשטן אונ' מיט זײנם ממון זול ער לײהן ארמן ענײם · אונ' עשירים
אױך װען זיא עש דורפֿן אבר אלש נאך זײנם בֿור מױגן אונ' לשם שמים · אונ' צו צײטן געבן
אונ' שענקן · דאר נאך אײן זאך אײן גישטאלט הוט · אונ' זול ניט אױם אײן קלײנש אכֿטן
גיגן דען לױיטן · ער דרף זײן גוט ניט דרום אין דרעק װערפֿן · אודר זיך ור דערבן · אונ'
זײן משא ומתן זול מיט אידרמן װארהפֿטיג זײן · אונ' ער זול די לױיט ניט נאײזן אונ' זול ניט
אַסור בהנאה זײן · אונ' אל זײן עסקים זולן גױטליך זײן מיט אידרמאן · אונ' װען מן אין שילט
אודר אים אױבל רעט · זא זול ער נימנט אױבל רידן · אונ' ער זול אידרמן גױטליך אן זעהן ·
אונ' ער זול מיט נימנט פוכֿן · אונ' װאו ער אײנן זורגן זיכֿט אודר טרױערן אודר ביטרױבט
זא זול ער אין טרױשטן אונ' זול אים גוטי װארט געבן · אונ' זול אידרמן איר אן טון מיט
װארטן אונ' מיט װערקן · אונ' ער זול זיך ניט ביהעפֿטן אודר גיזעלן צו אונטיגליכֿן לױיטן אונ'
אל זײן מעשים זול ער טון לשם שמים · אונ' ניט דרום דאש מן אין לובן אודר אירן זול ·
דש זעלביג איז דער גרונט אונ' דיא װאורציל דר בֿון ׃ אונזר חכֿמים האבן גיזאגט װען אײנר
אײן חבֿר װיל ור זוכֿן אבֿ ער זײן גוטר חבֿר איז · זו זול ער אין צארניג מאכֿן · זאגט ער
אין זײנם צארן אונ' ביקענט אים דיא װארהײט אין זײנם צארן זא זולשטו דיך צו אים גיזעלן ·
איז דאש ניט זו שײדא דיך וער בֿון אים · מן זול זיך אױך ניט צו אײנם גיזעלן דער זיך
זעלברט ניט דר קענן קאן · עש איז אסור דש מן זיך גיזעלט צו אײנם רשע אֿפילו מיט
ת צו טון ׃ אײנר זול אים אײן חבֿר קױפֿן דער אין שטרופֿט װען ער טעט װש ניט רעכֿט מצו ֿ
ת טרײבט אונ' גיבט דיר אל מול װער · אבר אײן חבֿר דער דיר שמאײכֿלט אונ' חניֿפו ֿ
רעכֿט װש דו טושט אונ' הילפֿט דיר דײן אונרעכֿט צו דעקן װען דו ניט רעכֿט טושט בֿון
דען זעלביגן חבֿר שײדא דיך · אונ' אײן חבֿר דער דיר אײן גרושן דינשט טעט אונ' ער
טעט עש בֿון זײנר הנאה װעגן דער זול אױך ניט דײן חבֿר זײן ׃ דיא ליבשאפֿט דש אײנר
גערן לאנג לעבט · אונ' דש לעבן ליבא הוט דיא זול אײנר אזא אן ליגן · אײנר זול יא דש
לעבן ליבא האבן אונ' זול גערן לאנג לעבן · אבר ניט דרום דש ער אל מול װיל װאל לעבן מיט
עשן אונ' מיט טרינקן · אונ' װיל טון װאש זײנם לײב זאנפֿט טוט אונ' װאל לושט האבן װיל ·
ת זײן גאר ויל · אונ' װען נױיערט אײנר זול גידענקן דיא תורה איז גרוש · אונ' דער מצו ֿ
אײנר שון אל זײן בעשט טעט זו קאן אײנר דענוך דעש גוטן ניט ויל דר לאנגן · דארום זול
ת אונ' מעשים טובֿים קאן טון · אונ' מן גערן לעבן דאש מן קאן ויל תורה לערנן אונ' ויל מצו ֿ
אין אײנר זױלכֿן גישטלט זול אײנר גערן לאנג לעבן דאש ער הקדוש ברוך הוא גינוג קאן
דינן · אונ' אײנר זול צירונג קױפֿן אין דיזם עולם דאש ער זיא הוט אין יענים עולם · אונ'
ת אונ'
זול זיך אל מול ביזורגן בֿור דעם מלאך המות אונ' זול אל טאג אי מער אי לענגר מצו ֿ
מעשים טובים טון ׃ אבר אײן לעבן און גֿוֿטש בֿורכֿט דש הײשט קײן לעבן · אונ' אל טאג
זול אײנר גידענקן דש ער זיך װאלט לושן ממית זײן על קידוש השם װען עש חס ושלום דר
צו קעם אונ' דו זולט ניט ליבא האבן אין קײן װעג דש מן דיך מכֿבד איז אונ' װער דיא צװאו
מידות ניט אן אים הוט דער איז ניט גוט צו אלן זאכֿן .דש אײן דש אײנר ניט זול כבֿוד
additional readings277
ביגערן בֿון לױיטן · אונ' זול ניט ביגערן הנאה בֿון לױיטן · דען װעלכֿר כבֿוד אודר איר
ת אונ' װאש ער גוטש ביגערט בֿון דען לױיטן דער מכֿט אל גוטי װערק צו שאנדן · אל מצו ֿ
טוט דש טוט ער בֿון גילימפפֿא װעגן אונ' ניט לשם שמים · אבר אײנר זול דענוך ניט לײדן
דש מן אים אײן שם רע אױף װערפֿט דא מיט מן אים און רעכֿט טוט ער זול זיך מיט
דער װארהײט ור ענטװערטן װיל עש ניט העלפֿן זוא זול ער עש גוט לושן זײן ׃ אונזר חכֿמים
האבן גיזאגט דיא כבֿוד אונ' דיא שנאה ציהן אײן מענשן בֿון דיזר װעלט ׃ ליבשאפֿט
אונ' זענפֿטיקײט זול מן אלזו ברױכֿן · אײנר זול ניט דרום עשן נאך אל זײנם לושטן אונ' װש
אים װאל שמעקט · זונדר ער זול דרום עשן אונ' טרינקן דש אים זײן לײבא וריש אונ' גיזונדא
אונ' שטרק בלײבא דש ער הקדש ברוך הוא װאל דינן קאן מיט לושט · דען װען אײנר קרנק
איז זא קאן ער הקדש ברוך הוא ניט דינן אונ' װען אײנר ניט שלופֿט אונ' אױמרדר ואשט ·
װען ער שלופֿט זו זול ער גידענקן דש ער דר נאך דעשטר בעשר לערנן קאן · אונ' קאן
תֿפילה טון װען ער גישלופֿן הוט · אונ' אלז מיט דער מאש · אונ' זול ניט אונגיזונדיא שפײזא
עשן װען ער לושט צו העט זונדר ער זול עשן דש דש אים דען לײבא גיזונדא האלט װען
ת אונ' אם יום טובֿ זול זיך אײנר ניט צו בֿול אימש שון ניט װאל שמעקט · אונ' אם שב ֿ
בֿױלן · אז אײן איזיל אודר אז אײן הונט · זונדר אלש ויל אז זײן לײבא בידארף אונ' האבן מוש
דאש אײנר אױך קאן תורה לערנן אונ' ניט צו בֿאל זײן דאש ער שלאף אז אײן בהמה · אױך
זול אײנר ניט צו ויל ואשטן ביש דש ער שװאך װערט · זא קאן ער אבר הקדוש ברוך הוא
ת זול אײנר אן ליגןניט דינן · דש זול אײנר אלש בידענקן אונ' בֿור זעהן · אונ' אל זײן הנאו ֿ
לשם שמים ׃ אישט אײנר צו ויל · זו קאן ער הקדוש ברוך הוא ניט דינן · דען ער איז צו
בֿאל אונ' צו שלעפֿריג · אישט אײנר דען צו װיניג זא קאן ער אױך הקדוש ברוך הוא ניט דינן
דען ער איז הונגריג אונ' צו שװאך · זונדר אײנר זול מיטיל מעשיג זײן מיט עשן · ניט צו
ויל גיריכֿט · זונדר צװײא אודר דרײא גיריכֿט דיא גיזונדא זײן · אונ' ניט צו טױיער · אונ'
זײן עשן שפײזא זול גירינגר זײן בײא טאג דען בײא נכֿט · אונ' אײנר זול זיך אזו גיװינן
אובא ער אנדרש קאן ניט מיר צו עשן אײן טאג דען צװײא מול · דאש ער גירינג איז צו אלן
גוטן זאכֿן · אונ' זול זיך גיװינן דאש ער זיך אױך צו צײטן לײדן קאן · אונ' ניט אלמול עבן גאנץ
זײן סדר האב אז ער אין גערן העט · אונ' זײן גימײנר טראנק זול װאשר זײן · אונ' זול ניט
ויל װײן טרינקן דען נױיערט צו רפֿואה · אודר װען אײנר זער ביטרױבט אודר אונמוטיג איז
אודר ביטראכֿט איז זא זול ער װײן טרינקן דארום דש ער זײנש אונגימך אודר לאײד זול ור
געשן · דוך זול ער זיך װאל הױטן דאש ער ניט צו ויל טרינק דש ער כלל ניט טרונקן װערדא
· זונדר דאש זײן לײבא בשטיט אין זײנר רעכֿטן קראפֿט · אונ' ער זול דש לעבן ניט דרום
ת װעגן ׃ אײן חכֿם שפראך ליבא האבן בֿון ויל גוטש עשן אונ' טרינקן װעגן אודר בֿון ויל הנאו ֿ
אײן מול איך לעב ניט דרום דאש איך עשן װיל · אבר איך עש דרום דש איך לעבן װיל ·
אױך װען אײנר אײן װײבא נימט זו זול ער זיא ניט אלײן נעמן זײן לושט מיט איר צו האבן
וד''ל נױיערט דרום דאש ער קינדר װיל מיט איר האבן דיא הקדוש ברוך הוא אױך דינן זולן
ת טון מיט אנדרן ורױען אונ' מיט בױזן גידאנקן · אונ' ער זול אונ' דש ער ניט דארף עבֿירו ֿ
דען יצר הרע ניט זײן װילן טון · אונ' װען זיך אײנר אין זױלכֿר מאשן אונ' אין זױלכֿר מאשן
ת קנעכֿט אונ' דינט הקדוש ברוך הוא אין אלן אונ' גישטלט בידענקט דער האײשט גֿוֿט י ֿ
