Talk:Jewish languages

message: Could someone please explain somewhere what the term qeltu means? --Jpgordon 21:57, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Please review Dialects of Arabic#General varieties.  TomerTALK 07:23, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: qeltu?

message: Would (or should) anyone attempt to categorize Yeshivish among other Jewish languages? Etz Haim 08:35, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yeshivish 

message: I've just completed the article on Aramaic language, and I'm wanting to expand on it. I'm wondering whether it would be useful to have an article on 'Jewish Aramaic' to discuss the features of Targumic, Midrashic, Documentary, Talmudic and other 'dialects' of Aramaic. I would also like to so an article on Neo-aramaic languages, and I'm wondering whether to do one big one on 'Jewish Neo-aramaic' or little articles for every dialect. I suppose a main article with small individual ones might be a good 'belt and braces' approach. Does anyone have any ideas or suggestions for this?
: Gareth Hughes 17:43, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure who here has enough expertise to help you; perhaps Olve? Jayjg 18:37, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jewish Aramaic and Neo-Aramaic 

message: Would someone mind adding a blurb about Yinglish if any scholarly study can be found on it, as well as substantially upgrading the Yinglish page? 
Also, please see my note on the Yiddish_language talk page:  "So...How many people really speak yiddish?" TShilo12 08:33, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  two notes 

message: Should we keep both templates, or just the "Jewish languages" one (as in Yiddish)? Hasdrubal 22:40, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've taken the bull by the horns and deleted the Jew template. Jayjg (talk) 22:59, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Two templates?

message: The "æ" grapheme is difficult to type; as our own article notes, it is "falling into disuse." This can be demonstrated through a few simple searches on Google:
Name                                 	æ hits	Non-æ hits
"Judæo-Arabic"/"Judeo-Arabic"        	12,200	13,500
"Judæo-Berber"/"Judeo-Berber"        	30    	531
"Judæo-Hamedani"/"Judeo-Hamedani"    	2     	18
"Judæo-Latin"/"Judeo-Latin"          	3     	68
"Judæo-Malayalam"/"Judeo-Malayalam"  	6     	12
"Judæo-Portuguese"/"Judeo-Portuguese"	8     	101
"Judæo-Romance"/"Judeo-Romance"      	15    	187
To Tomer: I don't think using the most clear and easily readable rendering is "anti-scholarly," not do I think that it violates any of Wikipedia's policies. On a side note I find your outrage rather disproportionate to the situation. Hopefully we can work this out together. Keep in touch. Warmest regards --Neutralitytalk 19:08, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
:Uf.  Your cut and paste was faster than my actually typing up my gripes.  I'm not outraged, as I said, I'm just irritated that this was done without so much as a word of discussion, and as such, done so incompletely.  If you have US-International kbd on your computer, æ is not even mildly difficult to type.  There is no evidence presented, even by you, that -e- is "easier to read" than -æ-.  Quoting a WP article claim that the ligature is "falling into disuse" is the same as Sirkumsize' quoting "Igor" (see Talk:Anti-Semitism#I am tired of your bullshit).  The vast majority of linguistics research, as with pretty much everything else, is still published in printing houses with ink on paper, not on google-accessible webpages, so when it comes to brainy subjects especially, as well as for various other reasons (some of which are touched upon below) the number of google hits is pretty irrelevant.  The relevant WP guidelines or policies that your unilateral undiscussed moves violate are Wikipedia:Consensus and Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English.  For more, please see below.  Tomer TALK 19:39, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
:I hate to say this, but see arguments on both sides. Frankly, "æ" looks more scholarly, but "e" is easier. Jayjg (talk) 19:41, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but lets move on from Neutrality's "bold" edit, and figure out what the preferred version is going forward. Jayjg (talk) 19:58, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yesyesyes.  If you look at the history a bit, you'll see that we both presented our cases at the same time.  What I wrote above is simply the same thing I had said in its own separate section, merged with minor rewording (since I took out the table already produced in Neutrality's statement) into the section above it.  Tomer TALK 01:59, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
I'm replacing the ligatures for a number of reasons. First, there are people (such as myself) who have laptop keyboards with which the only way one can really type out the ligatures is with the character map or to constantly be switching between languages in the language toolbar. Secondly, "academic" sources aside, as can be seen from the articles on fetus, encyclopedia, aesthetics, etc, it would be more consistent to stick with standard orthography, as per the Manual of Style. Lastly, besides being falling out of use, it is, quite frankly, an eyesore. Keeping it would be like preserving 'ſ': it would be dated and would only be an annoyance for modern readers.
If you have any objections, please feel free to revert along with an explanation  Lehi (talk) 09:12, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Judeo/Judæo

