Ivrit

[cellio]

My printer is currently holding hostage half a sheet of mangled paper, and the manual's instructions for clearing jams presume that (1) the "release the grip, darnit" button works and (2) you have access to enough paper to grab hold. I hope this doesn't involve a screwdriver...

But hey, at least one of my appliances is working, so here's another attempt to communicate little nothings in a foreign language.



(That's a thumbnail; click for a larger copy that more closely resembles the size at which I wrote it...)

Comments

[ichur72.livejournal.com]

Yofi, v'ani choshevet she'ani mevinah et hakol!

But if I may be picky, I think you need a subject for the last two sentences. From context, the subjects would seem to be "hu" and "anachnu", respectively, but unless you specify, they are not necessarily clear. "Shar" is past tense for any singular male subject, and "tzrichim" could refer to any male or mixed-gender plural subject.

/pedantic

[cellio]

Todah rabbah.

I'm a little fuzzy on when you have to be explicit about subjects. If the verb technically gives you enough information (there's only one "he" in this discussion, so a third-person singular verb without a subject would default, right?) it seems to be sometimes included and sometimes not. Any guidelines? Or is it that biblical Hebrew is the outlier in often leaving it out and actual speakers today usually include it? Is there a difference between speaking and writing?

[(Anonymous)]

AFAIK, subjects are usually included in modern Hewbrew and not always included in biblical Hebrew. The thing here is that the verb itself doesn't give you all the information; it only gives you singular/plural or masculine/feminine. So if no subject is present, the actual identity of the subject (1st, 2nd or 3rd person) has to be inferred from context. Biblical Hebrew relies more heavily on context (and leaves room for different meforshim to step in), so you don't always see an explicit subject. Modern Hebrew is a (re)constructed language, and that makes a difference. I get the impression that Ben-Yehuda was a) influenced by his greater familiarity with European languages, which often require explicit use of a subject, and b) intent on ensuring consistency.

[ichur72.livejournal.com]

Sorry, that was me!

[ichur72.livejournal.com]

Thought of something else that I meant to write but ditzed out on. (Hard to think about grammar and hold a squirmy toddler at the same time.)

I think you can get by without a subject more easily in past* and future tenses because in those tenses, the conjugation actually makes it clear what the subject is, rather than just stating number and gender.

* This is more true of three-letter roots than two-letter roots because the masculine singular conjugation for present tense (e.g., hu shar, "he sings") is the same as the third-person masculine singular conjugation (e.g., hu shar, "he sang").

[cellio]

Thanks for the feedback. I had been thinking that "shar" was unambiguous for number/gender, and it is in the past tense (what I meant) -- what I failed to notice is that it takes exactly the same form in past and present, so the tense itself is ambiguous!

[magid.livejournal.com]

Wait, there's a new rabbi at your shul? Or is this one of the other places you daven at?

(I agree that defaulting to including a subject is a good thing.)

[cellio]

Zeh rav sheini. Od yeish lanu rav rishon, v'hu ravi. Yeish lanu ravim shtei.

For everyone else: we got a new associate rabbi; when I talk about "my rabbi" I mean our senior rabbi, but the congregation has two rabbis.

What I literally said is that he (the one we're talking about) is a second rabbi. English draws a distinction between "second" (who might be equal in standing to the first -- second=additional) and "secondary" (clearly a lesser position). How would one convey that in Hebrew?

And how would one convey the general "one" in Hebrew, when everything takes a specific conjugation? Do you say "how do I", "how do you", or something else? What if you really want a generic (e.g. "one would think that...")?

[chaos-wrangler.livejournal.com]

S/b "yaish lanu shnei ravim" - the "two" goes before the "rabbis", and unless both are female you want the masculine version of "two".

[cellio]

Thanks! (I am forever getting the masculine and feminine numbers mixed up, alas.) And yes, both of our rabbis are male.

m/f numbers

[chaos-wrangler.livejournal.com]

The trick there is that with the counting numbers the letter hey is on the masculine ones instead of the feminine ones. The listing numbers behave "properly" in that the letter taf is on the feminine ones.

How do...?

[chaos-wrangler.livejournal.com]

"aich osim x?" = how do (no subject specified) do x?

"aich omrim x?" = how do (n.s.s.) say x? = how do I/you/anyone say x?

Etc. In this case just leave out the subject and put the verb in plural masculine/non-gendered.

It works for questions about the past too: "aich asu x?", "aich banu x?" = how did (n.s.s.) do x?, how did (n.s.s.) build x?

doing tefila

[chaos-wrangler.livejournal.com]

"hu asa tefila" feels wrong to my ears, unless you mean that he wrote/composed a new prayer. I'm not sure how I'd write/say this with just changing the verb (i.e. leaving tefila as the subject). I think I would generally phrase it as "uh haya hechazan hayom" - he was the chazan today - but I'm not sure how that works in a congregation with an official cantor since I don't want it to sound like he took over that job position.

*sigh* It looks like once again all the years since my ivrit-b'ivrit schooling are showing again.

Re: doing tefila

[cellio]

"hu asa tefila" feels wrong to my ears, unless you mean that he wrote/composed a new prayer.

No, I meant he led. Since "asa" seems to cover both "made" and "did", I thought I could go with the latter. "He did the t'filah" isn't the best way to say it, but I hoped it wouldn't raise eyebrows. Thanks for the correction. (How would you say "led"? Or does that not have the right connotation in Hebrew?) "Hu haya hechazan hayom" seems like it would work, or maybe "hu haya sh'liach tzibur" since that has no confusion with the cantor? ("Hayom" would seem to cover that, though.)

Re: doing tefila

[chaos-wrangler.livejournal.com]

I can't remember how to say "led" for this context, and I have a not-very-strong feeling that that works in English but not in Hebrew for this. Saying that he was the shaliach tzibur does sound correct to me.

Dani might have a sense of the correct Hebrew for this, especially if you want modern rather than modern+biblical+talmudic+whatever else that I've got.