Mendele: Yiddish literature and language ______________________________________________________ Contents of Vol. 4.261 January 4, 1995 1) Etiquette/ splitting the list (Daniella HarPaz) 2) Splitting the list (Zachary Baker) 3) Splitting the list (Bill Parker) 4) Splitting the list (Louis Fridhandler) 1)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 04 Jan 1995 01:03:48 -0500 (EST) From: harpaz@binah.cc.brandeis.edu Subject: Etiquette/ splitting the list 1. Some of the entries on Mendele which are sent in as responses to articles already "published" on Mendele are rude and insensitive to the writer--at least as they read on my computer terminal--in a way that I believe is inappropriate. I believe that frank and open disagreement is healthy and important in many relationships. Clearly in an environment such as Mendele which is geared towards encouraging dialogue and interaction about academic "things- Yiddish" disagreement is paramount. However, there is a certain etiquette, and frankly a respect for other Mendelniks, which should, I think, be strived for. I think that we need each be our own judge--I'm not suggesting an editor's censorship, but, could we not take some steps toward polite criticism? We do not all agree on issues and we have not all been part of Mendele since its inception, and yet we can easily be respectful of one anothers ideas and feelings. (Imagine reading the responses you send as if they were sent your way!) 2. I was interested in Patty Becker's suggestion about splitting this list. I am not certain that it is an ideal idea, but I think it was misread by some respondents and dismissed too quickly. The "stuff" behind the suggestion, the comment that often Mendele is "too" technical and uninteresting to larger parts of the Mendele readership is important to discuss. I too have often read through Mendeles and quickly deleted because they are only linguistics and questions of pronounciation or transliteration; these are issues which I find interesting in moderation, or when I have lots of free time. Not all other issues, though, need be relegated to a "Jewish list" as has been suggested. There are many "technical" or academically intereting aspects to the field of "Yiddish studies". There are many cultural/literary/historical/political things to discuss. On a couple of occassions I have spoken with other Mendelniks who are largely onlookers and not participants because they are not linguists and they don't care to read such "technical" linguistic stuff. The solution, though, is probably not to split the list. There is actually little to split! How often, besides the introductions and occasional entries, do we read other "non-linguistic" stuff.? Not often. I remember a time when I was in college and the student newspaper was hideously written and remarkably biased politically. I complained to a professor/mentor of mine. Do you know what she said? "Join the paper and write!" I think her suggestion was wise. Consider this (too long) entry then both a call to others out there in Mendele who could benefit from some lit. or hist. or politics or culture and a pledge. I think what we need to do is write. Get involved. I promise to respond to what I can and to write what I can. I am teaching a Yiddish lit. course in translation (English) this coming semester. I will use it as a stepping stone for interesting entries. Hey! That brings up another area we could deservedly discuss: the teaching of Yiddish. Daniella HarPaz P.S. Since I see a Mendele tendency toward sensitivity on certain issues I want it clear that I believe linguistics to be a highly worthwhile and important science. 2)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 07:01:16 PST From: bm.yib@rlg.stanford.edu Subject: Divide the list? Kholile! Here's one vote for _not_ dividing up the list. The world of Yiddish is small enough as is. How will those of us who have both plebeian and esoteric interests know to which list to send our messages? (Either-or? Both?) Dividing the list, in my opinion, is a recipe for both confusion and entropy. Mendele is an exemplary list. The medium is by its very nature participatory, which means that it is up to Mendelnikes to make it what it is. Too nit-picky grammatical? Well, send in a message about literature, or your local cultural scene, or some other topic. But don't sit back, waiting for the linguistic discussions to cease, because those will always be there. Frankly, I'm amazed at the sort of discussions one sees on Mendele. Where else would a beginner be able to have a dialogue with the former editor of a Lithuanian Yiddish daily? I could go on, but I think that faithful readers know that we've (thanks in large part to our Shames) got a good thing going. Why fritter it away? Zachary Baker 3)---------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 16:54:03 +0800 From: bill@brenta.eepo.dialix.oz.au Subject: No splitting I get a great deal of pleasure from reading the linguistic stuff as I do all the other anecdotal material. As far as mailing lists goes, mendele is one of the best. Don't split! Can we afford to waste solar energy? Bill Parker 4)---------------------------------------------------- Date: 04 Jan 95 14:39:45 EST From: 74064.1661@compuserve.com Subject: A vote for _not_ splitting. I agree with Patty Becker (4.256) that Mendele ought to be a vehicle for Yiddish culture. Where I _might_ disagree is the implication (if I understand correctly) that academics is _not_ relevant. The sciences of linguistics and history are not digressions from Yiddish culture. They have contributed much to discovery and preservation of Yiddish culture for us and future generations. Tsu di hoykh geshetste akademikers: yasher koyekh! Zoln zey tsugebn visnshaft vos zey gefunen far neytik. Mir veln leyenen un lernen. Concentrated academic work in highly specialized circles isolated from non-academic distraction is a powerful instrument for discoveries and insights unreachable by ordinary means. Unrelievedly narrow specialization, however, may result eventually in sterile aridity. Any academic Yiddish landscape needs as well the juices of Yiddish used in kitchen, bedroom, bathroom, and in social and intellectual interactions; the Yiddish of the streets, the shops, the marketplace, newspapers, books, debates, humor. Un ver ken zogn az di dozike zakhn un inyonim af a nit-akademikn grunt zenen nit erntste un vikhtike? We cannot do without the immediacy of non-academic discussions, and we cannot do without the mediation of scientists. I suspect splitting would yield two deadened lists, whatever each would turn out to be. I appreciate the academic history of the list, but I'd bet on the notion that lists, like species, evolve or die. Variety makes for cross-fertilization of ideas and liveliness. On the other hand, who knows what ill-advised stuff comes across the shames's computer screen from time to time, giving pause, and probably making him act as judge and gatekeeper? That split, the wheat from the chaff, is healthy. Louis Fridhandler ______________________________________________________ End of Mendele Vol. 4.261 Mendele has 2 rules: 1. Provide a meaningful Subject: line 2. Sign your article (full name please) A Table of Contents is now available via anonymous ftp, along with weekly updates. Anonymous ftp archives available on: ftp.mendele.trincoll.edu in the directory pub/mendele/files Archives available via gopher on: gopher.cic.net Send articles to: mendele@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu Send change-of-status messages to: listserv@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu a. For a temporary stop: set mendele nomail b. To resume delivery: set mendele mail c. To subscribe: sub mendele first_name last_name d. To unsubscribe kholile: unsub mendele Other business: nmiller@mail.trincoll.edu