זאכֿן · װען ער שון אישט אונ' טרינקט אונ' שלופֿט · זא טוט ערש לשם שמים · אונ' דער
דינט הקדוש ברוך הוא מיט עשן אונ' מיט טרינקן אונ' מיט אלן זכֿן · דען ער ליגט זײן
ת דרום אן דז ער הקדש ברו' הו' דינן קאן · אײן מענש זול אלי ליבשפֿט ור לושן · הנאו ֿ
אונ' זול זיך בהעפֿטן אן דיא ליבשאפֿט הקדוש ברוך הוא · אונ' צו דער װירדיגן מעלה קאן
ת אן זיך · אונ' בֿורכֿט הקדוש ברוך הוא ואר · דש איז נימנט קומן ער נעם דען אל מצו ֿ
דיא ליבשאפֿט דיא דער מענש צו הקדוש ברוך הוא הוט · דש טוט דיא נשמה דיא בהעפֿט
זיך אן אירן ואטר דען אוברשטן · דער זיא אין דען אונרײנן לײבא געבן הוט · אונ' הוט
זיא װאלן בֿור זוכֿן אוב זיא זיך הוט װעלן לושן ור בֿױרן בֿון װעגן לײבש לושט · אונ' זינט
דעם מול דש דער מענש אישט ביקלײדט מיט גילושט אונ' מיט בידורפֿניש דעש לײבש ·
278 appendix 4
זו הוט דיא נשמה דיא קראפֿט דש זיא אל מול אן הקדוש ברוך הוא גידענקן קאן · אונ' אל
מול אי דער מענש קומט צו זײנר װישהײט · זא הוט ער גיװאנט זײנם לושט נאך צו גין ·
אונ' זא אישט דער יצר הרע גישטערקט אױבר דיא װײזהײט .װען אבר אײן מענש זײן
װײזהײט שטערקט אױבר זײן לושט · זא װֵירט דיא נשמה דר לױיכֿט דש איז דיא װײזהײט
אונ' ביגערט דש זיא גערן רוא װאלט האבן בֿור דעם גילושט דעש לײבש · דאש זיא זיך
נױיערט קױנט ביהעפֿטן אן דיא קלארהײט דיא אוברשט · אז אײן קראנקר דער אײנש רוֿפא
ביגערט · אונ' װיר קױנן דיא זעלביג ליבשאפֿט ניט גלײכֿן צו אײנר ור גענקליכֿן זאך · װען
דיא ליבא קומט מיט ורײדן אונ' זיא וליכֿט זיך אין דש הערץ אונ' זיא איז זױשקײט דעש
ת זײן ניט גיאכֿט גיגן דער ליבשאפֿט ׃ אונ' װער הקדוש לײבש ׃ אונ' אלי ורײדא אונ' הנאו ֿ
ברוך הוא ליבא הוט דעם טוט קײן לאײד װיא ׃ אבֿרהם אבינו װאלט זײן זון יצחק שעכֿטן
בֿון ליבא װעגן דיא ער הוט צו הקדוש ברוך הוא ׃ עש איז ניט אידרמן װירדיג דאש ער
קאן ור שטין װאש דיא אהבֿה איז בֿון הקדוש ברוך הוא · מן קאן עש אױך אײנם איטליכֿן
ניט װאל צו ור שטין געבן ׃ אײן מאן אונ' זײן װײבא דיא זיך גאר ליב אן אננדר האבן דיא
לײדן אײנש בֿון דעש אנדרן װעגן מענכֿי זאך אונ' טוט אינן ניט װיא אונ' ורײען זיך מיט
אירר ליבשאפֿט · אונ' גיבט אינן ניכֿש צו שיקן · װיא װאל זיא װישן דש זיא זיך דוך צו לעצט
דורך דען טוט בֿון אננדר שאײדן מױשן · אונ' אײן ואטר אונ' מוטר מיט אירן ליבן קינדא
דש איז אלש ור גענקליך ורײדא אונ' ליבֿשאפֿט · אונ' איז אלש ניכֿש גיאכֿט גיגן דער ורײדא
אונ' ליבֿשאפֿט בֿון הקדוש ברוך הוא דעם זײן הערץ װירט אן גיצױנדא בֿון דער ליבשאפֿט
הקדוש ברוך הוא · אונ' אין זײנם שלאף אים טרױם גיט ער מיט אום אלש מיט זײן ליבשטן
ורײנדן ׃ נוך מער װען אײן מאן ורײדא אונ' לושט הוט צו זײנם ליבן װײבא דא ער אל מול אן
זיא גידענקט · אז שלמה המלך גיזאגט הוט קראנק בין איך בֿון װעגן דער ליבשאפֿט דיא
ת טראכֿטן דיא אין װײזן דש איך האב צו הקדוש ברוך הוא · דרום זול אײן מענש חכֿמו ֿ
ת · זא גיװינט ער אין ליבא · װען ער װאײש אײנר דר קענט דען הוך גילובטן װירדיגן גֿוֿט י ֿ
ת אונ' זײן שונהײט · אכֿפרקײט אונ' זױשקײט · װיא װאל אין נימנט דר ֿהײט י ֿ זײן גֿוט
בֿארשן קאן בֿון װעגן זײנר גרושן שונהײט ׃ גלײך אז דיא בױזן אױגן קױנן ניט אין דיא זון
זעהן · אלזו איז אױך אונזר חכֿמה צו קראנק אונ' צו טרױב דאש װיר דיא װירדיקײט דעש
שופפֿערש דער װעלט ניט קױנן אן זיכֿטיג װערדן · מיט אונזר װײזהײט · זונדר דאש װיר
ת דיא ער טוט · װען װיר אכֿטונג דרױף זעהן אל טאג אן זײנן װאנדר װערקן נסים אונ' נֿפלאו ֿ
געבן · אונ' אזו הוט דוד המלך גיזאגט · װען איך זיך דען הימיל װערק דײנר הענדא זון
אונ' מון אונ' שטערן דיא דו הושט בישאפֿן · זא װאונדרט מיך װער דא איז דער מענש
ת · זא גילושט אין מער װער דא גידענקט אים גרונט זײנש הערצן אן דיא װאונדר גֿוֿטש י ֿ
צו װישן דיא איר בֿון הק'בה' אונ' לובט אונ' בישױנט הק'בה' אונ' איא מער אײנר װײש
בֿון דער שונהײט הק'בה' אי ליבר ער אין הוט · אונ' װען װיר גידענקן אונזר ארמוט אונ'
אונזר אונזױברקײט גיגן זון אונ' מון אונ' שטערן דיא דא לױטר זײן אונ' דינן הק'ב'ה צו אלער
צײט איטליכֿש נאך זײנן זיטן · אונ' קײנש דש דא אױבר וארט דעש הוך גילובטן גֿוֿטש גיבוט
ת גיבוט ת · אונ' דער מענש דער אונראײן דער שװאך אונ' דער ביטרױבט זול װידר גֿוֿט י ֿ יֿ
טון · אונ' זײן גיבוט ניט האלטן דער דא ביראײט איז מיט שאנד אונ' מיט אונרײניקײט ·
אונ' מיט יאמר אונ' לאײדא גיבורן .אונ' מיט יאמר אונ' לאײדא מוש ער שטערבן אונ' אנדר
ויל לײדא דש דער ביטרױבט מענש מוש װארטן זײן אי ער צו זײנם גראב גיטראגן װערט ·
ת טוט לשם שמים דער קומט דר צו דש ער הק'בה' ליבא גיװינט אונ' װען ער אל זײן מצו ֿ
אונ' ער װירט דר ורײאט מיט דער ליבשאפֿט הק'בה' דאש איז דיא גרוש ורײדא אונ'
זענפֿטיקײט · עש אישט ניכֿש צו גלײכן צו דער זעלבן װירדיקײט ׃
ער װש שטארק אונ' גרוש מער װען זעכֿש אֵילן חוך ·
צו שטורמן אונ' צו ועכֿטן װש דעם ריזן גוך ·
ער טרוג אױף זײנם הױבט אײן גרושן קופפֿרן הוט ·
דאר צו טרוג ער אײן פאנציר בֿון שטאהיל גוט ׃
330אױף דען רינגן װארן גישלאגן בלעכֿן ·
דש דיא שארפפֿן פפֿײל ניט הר דורך קונטן שטעכֿן ·
דיא רינג װארן גיהערטט גאר זער ·
װאל בֿױנף הונדרט פפֿונט װאוג דש פאנצר שװער ׃
אײן קופפֿרן שילט זײן אכֿשיל דעק װאש ·
דען טרוג ער אױף דער אכֿשילן בֿור װאר זאג איך אױיך דש ·
װש טרוג ער אױף זײנר אכֿשילן אײן שטאנג דיא װש אל זאם ·
אונ' דיק אונ' לאנג אלז אײן זעגיל בױם ׃
בֿורנן אן דער שטאנגן אײן אײזן גרוש גינוג ·
זעכֿש הונדרט פפֿונד דש שפיש אײזן װאוג ·
ער טרוג אן זײנר זײטן אײן ויל גרושש שװערט ·
דש װש ניט צו שעצן אז ויל װש עש װערט ׃
additional readings281
װש ער געלט דארף מוטן דש זול ער בֿון מיר הון · אונ'
דש קױניגש טוכֿטר גיבט מן אים צו לון · אונ'
דער קלײנן צו דעם ואלק נון קאם · דוִד
ָ
ואלק גינג צו שטרײטן אונ' דא ער דש ור נאם ׃ דש
ָ 340
דוִד דער ויל יונגיא אל דינג בֿון אים װארף ·
ער טרוג אן זײנר זײטן אײן שװערט דש װש שארף ·
אין אײנר גוטן שײדן דש שװערט אים הינג ·
ער קאם צו זײנן ברױדרן אונ' וראגט װיא עש אין גינג ׃
דער שטרײט װש גישװינדן זיא שריאן אין דעם שטרײט ·
ת ̅ג̅ו̅ט געב אים אײן בױזיא צײט ·
דא קאם אבר גָלְי ֿ ̅
ער שפוטט אלזוא זער דש קױניגש אונ' זײן מן ·
דש ואלק ולוך בון דאן אױף דען בערג הין דאן ׃
282 appendix 4
ער הוט בײא זײנן צײטן גאר ויל שטרײט גיטון ·
דיר װערט דיא אורגיל אונ' דיא לױטן ניט געבן רעכֿטן דון ·
ער ציכֿט דיר דיא זײטן דאש עש דיר װערט לײט ·
דוִד קױניג זײט און בֿור צײט ׃
נײן שפראך ָ
איך האב בערן אונ' לֵיװאן און שװערט דר שלאגן ·
איך װיל דעם שטארקן ריזן זײן הופֿרט ניט בֿור טראגן ·
דא ענטװרט אים דער קױניג אונ' ליש בֿון זײנם שפוט ·
זוא גֵיא הין דעגן יונגן דאש דיר מוש העלפֿן̅ ̅ג̅ו̅ט ׃
ער שפראך דוא זולט מײן הארניש אלש טראגן אן ·
אױש צוך זיך דער קױניג אונ' קלײדט דען קלײנן מאן ·
אײן ויל גרושש װאונדר גישאך דעם קלײנן קנעכֿט ·
שאול גרושר הארניש װארד דעם קלײנן גירעכֿט ׃ ָ
דא דש זאך דער קױניג עש ביגונד אין צו בֿור דרישן ·
אונ' דש דער גרוש גישמײד דען קלײנן װאלט בישלישן ·
דוִד דער קלײנן גאר אײן װײזר מן · נון װש ָ
אין דונקט אין זײנן זינן דער קױניג זעך אין אן ׃
355נײן שפראך דער קלײנן קױניג איך װיל אױיך זאגן ·
איך הון בײא אל מײן טאגן קײן הארניש אן גיטראגן ·
איך װיל אזוא בֿור װאפֿנט ניט צו אים גון ·
מיט שלױידר װיל איך שטרײטן װיא איך בֿור האב גיטון ׃
אױש צוך זיך דער יונגן דיא רינגן שטעהלײן ·
אין זײן וואנדר קלײדר גױרט זיך דער יונג װידר אײן ·
זײן ויל גוטש שװערט נאם ער אן זײן זײטן ·
מיט אים נאם ער אײן שלײדר אונ' װאלט מיט שטײנן שטרײטן ׃
בֿױנף הערטר קיזיל שטײן נאם דער זעלביג קנאב ·
אין דיא אנדר האנט נאם ער זײן הירטן שטאב ·
תי דא אין דער ריז אן זך · ִש ִ
ער גינג גיגן דען גרושן פל ְ
װיל דער מיט מיר שטרײטן ער צו אים זעלבר יאך ׃
ער שפראך נון בישטו אײן קינד אונ' הושט נױיליך גיזוגן ·
װילשטו מיט מיר שטרײטן זוא בישטו װאל ביטרוגן ·
דוא מײנשט אין דײנם זין איך זײא אײן שלעכֿטר הונט ·
דוא קומשט מיט אײנם שטעקן אונ' װילשט מיך מאכֿן װאונט ׃
דגָן דײנש שטרײט מוש איך מיך שעמן · בײא מײנם̅ ̅ג̅ו̅ט ָ
װערשטו נוך אז יונג דענוך װיל איך דיר דײן לעבן נעמן ·
איך װיל דיר אב רײשן דײן יונגש לעבן ·
דעם ויך אױף דעם ועלד װיל איך דײן שעלים געבן ׃
284 appendix 4
פרק י''ב ויהי אחר הדברים האלה · אונ' עש װאר נאך דען רידן דען דאזיגן דא גינג דער קױניג
אלכֿסנדרוס צו דער אינסולן דער װײברן דיא דא גינענט װערדן אמזונס · אונ' ער זאנט צו
'אינן אײנן בריף אױף דיזי מײנונג · ור װאר איר האבן גיהורט דש איך האב אױבר זיגט אונ
אונטר טעניג גימאכֿט אלי דיא קױניגרײכֿן אונ' איך האב אין מײנם װילן דש איך װיל ליגן
אױף אױיך אײן צינז אונ' איך װיל אונטר טעניג מאכֿן אױיך צו מײנם דינשט דארום דש איר
זולדן ביטן אום װילן מײנש ורידנש צו דעם̅ ̅ג̅ו̅ט דעם אוברשטן אונ' אוב איר ניט װעלן טון
דש דאזיג זא װיל איך גין אױבר אױיך צו שטרײטן אונ' איך װיל ור װאושטן אױיך אונ' אל
אױיעװר לאנד ׃ דא ענטװארטן אים דיא װײבר װידר אום אין אײנם בריף צו זאגן · ור װאר
הושט דו װאל גיהורט װען דו עש שון זעלבר ניט װײסט דש װיר אױך זײן גילערנט צו קריגן
אונ' דש װיר אױך האבן גיװאונט צו שטרײטן אונ' דש װיר זיצן אין צװאושן דער בך אמזוניקון
אונ' מיטן אין דער בך דא איז אײן אינסולן דיא איז גאר מעכֿטיג אונ' גרוש דש װער דיא
אינסולן גרינגס אום גין װיל דער מוז אײן גאנץ ײאר דאר צו האבן אונ' דיא בך דיא ולױסט
גרינגס אום דיא אינסולן אונ' עש איז קײן װעג דש מן צו אונש קומן מאג דען נױיארט אױף
אײנם גאר שמאלן אונ' עינגן שטײג · צו דעם זא הוט דיא זעלביגי בך קײן אן בֿאנג דש מן
זיא מוכֿט אב גראבן אודר אן אײן אנדר אורט גילײטן אודר בֿױרן דא מיט זיא ניט אום
אונזרי אינסולן אום רינגלטי ׃ אונ' דיא יונק ורױאן דיא װיר אונדר אונש האבן דיא זיצן אל צו
additional readings287
מאל בײא איננדר מיטן אין דער אינסולן · אונ' דיא װײבר דיא דא בישלאפֿן זײן װארדן בֿון
דען מאנן דיא זיצן אן דעם פורטן דער אינסולן אן דעם זעלביגן אורט דא דער װעג אונ'
דער שטײג איז דש מן אין דיא אינסולן קומן מאג אונ' זיא האבן ניט בײא אינן קײני מאנן
דען דיא מאנן דיא זיצן אױף ײענר זײטן דער באך בײא דעם ויך אונ' בײא דען שאפֿן אונ'
בײא דען רינדרן אונ' זיא װײדן אל דא דש זעלביג ויך · אונ' זיא קומן נױמר מיא צו אונש
עש זײא דען זא פֿיל װיר אירר ביגערן מיט דער צאל אונ' דש זעלביג גישיכֿט דורך דען
ביפֿעלך אונזרר קױניגין ׃ אונ' אלש באלד אונ' דיא װײבר בֿון אינן זײן טראגן װאורדן דא ור
טרײבן װיר זיא װידר אונ' דש זיא װידר אום מױזן גין צו ײענר זײטן דיש בך צו דעם ויך
אונ' דש זיא דא זעלביגשט איר װאונונג האבן · אונ' װען דען דיא טראגנדיגי װײבר אירי
קינדר גיבורן האבן דא זױיגנד זיא אירי קינדר צװײא גאנצי ײאר אונ' אלש דען אנט װינן זיא
אירי קינדר אונ' זיא דר ציהן זיא ביז דש זיא זיבן ײאר אלט װערדן · אונ' דאר נאך זא שיקן
זיא אלי דיא קנאבן צו אירן בֿעטרן צו ײענר זײטן דיש בך דש זיא אױך מױזן דיש ויך װארטן·
אונ' דיא מײטלײן דיא ביהאלטן װיר בֿײא אונש אין דער אינסולן אונ' װיר לערנן זיא דש זיא
אױף דען פפֿערדן רײטן מיט שװערטר אונ' מיט שפיסן צו שטרײטן ׃ אונ' װיא הושט דו דיר
נון דורפֿן אין דײן הערץ נעמן אודר װיא זולט אײן אנדרר קױניג אין זײן הערץ נעמן דש ער
זולט קומן צו אונש אױבר אונזרן װילן אונ' מיט גיװאלט מיט אונש צו שטרײטן צו דעם זא הושט
דו אונש אנטבוט אין דײנם בריף דש דו װילט ור װאושטן אונ' ור דערבן אונזר לאנד ׃ נוך
מיא זא לאסן װיר דיך װאוסן דש װיר אלי ײאר ײערליך שעכֿטן פפֿערד צו דעם דינשט דיש
אב ̅ג̅ו̅טש זיאוס אונ' צו דעם דינשט דיש אב ̅ג̅ו̅טש פורנוס אונ' דש זעלביג טואנד װיר
דרײסיג טאג לאנג אלי ײאר אונ' דיא זעלביגן אב ̅ג̅ו̅טר דיא העלפֿן אונש בֿון אלעם לײדיגר
אונ' בֿון אלעם בֿײנד ׃ צו דעם װען אײן קױניג אײן לײדיגר אודר אײן בֿײנד צו אונש קומט
דש ער מיט אונש שטרײטן װיל זא רײטן װיר אים אנטגיגן אױף דען פפֿערדן אונזר צװינציג
אונ' הונדרט טױזנט שטארקר װײבר דיא דא אלי זײן גילערנט צו דעם שטרײטן אונ' װיר
ריכֿטן אן מיט אים אײנן שטרײט אונ' דיא אױבריגן װײבר דיא בלײבן דא הײמן אונ' זיא
ור הױטן דען װעג אונ' דען שטײג דא דורך מן הינײן קומט אין דיא אינסולן · אונ' אונזרי מאנן
דיא ציהן הינדר אונש צו בֿוס אונ' זיא ברינגן אונש אלער לײא שפײז אונ' גיטראנק דש װיר
אן שפײז קײן גיברעכֿן ניט האבן אלי דיא צײט דש װיר זײן אױף ײענר זײטן דער בך · אונ'
װען װיר דען אונזרי בֿײנד אױבר זיגן װיא דען אונזרי זיטן אונ' אונזרי גיװאונהײט איז גיװעזן
ביז אן דען טאג דען דאזיגן דש װיר אױבר זיגט האבן אלי דיא קױניג דיא נוך ביז אל הער
אױבר אונש גיצוגן זײן אלז דען זא אױבר קומן װיר אײן גרוש לוב אונ' אײנן גרושן נאמן בײא
אלען דען קױניגן אונ' בֿולקרן דיא אונזר גישרײא הירן · װען װיר אבר אױבר זיגט װאורדן
בֿון אונזרן וײנדן װעלכֿש נוך ביז אל הער ניא גישעהן איז זא װאורדן אונזרי בֿײנד װיניג לוב
אונ' קלײנן נאמן דר בֿון האבן דען װיר זײן ניכֿטש אנדרש דען װײבר אונ' זיא אבר זײן מאנן
דער שטרײטונג בֿון יוגנט אױף · אונ' װש ור לוב אודר נאמן מאג עש אײנם שטארקן הילדן
ברינגן װען ער זיך בירױמט אונ' זײט איך האב אײן װײב גישלאגן אונ' האב זיא אױבר זיגט
׃ אונ' איצונדר זא האבן װיר דיך לאסן װאוסן אלי אונזרי האנדלונג אונ' דארום זא דו ביגערשט
אונזרן ורידן זא װעלן װיר גערן מיט דיר אים ורידן זײן אונ' װען דו אבר ניט װילט אונזרן
ורידן זא זולט דו װאוסן דש דו אונש װירשט גיבֿינדן אין דען בערגן בירײטט צו דעם שטרײט
אונ' װיר װעלן מיט דיר שטרײטן ביס דש דו װירשט דיש שטרײטן זט װערדן ׃ ובכל זאת ·
אונ' בײא דעם דאזיגן אלעם זא זײן װיר אלי מיט איננדר צו ראט װארדן אונ' װיר זײן גוט
װיליג דש װיר װעלן דינען דײנר הערליכֿקײט מיט אײנם ײערליכֿן צינז נוך דײנם װאל
גיבֿאלן · אונ' דארום זא שרײב אונש װידר אום אײן ענטװארט װאש דו בישט צו ראט װאורדן
אונ' אוב דו אלזו דען ורידן װילט אן נעמן ׃ אונ' אלז דער אלכֿסנדרוס דען בריף גילעזן הט דא
לאכֿט ער זיר זיר אונ' ער גיבוט דש מן זולט שרײבן אײנן אנדרן בריף אונ' דש מן אינן דען
זעלביגן בריף זענדן זולט אױף דיזי מײנונג ׃
288 appendix 4
איר האבט אין אױיעװרם בריף גאר צו ויל װארט אונ' אױבריג גישװעץ גיטריבן אונ' איצונדר
זא איר װעלנד דש איך קום אונ' אױיעװר לאנד ור װאושטי אונ' ור דערבי זא שטעלנד אױיך
אין דיא בערג בירײטט צו שטרײטן · זא איר אבר בֿון מיר ביגערנד גינאד אונ' בארם
הערציקײט זא קאמנד צו מיר הינױבר אױבר דיא בך זא װיל איך אױיך גאר קײן לײדש טון
אונ' ברינגט צו מיר מיט אױיך עיטליכֿי װײבר דיא דא רײטן אױף דען פפֿרדן אונ' דיא דא
גילערנט האבן צו שטרײטן זא װיל איך אײנר איטליכֿן אין זונדרהײט געבן בילונונג זילבר אונ'
גולד נוך אירם װאל גיבֿאלן ׃
דא זאנטן זיא װידר אום נוך אײנן בריף צו דעם קױניג אלכֿסנדרוס אױף דיזי מײנונג · אך
גינעדיגר קױניג װיר ביטן דיך אונ' היר צו אונש אין דיזר זאכֿן אונ' בֿאר דו הינױבר אױבר
דיא בך אונ' קום צו אונש אונ' ביזיך אונזר קױניגרײך אונ' אונזר לאנד זא װעלן װיר דיר געבן
הונדרט צינטנר גולד · צו דעם זא װעלן װיר דיר געבן בֿױנף הונדרט אידלר שױנן יונק ורױאן
דיר צו קיבס װײברן אונ' זא דו זיא װילט געבן צו דײנן קנעכֿטן צו װײברן זא װעלן װיר דיר
געבן אנדרי אן איר שטאט · צו דעם זא װעלן װיר דיר געבן צװינציג אונ' הונדרט שטארקר
גרושר פפֿערדן גלײך אז דא איז גיװעזן דײן שטארק פפֿערד בוציפֿאל װעלכֿש דו ור לורן
הושט דען װיר האבן גיהורט זײן הירונג ׃
וילך אלכסנדרוס · אונ' ער גינג אלכֿסנדרוס אונ' ער אױבר בֿור דיא בך דיא זעלביגי אונ' ער
קאם אין דיא אינסולן דיא זעלביגי אונ' ער זאך דיא װײבר אמזונס אונ' נון זיא װארן אױבר
ת אונ'
אױש זיר שױן גישטאלטט אונ' אירי קלײדר דיא װארן גלײך אז דיא קלײדר דער יוניו ֿ
ער נאם בֿון אינן צינז אונ' זיא גאבן צו אים אלעש דש װאש זיא אים ור הײסן הטן אונ'
בֿון דאנן איז ער גיגאנגן צו דער בך אנטלנטא אונ' ער גיבֿאנד אױף ײענר זײטן דער זעלביגן
בך מענשן אונ' װילדי טיר גאר װאונדר בארליכֿי אונ' אל דא הוט ער גיבֿונדן דיא מענשן
דיא מן נענט אין שפראך דער יונים קינוקופוליס אונ' אירי הױבטר דיא זײן גלײך װיא הױבטר
דער הונדן · אונ' אין טױיטש נענט מן זיא הונדש קופפֿף ׃ אונ' אל דא הוט ער גיבֿונדן
אנדרי מענשן דיא הטן גאר קײני הױבטר ניט אונ' איר מונד מיט אירן אױגן דש שטונד
אינן אן אירר ברושט ׃ ומשם נסע · אונ' בֿון דאנן איז ער גיצוגן אין אײן אנדר לאנד אונ' דש
זעלביג לאנד דש ליגט אין דעם מיר זיבן מײל װײט · אונ' אלש ער דארײן גיקומן איז דא
הוט ער גיבֿונדן אל דא דיא שטאט אליאוס דש איז דיא שטאט דער זונן אונ' דיא לענגי
דער מױארן בֿון דער זעלביגן שטאט גרינגס אום דיא איז צװינציג אונ' הונדרט (מיל) אונ'
אירי טױרן דיא זײן גיצײרט מיט לױטרם גולד אונ' בֿון אידלן גישטײנן דיא מן נענט אין שפראך
דער יונים אסמירלדא אונ' אין דער זעלביגן שטאט דא זיצן גאר קלוגי ור נױפֿטיגי לױיט אונ'
דארינן איז אײן גרושר טעמפיל אונ' דער (כהן) דיש זעלביגן טעמפיל דער איז אײן שװארצר
מור אונ' אין דעם זעלביגן טעמפיל דא אופפֿרט מן אונ' דינעט דער זונן · אונ' אלזו דינעט
אלדא אלכֿסנדרוס אירן דינשט אונ' ער שעכֿטט שעכֿטונג צו דער זונן ׃ אונ' ער גינג בֿון
דאנן דרײא טאג רײז װײט דא גיבֿאנד ער וינשטרנוס אונ' קײן ליכֿט · אונ' בֿון דאנן איז ער
גאנגן אין דש לאנד כרש אונ' קריקסם דער קױניגן פרס אונ' ער הוט גינומן בֿון אינן פֿיל
הױיזר אונ' שטיט בֿול בֿון זילבר אונ' בֿון גולד אונ' פֿיל קושטליכֿי תכֿשיטים ׃
1 According to the Julian calendar then in use, 3 February 1579 was indeed a Tuesday.
290 appendix 4
שױרץ אױף דײן ארים אונ' בינד מיר אלי ויר גר רעכט ·
דש איך ניט װער צאפילן לעכט ·
װען איך װער זעהן דש מעשר דא איך זול װערדן מיט גישעכט ·
אונ' צו אײנם קרבן זול װערדן גינעכט ׃
װען דו מיך צו אֵיש גיברענט װערשט הון · אונ'
היבן גר שון · אֵיש זולשטו אױף ֵ מײן
צו מײנר מוטר זולשטו זיא טראגן טון · אונ'
איר צו אײנר גידעכניש לון ׃ אונ'
יצחק אױבר גושן װר מיט הײשן טרעהן ·
ליבר ואטר װש װילשטו צו מײנר מוטר יעהן ·
װען זיא מיך מיט דיר ניט װערט קומן זעהן ·
ליבר זון איך װײש װאל װש אונז בײדן װערט גישעהן ׃
45איך אונ' שרה דיא ליב מוטר דײן ·
װערדן נוך דײנם טוט ניט לנג אױף ערדן זײן ·
דען װער װעלט טרױשטן דיא אֵילענד מײן ·
אונ' דײנר מוטר שװערניש אונ' פײן ׃
יצחק װידר צו אברהם זײט ·
דער אױיך הוט גיטרױשט אלי בײד ·
אֵי איך װארד גיבורן אונ' אױף ערדן בירײט ·
דער זול אױיך טרױשטן אױיער בײדר שװערניש אונ' לײד ׃
אונ' דא דיא רֵיד װארן ור גאנגן צו האנט ·
דש מזבח װר אױף גִריכט דש בױיאר בראנט ·
אלי ויר ער אים צו אננדר באנד ·
אונ' שױרצט זיך אױף אונ' נאם דש שעכט מעשר אין זײן האנט ׃
ואטר אונ' זון האטן אײן גלײכן מוט ·
צו שעכטן אונ' צו ור גישן בלוט ·
זיא אײניגטן זײן נאמן אונ' הילטן זײן גיבוט אין הוט ·
דש גיפיל װאל הקב''ה אונ' דוכט אין זײן גר גוט ׃
איר בײדר װײנן װש גר גרוש ·
ויל טרעהרן אברהם אױבר יצחק גוש ·
דש עש װיא אײן װשר אױבר אין ולוש ·
זיא אײניגטן זײן נאמן און צאל אונ' און מוש ׃
50אברהם שפרך צו יצחק זײנם זון ·
װיא קױנט אונז ה''קב''ה גרױשר ורײד אן טון ·
ֹוחל גיװעזן אױף דײן דַם שון ··
זינט דו מיר הושט מ ֵ
אונ' שיקט אונז אײן לעמלן צו אײנם קרבן נון ׃
additional readings295
װאל בענשן אברהם אונ' יצחק דיא מאנן בידר · מיר מױגן
זײא דש מעשר גיבענשט זײא דש װידר · גיבענשט
זײא ער בור גיבענשט זײא ער זידר · גיבענשט
זײא ער אין אל גיזנג אונ' אין אלן גלידר ׃ גיבענשט
70גיבענשט זײא דער בערג אונ' דער דורן ·
גיבענשט דש אַיִל דש זיך הוט ור װארן ·
גיבענשט זײא זײן הױט זײן ולײש אונ' זײן הורן ·
װען מיר עש בלוזאן זא טוט הקב''ה אב זײן צורן ׃
שטָן באלד ור בערגן · מיר עש בלוזן זא מוז זיך דער ָ װען
מוז באלד הין װעק וליהן מיט אל זײן שערגן · אונ'
דארף זיך ניט לושן זעהן דען זעלבן מורגן · אונ'
בור שאנדן מוז ער זיך קריכן אונטר דיא בערגן ׃ אונ'
װארום דער שטן װר זיך בירױמן גיגן גוט דעם הערן ·
װיא ער װאל װעלט דיא עקידה ור שטױרן ·
װיא ער װישט גיװיש אברהם טעט עש ניט גערן ·
דש װעלט ער מיט דער װארהײט ביװערן ׃
נון האט איר גיהױרט װיא ער ור זױכט אל זײני ור נױפטן ·
ער קערט זיך צו שרה דיא זאש ביטױפטן .
ער װיז איר דיא עקידה אובן אין לױפטן .
אזו גינג איר דיא נשמה אױז מיט װײנן אונ' זױפצן ׃
אך שטיט אין אונזרן ְס ָפרִים ·
ש ָברִים .