message: Urgent: see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Hebrew) to add your opinions about this important matter. Thank you. IZAK 18:13, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hebrew naming conventions 

message: What is the language most associated with being called 'Jewish'? If someone said "I speak Jewish" Which language would they most likely be referring to?
This is just curiosity on my part not for anything pertaining to the article. --Hellahulla 19:04, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If I recall it right, Ottoman Turks understood Spanish as the "Jewish language" since that is what they heard when the Sephardis of the Ottoman Empire talked. --Error 01:27, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: nowadays it's Hebrew, but saying "i speak jewish" is wrong, it's like saying "I speak american". Jews are all over the world and speak many languages. The languages I know of that were spoken in jewish communities:
Yiddish, since hebrew was sacred in and just bible. German, Spanish,Russian, Arabic and Morocco type arabic which my grandmother spoke. Israel is a place that gathered many people from all over the place, and there were a lot of languages talked. Check history books on the foundation of the country - there was a big debate between schools about which language to teach. Nowadays the first language taught is Hebrew. After that English. After that Arabic for a few years and then it becomes a chosen language (you can choose to continue with it or not) and the same with french, which you start to learn instead of arabic if you choose to. And Spanish is also an option in some schools.
So: 1.Hebrew 2.English 3.Arabic/French/Spanish sometimes
Hebrew you learn all the time under the name "lashon" which freely translated means "tounge". You learn the different laws of the Hebrew language.
After that English. Those two are a must, but english is split to groups, like math, for beginners, advanced and english speakers. I can't remember if the groups are there from the start.
Then Arabic, French and Spanish. Arabic spreads across a few years (you don't learn all the letters in one year) so you're basically catching up to a level of a small child. I never took French or Spanish.--217.132.208.171 (talk) 08:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Jewish

message: Somewhere in the article, it says that "The combined number of Jews who have spoken or now speak Hebrew or English is greater than that of Jews who have spoken Yiddish." While this sounds plausible, it begs for a reference, but that's not my point. Instead, I wonder what's the point to lump together English and Hebrew in one category and compare them with Yiddish. Among secular Jews outside Israel, speakers of Modern Hebrew are a minority dwarfed by the number of Jewish speakers of English (and other languages, depending on where they live). Also, linguistically, English and Hebrew have fairly little in common - while Yiddish and Hebrew are both specifically Jewish languages, and Yiddish and English are both Germanic languages. Thus, forming a combined class for English and Hebrew and then pointing out that it's bigger than Yiddish strikes me as fairly odd. It smacks of the old argument between advocates of Yiddish and Hebrew about what should be the proper Jewish language, as if someone wanted to hammer it home that Yiddish is heading south. (That internal Jewish quarrel is quite tasteless, btw. as large portions met their deaths in the Holocaust.) So unless someone can explain the factual (not political) point of this sentence for the article, I suggest to get rid of it. Jimmy Fleischer (talk) 18:13, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's the point of a comparison between English/(Modern) Hebrew and Yiddish in terms of number of speakers? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Jewish languages. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080725085641/http://www.bh.org.il/Links/JewishLangs.asp to http://www.bh.org.il/links/jewishlangs.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080407074136/http://hispanismo.cervantes.es/documentos/smidX.pdf to http://hispanismo.cervantes.es/documentos/smidX.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:27, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified