Mendele: Yiddish literature and language
______________________________________________________
Contents of Vol. 5.060
July 19, 1995

1) Bringing; rabbis (Eliyahu Juni)

1)----------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 10:12:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: ejuni@acs.ryerson.ca
Subject: Bringing and the thing with rabbis

In vol. 5.056, Reb Shleyme Axelrod wrote about the use of the verb
"bring" instead of "give", "present" or "cite", and speculated that it
might come from Yiddish, specifically the shop talk of lomdim.  I can
definitely confirm a Yiddish source, but although I've heard it mostly in
Toyre-related contexts, I always thought that it was general Yiddish
usage, and not just a yeshivishism.

In khsidishe Yiddish, the verbs 'brengen' and 'to bring' have a wide
range of uses.  The basic usage is similar to "cite" or "quote", e.g.
"der darkey moyshe brenkt a heter fun'm b'hag."

A further use is when quoting a story or precedent which is narrated or
recounted in a work (and not quoted from another work), e.g. "der ksav
soyfer brenkt az ven zayn tate hot g'lernt bay der haflue, iz der haflue
g'zitsn bay kidish, ober ven er iz g'gangen ts'reb nosn adler, iz reb
nosn g'shtanen bay yoym hashishi, un g'zitsn far di brokhe oyf der vayn."
In this usage, it functions similarly to the verbs 'zogt' and 'shraybt'.

Then there is a use when quoting evidence (or an example, a proof or an
argument) from a work, e.g. "der noyde biyhude brenkt a raye az der khazn
meg iberzingn verter in khazoras hashats fun di piyut vos m'zogt iberul
in di ershte brokhe fun kriyas shma, vayl m'zogtze oykh kdey ts'davenen
mit mer kavone".  In this usage as well, "brenkt" functions similarly to
'zogt' and 'shraybt'.

In these three usages, the source being quoted is, in a sense, "bringing
in" something somewhat external--whether quoting something from another
work, telling over a mayse sh'hoye, or using evidence to back up a claim.
And all three can be used to describe what a speaker said, as well as
what an author writes.

There are also those who use "brenkt" as a simple replacement for 'zogt'
and 'shraybt', even when what they are quoting is not something external
to the source, e.g. "der minkhas eluzer brenkt az der vos est fish bay
ale dray sudes fun shabes vet zikher bakumen zayn kheylek in oylem habe"
(when the author of the minkhas eluzer wrote it on his own, without
quoting a source).

This last usage is only used when quoting an author (never when quoting a
speech).  It seems rather awkward to me, because it doesn't have the
semantic justification of the other three.  But although it is less
common than the first three, it is very widespread, even among those who
learned their Yiddish in pre-WWII Europe, so the awkwardness is probably
just my one of my hangups (I have quite a collection :-).

All these usages can be found in yeshivishe Yiddish, but the third
("brenkt a raye") is extremely common (and may be functioning as an
idiom), while the fourth is rare.

This usage has been picked up in yeshivishe Yinglish, English, and
Hebrew. In standard English, the sentence "Epicurus brings all the
standard arguments for the existence of a divine being, and successfully
refutes them" would raise eyebrows because of its syntax;  in any
American yeshive it would raise eyebrows for its content, but the syntax
would be correct.

In yeshivishe Yinglish one can often hear the phrase "brings a raye", but
"brings a proof" would sound awkward;  not because of the verb, but
because 'proof' is rarely used--in yeshives we always say 'raye'.

In khsidishe and yeshivishe Hebrew, the verb "l'havi" ('to bring') is
used the same way that "brenkt" is used in Yiddish.  In Hebrew too, all
four usages can be heard;  in yeshivishe circles, the third usage ("meyvi
r'aya") is extremely common, may also be functioning as an idiom.

The Yiddish idiom "shtayt in sforim" often appears in Hebrew as "muva
bisfarim"--'(it is) brought in sforim',  although it is can also appear
as "katuv bisfarim"--'(it is) written in sforim'--or simply "katuv". But
in Yinglish, "shtayt in sforim" usually appears as "it says in sforim"
(though it sometimes appears as "it's brought down in sforim" or as "they
bring down").

These English and Hebrew Yiddishisms are common even among non-Yiddish
speakers in the Orthodox community, especially speakers of Modern
Standard Yeshivishese--even among S'faradim, who have no Yiddish heritage
at all. Still, they are clearly Yiddishisms, and not native to Hebrew.
Tomer meynt ir az ikh shtel tsu boydem ts'klots, vel ikh brengen tsvey
rayes:

Alef.  "Muva bisfarim", "katuv bisfarim", and "katuv" are used
idiomatically, in exactly the same way as "shtayt in sforim":  when the
speaker/writer knows that there's a source, and can't be troubled to find
the exact reference;  or when the speaker/writer is so absolutely sure
that s/he is right, that it's poshet and needs no reference, and besides,
surely there are loads of sforim out there that say the same thing.  (In
Yiddish, Yinglish and Hebrew, "s'iz a dovor yodua" (and it's permutations
"it's a dovor yodua" and "davar yadua hu she__") have a similar meaning--
everyone knows I'm right, so I don't have to provide evidence or a
source.)

Beyz.  The Hebrew word "katuv", in all but the most recent religious
literature, has a very specific meaning, different from the one used
above:  it introduces a posuk from T'nakh, and not any other quote, even
from other religious works.  The Yiddish 'shtayt', on the other hand, can
be used to introduce any quote--"shtayt in m'lokhim", "shtayt in rambam",
"shtayt in hayntiker tsaytung".

I have deliberately used the terms 'khsidish' and 'yeshivish', instead of
geographical divisions, because my experience with these variations in
usage has been split according to modern social lines, and ignores
geographical dialect boundaries.  The khsidishe community whose usage I
am describing includes speakers of poylishe, litvishe, ingerishe and
rusishe yidish;  the yeshivishe community, while mostly litvish, includes
speakers of other dialects as well.  I've noticed the difference in the
yiddish spoken in these communities today, and I don't know if they
originated in dialect differences which spread differently in different
communities, or in differences in usage in these different communities.
(In yeshives we talk about rayes much more than about mayses, while by
khsidim mayses are at least as common as rayes, and more so in the less
scholarly rebistives.)

While we're on the subject of spreading Yiddishisms, Reb Shleyme
(deliberately?) used another one in his question:  referring to persons
as objects by prefixing an article to a proper name.  His example
sentence was

     "In support of his position, So-and-so brings the Rambam's statement
      that ..."                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^

(If you've never noticed it before, compare it to
". . . So-and-so brings a line from the Shakespeare's sonnet . . .")

In a cheeky song whose lyrics were quoted in the same volume by Reb Khasl
Igelfeld, Rabeynu Tam is constantly referred to as "der/dem Rabeynu Tam".

This is a common feature of Yiddish in the Orthodox community (and is
used by many in English and Hebrew as well), but it is used only to refer
to great rabonim and their works.  Does anyone use it in reference to
ordinary folk?  Is it used in Yiddish "out there" other than ts'makhn
khoyzek?

Another issue:  usually the article is used with an acronym or a magnum
opus, not with a name or nickname.  An acronym requires it, and usually a
name can't take it: "der Rabi Moyshe ben Maimon" and "Rambam zogt" are
both incorrect.  Offhand, the only other names which I can think of which
can have an article are "der Rabeynu Yoine", "der Rabeynu Dovid", "der
Rabeynu Khananel" and "der Rabeynu Bakhye".  But when the full name is
used, "der Rabeynu Bakhye ibn Pkude" and "der Rabeynu Khananel ben
Khushiel" sound wrong.  Might the use of an article with a proper name be
restricted to names prefaced by the title "Rabeynu", or even to names
consisting of "Rabeynu X" where X is a single personal name, and no more?

Then again, "der Rabeynu Gershom" sounds completely wrong.

The use of an article with a name seems to me to be restricted to refer
to the person's works, and not to the person--"der Rabeynu Dovid iz a
peyrush oyf mesekhte Psokhim;  Rabeynu Dovid hot g'voynt in Provants."

If so, that would explain the strangeness of "der Rabeynu Gershom"--if he
wrote anything, we don't have it.  And using it to refer to a peyrush
mistakenly attributed to him and printed with his name in the margin of
some g'mores doesn't sound nearly as bad.

(The use of an article with an acronym or a book title, on the other
hand, can be used to refer to the person as well as his work:  "der
Rambam iz geveyn rov in Fostat;  der Noyde Biyhude iz geveyn rov in
Prag.")

("derebereBer" doesn't count--it means "the rebbe, reb Ber", and the
article doesn't refer to the name but to the profession.)

For the yeshiva-educationally challenged, I apologize for descending so
far into a rather esoteric subject.  And yes, all those are names of real
historical characters, not names out of a hat ;-).

Eliyahu Juni

______________________________________________________
End of Mendele Vol. 5.060