תרוּעָה ְ תקִיעָה ְ װען מיר מאכן ְ
ש ָערִים ·
ַחמֵי ְ
זא טױנן זיך אױף ויל ר ְ
אונ' צו רײשן אלי בױזי גְזֵירות אונ' בױזי נְָדרִים
75אונ' נוך מֵין שטעט אין אונזרר תורָה ·
הרַע ·
דש ײען טג הוט אױבר אונז קײן מאכט דער יֵצֶר ָ
דש גוטש האבן מיר אלז בון אברהם יצחק אונ' שרה ·
נױיארט דש מיר װערן ורום אונ' ִב ְס ָברָא ׃
שידיג ·נימנט װידר אונז װערט קױנן זײן ֵ אונ'
הקב''ה װערט אונז אל צײט זײן גינעדיג · אונ'
בון דעם גָלות זולן מיר װערדן באלד לֵידיג · אונ'
זול אונז משיח זענדן אפילו ביז גין קרימונה אונ' וינידיג ׃ אונ'
דענוך זול מיך נימנט האלטן דש װארט צו רֵידַה ·
תדַע · איך האלט אין לײט ניט ויל דראן לְַמעַן ֵ
איך שװער אױיך אז אײן יֻוד אפֵידה ·
זיא זײן אזו ורום זיא בידורפטן װאל װידר אל טג אײן ְעקֵידַה ׃
298 appendix 4
· נון זײא װיא אים זײא איך קאן עש דוך ניט װענדן
· ‾י‾ ער זול עש אײלן אונ' זול עש ענדן איך װיל ביטן ‾‾ה‾ש
· אונ' זול אונז באלד דען גואֵל זענדן
זא מיט װיל איך באלד אױז לושן אונ' בולענדן ׃
· ביטן מיר הקב''ה דש ער ניט אן זיכט אונזר זױנד 'אונ
· לושט אונז ניט מין יאגן אז דיא הױנד 'אונ
· זול זיך דר בארמן · אױבר אונזרי ארמי גיזינד 'אונ
ח צו דר לױזן ישראל זײן אֵירשטי קינד ׃ַ ָשי
ִ זול שיקן מ 'אונ
· אין דעם גלות גידענק אונז זכות אברהם אונ' יצהק אונ' יעקב אין אלי צײט ' אונ80
· װילן דער ליבשאפט דיא ער דיר הוט דר צײגט אום
· לוש אונז אײן מול גילעבן דיא גרוש ורײט 'אונ
שיק אונז משיח דא מיר לאנג אױף האבן גיבײט ׃ 'אונ
Baking Matzah
דיא מצות באכן
דיא רעכֿט ִמצְ וָ ה איז דז מן ערשט די ַמצוֹת זול באכֿן נוך דעם דאז ָח ֵמץ אױז דעם
הבּיִ ת זול זײני ִמצְ וֹת זעלברט העלפֿן באכֿן · אונ' װען מן
ַ הױז איז · אײן איטליכֿר ַבעַ ל
אן היבט צו קנעטן · זא זול ער זגין דאז איז דער ִמצְ וָ ה טאײג ׃
· דער אנדר נכֿט · אונ' אײניר בֿון אײן טײל מכֿן צװין טאײג · אײניר בֿון דער ערשטן נכֿט
· אונ' איז װאל בעשר גיטון · אז מן אײן טאײג מכֿט אונ' זעקש ִמצְ וֹת דרױש שנײדן ׃
additional readings299
מיט װאשר · אײנש בֿור דיא װען מן ִמצוָ ה װאשר ציכֿט זא ציכֿט מן אך צװײא כֵּ לִ ים
ערשט נכֿט · אונ' אײנש בֿור די אנדר נכֿט ׃
װען מן דאז װשיר אדר מעל אויבר די גאס טרגט זא זול מן עש צו דעקן · אונ' אי מן אן
היבט צו קנעטן זא זול דער ַבּעַ ל ַה ַבּיִ ת זגן אלי ברויקליך דיא בֿום טאײג ואלין דיא זולן
ֶה ְפ ֵקר זײן · אין דער װארטן װען זיא אױף דער ערדן ָח ֵמץ װערן זא װערן זיא ניט מין
אין זײנם ְרשׁוּת ׃
אין װעלש לנד איז אײן הויפשר ֶס ֶדר דאז מן די ִמצְ וָ ה טאײג קלײן מכֿט זא װערן זיא א[ל]
ש דר וויניגר װיניגר ָח ֵמץ ׃ מן זול קנעטן אן אײנים קוילין אורט אונ' דאז יא קאײן זון שײן
· אך װײט בֿום אובֿן ·
ֹלהינוּ ֶמלֶ ְך ָהעוֹלָ ם
אַתּה יְ יָ ' ֱא ֵ
מן נעמט ַחלָ ה פֿום טאײג אונ' מכֿט ְב ָרכָ ה דרויבר ׃ ָבּרוְֹך ָ
וֹתיו וְ צוָ נוֹ לְ ַה ְפ ִרישׁ ַחלָ ה ׃ מן זול אײן קוכֿן דרױש מכֿן אונ' זול זיא װארפֿן קד ָשׁנוּ ְבּ ִמצְ ָ
ֲא ֶשׁר ְ
אין די גלויאנדיגן קולן · אודר אין אובן אי דיא מצְ וֹת דרײן קומן · דאז זיא בֿור ברענט אי מן
רוּמה ·
מוֹעד מכֿט מן אך די ְב ָרכָ ה · אונ' ניט לְ ַה ְפרישׁ ְתּ ָ ַה ָנָאה דר בֿון הוט ' אונ' אים חוֹל ַה ֵ
תּרוּמה ' דען מן דארף זיא ניט ַחלָ ה הײשן · מן ָ נויארט אם יוֹם טוֹב מכֿט מן לְ ַה ְפריש
מוזט זיא זוינשט בֿור ברענן · אונ' מן דארף ניט ָק ָד ִשים אם יוֹם טוֹב בֿור ברענן ׃ מן
זול קײן ַמצָ ה נוך ִמצְ וָ ה לושן שטיל ליגן אײן אױגן בליק מוישיג · אונ' װען אײן ִמצָ ה װער
גילעגן מוישיג דאז מן ניט דראן אום גינג אזא ויל אז אײן ְשׁלִ ישׁ בֿון אײניר ָשׁעָ ה זא װערד
זיא רעכֿט ָח ֵמץ אונ' מן מושט זיא בֿור ברענן · אונ' װען מן דען טאײג העט לושן אײן
װיניג שטיל ליגן · אונ' װער דער נוך װידר מיט דעם טאײג אום גנגן · אונ' װידר לושן
שטיל ליגן · װען עש אלז צו אננדר װער דאז דער טײג װער שטיל גילעגן · אז אײן ְשׁלִ ישׁ
בֿון אײניר ָשׁ ָעה · זא איז ער גלײך אז װאל ָח ֵמץ אז װער ער אננדר שטיל גילעגן · און
דז מן דער צװישן גיערביט העט דאראן ׃ װען ַמצוֹת גימכֿט װערן אונ' קוינטן ניט אזא
בלד אין אובֿן קומן · דא זול מן זיא װידר צו ברעכֿן אונ' בערן דז זיא ניט ָח ֵמץ װערדן ·
אײן טײל ליגן װעלגיר הולץ אױף די ַמצָ ה אודר לושן אײן קינד די הענד דרױבר שטרײכֿן
אונ' זגן אזא ליגט זיא ניט מוישיג · אביר עש איז ויל ערגיר אז װען זיא גנץ מוישיג לעג
דען דאז קינד מכֿט זיא ערשט װארם אונ' גיט דער בעלדר אױף · מן זול דיא ברעך װאל
שאבן · אונ' די װעלגר הוילצר · זונשט װערט דער טאײג ָח ֵמץ אין דער ברעכֿן אונ' בֿור
מוישט זיך מיט דעם אנדרן ַמצה טאײג · אונ' זול ניט לושן קינדר דיא ברעך שאבן · מן
זול אך די שטופיל אײזן גלויאן · אונ' װרטן ביז זיא קאלט װערן · מן פפֿלעגט אײן ָס ֵפק צו מכֿן
דען אוב אײן ִמצְ וָ ה גיברוכֿן װאוירד אודר אים אובֿן כָ לְ יַ יה װער · זא נעמט מן דען ָס ֵפק
דער בֿױר ׃
מוֹחל זײן װען דיא װען ויל ַבּ ְעלֵ י ַב ִתּים מצְ וֹת מיט אננדר מכֿטן · זא זאל אײניר דעם אנדרן ֵ
מצְ וֹת בֿור װעקסלט מױכטן װערן · װאו עש ניט גישעך · זא װער עש שיר אײן ִמצְ וָ ה דאז
אײן עְ ֵב ָירה מעכֿט דער דורך קומן · דען ער נעם זײנש ֶחבר ַמצָ ה · װער אײן גִיגַזַלְ ְתּ ַמצָ ה ·
מן זול דען טײג ניט צו װאײך מכֿן · אונ' װען ער צו װאײך װער זא זול מן אײן אנדרן הערטן
טאײג מכֿן · אונ' זול די צװין טאײג דורך אננדר מוישן אונ' קנעטן גר װאל ׃ מן זול זעהן
דז ניט טרוקן מעל קומט אױף דיא ַמצָ ה דען מן קוכֿט זיא אונ' די מעל דרױף װערט ָח ֵמץ ׃
די ורומן לײט היצן דען אובֿן מיט דען לולָ ב בֿון ֻסכוֹת · דא װײל אײן ִמצְ וָ ה בֿור איז מיט
גישעהן ׃ װען די ַמצְ וֹת גיבאכֿן זײן זא זול מן זיא ניט לעגן אױף די מאױאר בֿום אובֿן ·
דען זיא ציכֿט דש ָח ֵמץ אן זיך · װיא ויל מול איז דא זעלבן ָח ֵמץ גילעגן · מן זול זיא אין
אײם יוֹם טוֹב קורב טון · אודר אױף הױלצר ליגן ׃ מן ליגט דיא קינדר שלופֿן אם ֶע ֶרב ֶפ ַסח
דאז זיא צום ֶס ֶדר װאכֿן קױנן ׃
300 appendix 4
) “Pumay, You Dear Companions” (c.1600פומײא איר ליבן גיזעלין 7.
The putatively carefree life of the yeshivah student is apparently celebrated in this
song, as the reference to Purim would also seem to suggest, although the holiday’s
mention might well point to parody and thus not in fact praise of the behaviors
depicted. The song’s seven-line stanzas have the rhyme structure ABABCCX, the
last line a refrain (except in the final stanza).
Oxford, Bodleian, MS Opp. add. 4°. 136, pp. 12–14; Evi Butzer, Die Anfänge׃Source
der jiddischen purim shpiln in ihrem literarischen und kulturgeschichtlichen Kon-
Buske, 2003), 213–16; EYT 86.׃text (Hamburg
1פומײא איר ליבן גיזעלין ׃
ג̃א ט געב אײך אײן גוט פורים
איך קום ארײן מיט מײנין שעלין ׃
װעגן דש קױנגש בחורים ׃
דרום רישט אײך צו ׃
טרגט מיר צו אוקשן פלײש ׃ ביהלט דיא קוא ׃
יוהאשי הביטײעי ׃
Prague and probably died there in the mid-sixteenth century. She composed not
The Nurse-מנקֿת רבֿקּה( only this poem but also an ethical guide for Jewish women
maid of Rebecca, 1609; EYT 93) which became very popular. Multiple early editions
)!of the text exist (three published in 1650 in Prague
Oxford, Bodleian Opp. 8° 460 (2c) [olim 405], unfoli-׃ Prague, 1650, extant׃Source
ספרות ated [fos. 7r–8v]; Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 8° 650; Chone Shmeruk,
Magnes, 1981, pp. 56–70); EYT 104.׃ (Jerusalemײדיש בפולין
חמשה חומשי תורה 9. Jekuthiel b. Isaac Blitz, Yiddish translation of
) (1676–9נביאים וכתובים בלשון אשכנז
Two complete Yiddish translations of the Hebrew Bible were published in Amster-
dam in the years 1676–9, the first by Jekuthiel ben Isaac Blitz at the printing shop of
Uri Phoebus ben Aaron ha-Levi (1676–9), and the second by Joseph ben Alexander
Witzenhausen at the shop of Joseph Athias (1679). They both favor providing the
), andדרש( ) of the source text, without exegetical interpretationפשט( literal sense
likewise they both lean toward an idiomatic rendering of the original, rather than
the traditional word-for-word translation, although still both retaining many sty-
tradition of biblical translation. Neither ofחומש־טײטש listic features of the earlier
from its position as theצאינה וראינה these translations was, however, able to oust the
most important Yiddish biblical translation of all time, and indeed exercised almost
no further influence. The text is edited here from the first edition of Blitz’s text
(1676–9).
, Amsterdam [Uri Phoebus], 1679,חמשה חומשי תורה נביאים וכתובים בלשון אשכנז ׃Source
Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. fol. 108; EYT 113.׃fol. 1r; extant
ספר בראשית
דאש ערשטי קאפיטל
אשׁית אם אן פֿאנג · בישוף גאט הימל אונ' ערד ׃ ב אונ' דיא ערד װאר װישט אונ'ְבּ ֵר ִ
לער · אונ' װאר פֿינשטר אױף דעם אפ גרונד · אונ' דער װינד פֿון גאט שװעביט אױף
דעם װאשר ׃ ג אונ' גאט שפראך עש זאל ליכֿט זײן אונ' עש װאר ליכֿט ׃ ד אונ' גאט זאך
דאש ליכֿט דש עש גוט װאר · אונ' גאט שײדט אב צװישן דעם ליכֿט אונ' צװישן דער
פֿינשטרניס ׃ ה אונ' ער הײשט גאט דאש ליכֿט טאג · אונ' צו דער פֿינשטרניס הײשט ער
נאכֿט · זוא װאר אױש אובינט אונ' מארגין אײן טאג ׃ ו אונ' גאט שפראך · עז זאל אײן
שפרײטלונג זײן מיטן אין דיא װשר · אונ' דאש זול אב שײדן צװישן דעם אײני װאשר ·
אונ' דאש אנדר װאשר ׃ ז דא מאכֿט גאט דען שפרײטילונג · אונ' שײדט צװישן דען װאשר
דיא אונטר דעם שפרײטלונג װארן · אונ' צװישן דען װאשר דיא אובין איבר דעם שפרײטלונג
װארן · אונ' עש װאר אלזו ׃ ח אונ' גאט הײשט דען שפרײטלונג הימל · זוא װאר אױז אובינט
אונ' מארגין דער אנדר טאג ׃ ט אונ' גאט שפראך עש זאלן זיך דיא װאשר פֿר זאמלן פֿון
אונטר דעם הימל · אױף אײן זונדרליך אורט · דש זול װערדין גיזעהן דיא טרוקניס · אונ'
עש װאר אלזו ׃ י אונ' גאט הײשט דיא טרוקניס ערד · אונ' צו דער פֿר זאמלונג דר װאשר
הײשט ער · מער · אונ' גאט זאך דאש עש גוט װאר ׃ יא אונ' גאט שפראך עש זאל
װאקסן אױז דער ערד גראז אונ' קרױט · אלז זאמהאפֿטיג װידר פֿון צו זיאן · אונ'
פֿרוכֿטבארי בױאמן דיא פֿרוכֿטין טראגן צו זײנר ארט · אונ' זײן אײגן זאמן װידר אין אים
איז צו זיאן אױף דער ערד · אונ' עש גישאך אלזו ׃ יב אונ' דיא ערד ליז אױף װאקסן גראז
אונ' קרױט · דש זאמן אין זיך טראגט · איטלכֿש נוך זײנר ארט · אונ' בױמן דיא פֿרוכֿט טרוגין
· אלז דש אירר אײגן זאמן צו איר ארט בײא זיך זעלברט האטן · אונ' גאט זאך דז עז
גוט װאר ׃ יג דא װאר אױש אובינט אונ' מארגן דען דריטן טאג ׃ יד אונ' גאט שפראך ·
עש זאלן זײן ליכֿטר אן דעם שפרײטלונג דש הימלש · צו שײדן טאג אונ' נאכֿט · אונ'
זאלין זײן צו צײכֿן · אונ' צו צײטן · צו טעג · אונ' צו יארן ׃ טו אונ' זולין זײן ליכֿטר אן דעם
שפרײטלונג דעש הימלש דאש זיא שײנן זולין אױף דיא ערד · אונ' עש גישאך אלזו ׃ טז
אונ' גאט מאכֿט צװײא גרושן ליכֿטר · אײן גרוש ליכֿט דאש דען טג רעגירט · אונ' אײן
קלײן ליכֿט דאש דיא נאכֿט רעגירט · דא צו אך שטערן ׃ יז אונ' גאט זעציט זיא אן דען
שפרײטלונג דעש הימלש דאש זיא שײנן אױף דיא ער ד ׃ יח אונ' דען טאג אונ' נכֿט
additional readings305
רעגירט · אונ' שײדן ליכֿט אונ' פֿינשטרניס · אונ' גאט זאך דש עש גוט װאר ׃ יט דא
װאר אױז אובינט אונ' מארגין דען פֿירדן טאג ׃ כ אונ' גאט שפראך זיא זאלן װידמנן דיא
װאשר מיט װידמיגי אונ' לעבנדיגי טירן · אונ' גיפֿעגל זאל פֿליגן אױף ערדן אונטר דעם
שפרײטלונג דעש הימלש ׃ כא אונ' גאט בישאפֿט דיא גרושי פֿיש אונ' אליר לײא טיר דאש
דא לעבט · אונ' פֿום װאשר װידמונד · אײן איטליכֿש נוך זײנר ארט · אונ' אלרלײא גיפֿעדר
גיפֿעגל אײן איטליכֿש נוך זײנר ארט · אונ' גאט זאך דש עז גוט װאר ׃ כב אונ' גאט זעגינט
זיא אונ' שפראך · זײט פֿרוכֿט באר אונ' מערט אײך · אונ' ארפֿילט דאש װאשר אים מער ·
אונ' דאז גיפֿעגל זאל זיך מערן אױף דער ערדן ׃ כג דא װאר אױז אובינט אונ' מארגן
דער פֿיפֿטי טאג ׃ כד אונ' גאט שפראך דיא ערד זול ערפֿאר ברענגן לעבנדיגי טיר אײן
איטליכֿש נוך זײנן ארט · פֿיך אונ' װערים אונ' טיר אױף דער ערדי · אײן איטליכֿש נאך
זײנר ארט · אונ' עש גישאך אלזו ׃ כה אונ' גאט מכֿט דיא טיר אױף ערדן נוך זײנר ארט
אונ' דאש פֿיך נאך זײנר ארט · אונ' אלר לײא גװערם אױף דער ערד נוך זײנר ארט · אונ'
גאט זאך דז עש גוט װאר ׃ כו אונ' גאט שפראך · לאזט אונז מענשין מאכֿן · אײן פֿארם
דר אונז גלײך זײא · דיא דא הערשן איבר דיא פֿיש אים מער אונ' איבר דיא פֿעגיל
אונטר דעם הימל · אונ' איבר דיא גאנצי ערד אונ' איבר אלי דאש גיװערם דש אױף דער
ערדן קריכֿט ׃ כז אונ' גאט בישאפֿיט דען מענשין אין זײנם גלײכֿן · אין דעם פֿארם
גאטש האט ער אין בישאפֿן · אײן מאנש אונ' װײבש פארשון האט ער זיא בישאפֿן ׃ כח
אונ' גאט זעגינט זיא אונ' שפראך צו אינן · זײט פֿרוכֿטבאר אונ' מערט אײך · אונ' פֿילט
דיא ערד · מאכֿט זיא אײך אונטר טאן · אונ' הערשט איבר דיא פֿיש אים מער · אונ'
איבר דיא פֿעגל דעש הימלש · אונ' איבר אלן דאש טיר דש אױף דער ערדן קריכֿט ׃
כט אונ' גאט שפראך · זעכֿט דא · איך הב אײך געבן אלירלײא קרױט דש אין זיך זעלברט
זאמין ציהט · אױף דער גאנצי ערד · אונ' אליר לײא פֿרוכֿט בארי בױמן דיא אך זעלברט
זאמן ציהן · אײך צו אײארר שפײז ׃ ל אונ' צו אליר לײא טיר אױף ערדן · אונ' צו אלירלײא
פֿעגיל דעם הימלש · אונ' צו אלים גיװערם אלז דאש לעבן האט אױף דער ערדי · דאש
זיא אליר לײא גרין קרױט עסין · אונ' עש גישאך אלזו ׃ לא אונ' גאט זאך אן · אליז װאש
ער גימאכֿט האט · אונ' עז װאר זער גוט · דא װאר אױז אובינט אונ' מארגן דער זעקסטי
טאג ׃
Shabbatai Ṣevi
אין דער זעלביגי צײט האט מאן אן גיפאנגין צו רידן פון שבתאי צבי אביר אױ לנו כי
חטאנו אונ' דאז מיר עש ניט ארלעביט האבין אונ' װיא מיר גיהערט האבין אונ' װיא מיר
זיך פאשט אײן גבילט האבין /װען איך גידענק אן דער תשובה װאז פון יונגי אונ' אלטי
גישעהין איזט דאש ניט צו ערשרײבן װיא עש ידועה ומפורסם איזט דורך דען גנצין עולם
ָאה רבש''ע אין דער צײט דאז מיר גיהאפיט האבין דאז דוא דוך בארים הערציגיר גאט
דיך װערשט איבר דײן ארים פאלק ישראל מרחם זײן אונ' אונש ארליזין /אלזו האבין מיר
װאול גיהאפט אליש װיא אײן אשה דיא דאר זיצט אױף דען גװין שטױל אונ' ערביט זיא מיט
גרושי שמערטצין אונ' װיא טאג אפ /אונ' פאר מײנט נאך אל איר שמערטצין אונ' װיא טאג
װערט זיא מיט איר קינד ארפרײאיט װערין אביר נאך אל איר שמערטצין אונ' װיא טאג
קומט ניקש אנדרשט אלז דאז זיא אײן װינט גיהערט /אלזו מײן גרױזר גאט אונ' קיניג
איזט אונש אך גישעהן מיר האבין גיהערט אונ' אל דײן ליבי קנעכט אונ' קינדיר האבן
זיך זער גימיט מיט תפילה תשובה וצדקה דורך דער גנצי װעלט אונ' דײן ליפ פאלק ישראל
זענין אױף דען גיװין שטױל גיזעסין אונ' גימײנט נאך אל איר שװארי תשובה תפילה וצדקה
דאש זיא ב' ג' שנים זײנין אין גיװין שטױל גיזעסין איזט דאר נאך ניקש אליש װינט הרױז
גיקומין לא די דאז מיר האבין דאז קינד ניט זוכה גיװעזין צו זעהין /דאר מיר זיך זוא
זער אום גמיט האבין אונ' זוא װײט זענין גיקומין דאז מיר אונש גנץ פאר זיכירט האבין
גיהאלטין זענין מיר בעו''ה שטעקין בליבין /מײן גאט אונ' הער דערינט האלבין פאר
צאגין דײן פאלק ישראל דאך ניט אונ' האפין טאגליך אױף דײן בארימהערציקײט דאז דוא
זיא ארליזין װערשט אפי' שיתמהמ' אחכה בכל יום שיבא װען עש דײן הײליגיר װיל
װערט זײן /זוא װערשטו דײן פאלק ישראל שונט גידענקין /דיא שמחה װאז גיװעזין איזט
װען מאן כתבי' האט גיקראגין דאז איזט ניט צו בישרײבן /דיא מײנשטי כתבי' דיא
קומן זײן /האבין דיא ספרדיי' ביקומן /זוא זענין זיא אלי צײט מיט אין איר בית הכנסת
גנגין אונ' לשם גילײאיט זענין טײטשי יונג אונ' אלט אך אין איר בית הכנסת גנגין אונ'
דער פורטוגיזין יונגי גיזעלין האבין זיך אלי מאלט אין איר בעשטי קלײדיר אן גיטאן אונ'
אײן אידריר האט זיך אײן גרינין בראטין זײדין באנד אום זיך גיבונדין דאז איזט שבתאי
additional readings307
צבי זײן ליברײא גיװעזין אלזו זענין זיא אלי בתופי' ובמחולות אין איר ב''ה גנגין מיט שמחה
כשמחות בית שאיבה דיא כתבים גילײאיט /טײליש האבין נעביך אל דאז איריגי פאר
קאפט הױז אונ' הױף אונ' אליש גיהױפט דאז זיא אלי יום זולין ערליזט װערדין /חמי ע''ה
האט צו האמיל גיװאונט אלזו האט ער משם עוקר דירה גיװעזין אונ' זײן הױף אונ' הױז
וכלי בית מלאה כל טוב אליש שטיהן לאזין אונ' איזט לק''ק הילדסום גיצאגין צו װאונין אונ'
האט אונש לכאן המבורג ב' גרושי פעסיר מיט אליר הנט לײנין צײק גשיקט אונ' דרין
איזט גיװעזין פון אליר הנט עשין שפײז כגון ערביזין דערפלײש אונ' זונשטין אנדרי
גראמפילשפרײז פון קװעטשיך שניץ אליש זוא װאש זיך װארין קאן /דען דער גוטי מאן
ע''ה האט גידאכט מאן װערט כפשוטה מין המבורג לארץ הקדושה פארין /דיזי פעסיר
זענין װאול יותר אליש א' שנה בביתי גישטאנדין ענטליך האבין זיא מורא גיהאט דער
פלײש ושארי זאכין װערין מכולה גין האבין זיא אונש גישריבן זולין דיא פעסיר אױף מאכין
אונ' װאש עשין ש[פי]יז איזט הרױז נעמין /דאש דאש לײנין גיצײק ניט מכולה װערט
אלזו עש װאול ג' שני' גישטאנדין אונ' אליש גימײנט זולטי עש צו זײניר רײז ברױכן אביר
דעם היכשטין האט עש נאך ניט ג[י]פאלין /מיר װישן װאול דאז עש אונש דער היכשטי
האט צו גיזאגט אונ' װען מיר גנץ פרום װערין פון גרונד אונזיר הערטץ אונ' ניט זוא ביז
װערין /זוא װײס איך גװיז דאז זיך המקום זולט איבר אונז מרחם זײן /דאז מיר נור
זולין האלטין ואהבת לרעיך כמוך /אביר גאט זאל זיך ארבארמין װיא מיר דאש האלטין
דיא קנאה דיא שנאות חנם דיא מנקין אונש איזט דאז קאן קײן גוט טון /דען נאך דוא
ליבר הער גאט װאז דוא אונש האשט צו גיזאגט דאז װערשטו קיניגליך אונ' גינעדיגליך
האלטין אױב עש זיך שונט װעגין אונזרי זינד װילין זוא לנג פאר ציאיט זוא װערין מיר עש
דאך גװיש האבין /װען דײן גיזעצטי צײט איזט אונ' דרױף װאלין מיר האפין אונ' ביטין צו
דיר גרושין גאט דאז דוא אונש אײן מאלט מיט דער גאולה שלימ' זולשט משמח זײן
Appendix 5
Further Reading
With the completion of this book, the diligent reader will have acquired at least
advanced intermediate skills in reading OLY. It will still be daunting for most read-
ers to plunge into the complexities of OLY texts. There are alternatives, however.
One of the best next steps after completion of the present volume is to read through
Eli Katz’s edition of the immensely entertaining Book of Fables (1994), whose texts
are of moderate difficulty. Katz prints an English translation opposite the facsimile
pages of the original Middle Yiddish text, and thus with a tactically placed sheet of
notepaper, one’s eye could be discouraged from wandering to the translation until
no further hope remains of comprehending the original text. One might also read
in the same manner several OLY epics and heroic lays, in addition to those already
read in the present volume, by placing my volume of translations (Frakes 2014)
alongside the original texts, full references to which are provided in that volume,
and several of which are now conveniently available online. Edward Fram’s edition
of the “Women’s Commandments” (Fram 2007) provides facing-page English
translation and OLY text. For readers of French, the same method might be used
with the edition of the מעשה בוךby Astrid Starck (2004), which presents a facsimile
of the 1602 edition opposite the French translation. Readers of Ivrit may also make
similar use of Chava Turniansky volume of Glikl Hamil (2006), which prints a
facing-page Ivrit translation of the Yiddish text.
In addition to reading the original texts, one should orient oneself in the literary
and cultural history of Yiddish-language Ashkenaz by reading Jean Baumgarten’s
history of early Yiddish literature (1993), which is also available in a revised edition
in English translation (2005). Readers of modern Yiddish should then read the
seminal monograph by the grand master of early Yiddish studies, Chone Shmeruk
(1988), which includes substantial textual quotations and analytical commentary.
By that point, the reader should have enough experience and reading skills to
take on most texts in the canon. In the absence of a reference grammar of OLY and
a dictionary of OLY, it must be acknowledged that we all labor in the dark. That
said, the adventurous reader could do worse than to keep Hermann Paul’s gram-
mar of Middle High German on hand for consultation (25th edn 2007). The best
compromise solution for the lack of an adequate dictionary is to make use of the
array of dictionaries mentioned in the introduction to the present volume: Harkavy
(1988), Weinreich (1968), Niborski and Vaysbrot (2012), and Mark and Joffe (1961–).
In addition—perverse as it may seem—the dedicated reader of OLY cannot do
without the immense Mittelhochdeutsches Handwörterbuch of Matthias Lexer
(1872–8) and the still more extensive Deutsches Wörterbuch of Jacob and Wilhelm
Grimm (1854–1971), both of which are conveniently available online with quite
user-friendly interfaces. In order to make efficient use of these dictionaries of the
310 appendix 5
German language for early Yiddish studies, however, the reader will have to master
the complex art of finding German cognates of OLY words, which is of course an
advanced skill of its own: developing the skills necessary to know that, for instance,
the reflexes of OLY ווייב/ ויפappear as wîp in Lexer and weib in Grimm will not, for
all except the well-trained Germanists among the readers of the present volume,
necessarily be an automatic or even easy task—and, it should be acknowledged,
this particular example is after all rather straighforward. Even after finding the
German cognate, one must develop a nuanced understanding of what use the
MHG or NHG lexicographical evidence might be in a OLY context: in other words,
a lifetime of work. Instruction in those skills is far beyond the scope of the present
volume. Until the day when a dictionary of OLY exists, such is, alas, among the
tasks that face us all in reading OLY.
But now, on to the vast sea of OLY literature and linguistics: !מיטן רעכֿטן ֿפוס
Glossary
As has been noted in earlier pages, a volume such as the present one can only be a
cluster of compromises. In a volume glossary, that problem becomes even more
obvious. While one could simply list every individual word in every orthographical
variant present anywhere in the volume, that would effectively make the glossary
almost the same length as the entire rest of the book without pedagogical benefit to
the user. On the other hand, any “normalization” of spelling would, for instance,
mean that the reader who seeks the word ֿפורןmay seek it for a long time before
finding it under פו(י)רן. Should all instances of [a] in stressed syllables be omitted,
as is generally the case in OLY? Or should אbe added where it is lacking in such
cases, for the sake of consistency? What to do with י/[ = עe]?
The answer is: compromise. Several alterations of the orthography attested in the
texts have been instituted here, in order to ease the reader’s task of finding words.
The various representations of initial [f]—i.e. בֿ/ ב/ ̌פ/ ֿפ/ פ/ וו/ —וare here all
represented as פ, so that, for instance, words that all begin with the prefix [fər] are
not scattered through the entire glossary. Since פcan represent both [f] and [p], the
bracketed suggested pronunciation will clarify which applies in a particular case.
Variant spellings such as או̌ש/אוש/אויז/אוי̌ש/אויש/ אויסare simplified to אויש. In order
to make clear that the (primarily but not exclusively) verbal prefixes [gə-] and [bə-]
are indeed syllabic, they are here spelled גי־and בי־, respectively; the prefix [bay-] is
spelled בייא־. Since there is little consistency in the use of rafe in Germanic-component
words, it is omitted from words of that component, but retained when it appears
in Semitic-component words (but it is not added to Semitic-component words to
conform with standard Hebrew-Aramaic orthography).
The inconsistent presence of vowel graphs in OLY texts—זארג/זורג/—זרגcould
cause unnecessary aggravation for the reader seeking the word in the glossary, and,
after all, a glossary is both a corpus and a finding list. Such stressed vowels are here
supplied: זארג. Such a practice will also inevitably engender some (slight) aggrava-
tion, but, I hope, less than if the full range of OLY orthographic inconsistencies
were preserved intact.
Except for such quasi-normalizations of the orthography, the original form of
the words occurring in the texts is here preserved, especially with respect to vowel
graphs. Thus in order to find the sound [e], the reader should check spellings with
both עand י. While the word [ דערפלײשdëŕ fleyš] ‘dried meat’ in Glikl’s report con-
cerning Shabbatai Ṣevi would likely have been spelled דוירפליישin an earlier period
(or from the pen of another writer) of OLY, that probable historical form is not
noted.
Non-separable prefixes of verbs are not written as separate words here.
More information is provided here than in the Lesson glossaries, but the reader
should nonetheless view this glossary simply as a pragmatic lexical guide to the
texts included in the present volume. It is not and does not aspire to be a mini-
dictionary of OLY.
312 glossary
The same abbreviations are used here as elsewhere in the volume. Verbs other-
wise unmarked are weak; adjectives and adverbs are not identified as such, unless
confusion might otherwise arise. In indications of plural forms, a general final
unstressed vowel is represented by ( אin actual texts, that vowel sometimes appears
as א, י, or ע.
Alphabetization is commonsensical: thus individual words that are spelled as if
two words are alphabetized as one. Thus אבגיזנטרprecedes אב שלגן. No punctation is
editorially added, but it is retained as it occurs in the texts. Nouns that display weak
endings in any text included in the volume are so marked, even though they may
not be weak in every text, nor even always consistently so in a single text.
Multi-word collocations and idiomatic prepositional phrases, such as אין אננדר
and אין איביגלײך, are alphabetized under the phrase’s main word.
The marking of a word or phrase as H does not indicate etymology, but rather the
identity of the word or phrase as whole Hebrew. As noted in the introduction, it is
often difficult to distinguish between merged Hebrew and whole Hebrew; I have
intentionally erred on the side of providing too much rather than too little informa-
tion in this volume glossary. Thus a usage such as Glikl’s ‘ בביתיin my house’ was,
I would suggest, unlikely to have been perceived by her and her audience as anything
other than whole Hebrew, while ‘ ֵא ֶשת ִאישwoman of a man’ = ‘married woman/wife’
was, I would suggest, more likely to have been “felt” as fully integrated into Yiddish,
although still obviously known to be Hebrew-derived. Since neither I nor any other
twenty-first-century reader of OLY can pretend to such a sense of linguistic nuance,
that phrase too is marked ‘H’. Words such as ‘ אפילוeven’ and ‘ בהמהcow/stock ani-
mal,’ however, were almost certainly so fully integrated as to be simply Yiddish;
they are thus not marked as whole Hebrew.
Since the function of this glossary is quite different from the listing of verbs in
Appendix 2 (where most aspects of orthography are standardized), predictable
discrepancies in the spelling of words in the two lists abound.
Biblical citations are provided with full punctation and thus not provided with a
separate Ashkenazic suggested pronunciation.
Blessed is the One Who resurrects the dead [boruχ ָברוך ְמ ַחיֶ ה ֵמ ִתים
meχaye meysim]
growl/roar [brumən] ברומן
flame/fire [brunstən] דיא/ברונשטן דער
breast [brust brïst] ברושט דיא ברוישט
broad/wide [breyt/brat] בראט/ברייט
breaking- [briχ] בריך
bring ir.wv [bringən] ברינגן
Briyo fem.prop.name [briyo] ְב ִריעָ ה
formal document/letter [briv/brif] בריף דער
blessing [broχə] ְב ָרכָ ה דיא ־ות
[beginning of] morning prayer H [borχu] ָב ְרכוּ
pluck/break scv3 [breχən] ברעכן
burn ir.wv [brenən] ברענן
in the name of God, the Lord of Israel H [bəšém hašém בשם השם אלקי ישראל
elokéy yisróəl]
in the name of God, the Lord of Israel H [bəšém בשם יי אלקי ישראל
adóuni elókey yisroəl]
in the name of Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, amen H בשם מיכאל רפאל גבריאל
[bəšém miχóəl rəfóəl gavríəl ámen/ómeyn] אמן
virgin/girl/young woman [psulə] בתולה דיא ־ות
with timbrels and with dances (Ex 15:20) H [psúfim בתופים ובמחולות
uvimxóuləs]
Worms Mahzor couplet, ms. Osroth Heb. 4° 781, vol. I, fol. 54r
printed here by kind permission of the National and University Library,
Jerusalem.
“Joseph the Righteous,” Cambridge, University Library, T.-S. 10K22, fos. 17v–18v
(with image of fol. 17v) and
“Women’s Commandments,” Cambridge, University Library, Add. 547, fos. 4r–7v
printed here by kind permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library.
Seyfer Midos, Isny 1542; ms Opp. 4°. 955 [olim 1216], Chapter 5, fos. 21r–26r,
Yosifon, Michael Adam, Zurich 1546, ms O.1.8. Art.Seld., fos. 78v–80v,
“Pumay, You Dear Companions,” ms Opp. add. 4°. 136, pp. 12–14,
Simon Levi Ginzburg b. Judah/ Isaac Tyrnau, Customs (1593), ms Opp. 8°. 625,
fos. 21r–22r,
Rebecca b. Meir Tiktiner, ‘Simḥas-Torah Song’ (Prague, 1650), Opp. 8°. 460 (2c),
fos. 7r–8v,
Jekuthiel b. Isaac Blitz, Yiddish Pentateuch (Amsterdam 1676–1679), Opp. fol. 108,
Riddle, ms. Can. Or. 12, fols. 214r–215r (with image of fol. 215r),
Traveler’s Charm, ms Opp. 300, fol. 120v
printed here by kind permission of the Bodleian Library, Oxford.
Briyo and Zimro, cod. hebr. 100, fos. 67r–73v (with image of fol. 67r)
printed here by kind permission of the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich.
“Fable of an Old Man with Two Wives,” no. 136 in Mishle shualim (1583), D 1389,
fol. 60v–61r
printed here by kind permission of Alliance Israélite Universelle, Paris.
Glikl b. Leyb Pinkerle [Glikl Hamil], ms. hebr. oct. 2, fos. 47r–48v
printed here by kind permission of the Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek,
Frankfurt am Main.
368 permissions
Medical remedies, cod. HB XI 17, no. 480, 552, 561, 606, 646, 704, 744, 854, 921, 959,
993, 998, 1027, 1032, 1047, 1055, 1062, 1197, 1204 (with image of fol. 62v)
printed here by the kind permission of Württembergische Landesbibliothek,
Stuttgart.
Pariz and Viene (Verona 1594), Fonds Venturi, no. 192, canto five, st. 249–302 (with
image of fol לr)
printed here by the kind permission of the Biblioteca del Seminario Vescovile,
Verona.
Pharr, Clyde (1925). Homeric Greek. Boston: Heath; rev. edn by John Wright. Nor-
man: University of Oklahoma Press, 1985.
Quin, E. G. (1975). Old Irish Workbook. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy.
Shmeruk, Chone (1977). “The Hebrew Acrostic in the Yosef Hatsadik Poem of the
Cambridge Yiddish Codex,” Michigan Germanic Studies 3: 67–81.
Shmeruk, Chone (1978). פרקים לתולדותיה:ספרות יידיש. Tel Aviv: Porter Institute for
Poetics and Semiotics; revised translation: פּרקים ֿפון דער ִײדישער ליטעראַטור־געשיכטע.
Tel Aviv: I. L. Peretz, 1988.
Shmeruk, Chone (1981). ספרות ײדיש בפולין. Jerusalem: Magnes.
Shmeruk, Chone (1985). כ''י בית, מחזור וורמײזא,''הברכה המחזורות בײדיש קדומה במחזור ווֹרמס
בעריכת מלאכי בית־אריה, כרך המבואות,Heb. 4° 187/1 הספרים הלאומי והאוניברסיטאי. Jeru-
salem: Cyelar Publishing, pp. ק־קב.
Shmeruk, Chone (ed.) (1996). פּאריז אונ' וויענה. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences
and Humanities.
Starck, Astrid (trans.) (2004). Un beau livre d’histoires/Eyn shön Mayse bukh. 2 vols.
Basel: Schwabe Verlag.
Steinschneider, Moritz (1852–60). Catalogus librorum hebraeorum in bibliotheca
bodleiana. Berlin: Friedlaender.
Timm, Erika (1987). Graphische und phonische Struktur des Westjiddischen unter
besonderer Berücksichtigung der Zeit um 1600. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer
Verlag.
Timm, Erika (2013). “Ein neuentdeckter literarischer Text in hebräischen Lettern
aus der Zeit vor 1349,” Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum 142: 417–43.
Timm, Erika, and Gustav Adolf Beckmann (1996). Paris un Wiene. Tübingen:
Niemeyer.
Turniansky, Chava (ed. and trans.) (2006). 1719־1961 גליקל זיכרונות. Jerusalem: Zal-
man Shazar Center, Hebrew University.
Weinreich, Max (1973). מעטאדןָ , ֿפאַקטן, באַגריֿפן:געשיכטע ֿפון דער ִײדישער שפּראַך. 4 vols.
New York: YIVO. English translation: Shlomo Noble, History of the Yiddish
Language, vol. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980. 2 vols. New Haven:
Yale University Press, 2008.
Weinreich, Uriel (1968). ִײדיש־ענגליש װערטערבוך,ענגליש־ײדיש
ִ ָ New York: YIVO.
מאדערן.
Wexler, Paul (1987). Explorations in Judeo-Slavic Linguistics. Leiden: Brill.
Wexler, Paul (1993). The Ashkenazic Jews: A Slavo-Turkic People in Search of a Jew-
ish Identity. Columbus: Slavica Publishers.
Wexler, Paul (2006). Jewish and Non-Jewish Creators of Jewish Languages. Wies-
baden: Harrassowitz.
Wright, Roger (1982). Late Latin and Early Romance in Spain and Carolingian
France. Liverpool: Francis Cairns.
Yiddish: the Fifteenth Slavic Language (1991). International Journal of the Sociology
of Language 91.
Zaretski, Ayzik (1926). פּראַקטישע ִײדישע גראַמאַטיק פֿאַר לערערס אוּן סטוּדענטן. Moscow:
Shul un bukh.
While many of the works listed here are indeed of essential value in the study of OLY, others were cited
in the present volume only for a tactical, momentary point of argument. Thus, the reader should not
consider the list as a core bibiliography of the field of OLY.
Index