Names, my friends, are often lost in translation, and it is a good show of sensitivity to names to attempt to render them as loyal to their language of origin as possible. One simple example is that what are today known as ‘Muslims’ in English were once known as Muhamadeans, or ‘followers of Muhammad’ (a word which even the spell check today doesn’t pick up), but after prolonged interactions between the British and the Arabs the former became more aware of how absurd a name Muhamadeans was, and ultimately called the Arabs as they call themselves, ‘Muslims’ (in today’s day the American president is known to be setting precedents in regards to pronouncing names more correctly, such as pronounciations of ‘Iraq’ and ‘Iran’ in which they don’t rhyme with ‘rack’ and ‘ran’).
I bring this up, friends, because the word to describe my own religion is not the word with the most exquisite intonation in the English language. In fact it’s a monosyllable name: ‘Jew’. In my mind there is no question that the way this word evolved in Romance, Germanic and other European languages had a lot to do with how Jews were seen for time immemorial, namely hated beyond all hate and despised beyond all spite. I think it’s quite possible the name could have been rendered ‘Judean’ or ‘Israelite’ or something along those lines, had the original transliteratiors of that name not had a disposition towards us, especially considering they gave themselves the long, flowery two syllable name of ‘Christians’.
That is without mentioning that in the English language the word ‘Jew’ has become a byword for every vice and degeneracy that one may conjure up. To call a Jew a ‘Jew’ is slander enough. And not the word ‘Jew’ alone, but also the English title for our holy sages the bearers of the tradition and authors of the Mishna and Talmud has become a despicable word. A ‘Pharisee’ is the most acute kind of hypocrite.
Yet our own hands are not completely clean of this behavior, since in our literature we give ourselves the flattering name of ‘Yisrael’, whereas a member of the nations gets the one syllable title which has become a byword for unruliness and ung-dliness in its own right: ‘Goy’.
Should we then, as the Muslims, demand we be called by a more flattering name? Our ancestors in Germany two hundred years ago tried a similar thing; they demanded to be called ‘Germans of the Mosaic Faith’. The name worked for a while, but anytime the Western European powers were in the Jew-hating mood they passed legislation that they should officially be called ‘Jews’.
One current approach to the issue that I’ve been hearing since I was young is to use the word ‘Yehudi’ in English as opposed to ‘Jew’ (which seems to be the approach our friend Ehav Ever has taken). My own approach has been similar, which is to at least call ourselves by the name of Yisrael if we’re speaking in a religious context. Though as far as official linguistic usages are concerned, I usually feel far more comfortable using a name that’s already found in the dictionary, even if it has a ‘goolis-yeed’, bourgeoisie sort of swindling connotation to it which is the epitome of every ill ever associated with our nation.
9 comments:
Jew (Judio) is the most flattering name I can think of; it comes from Tanakh and refers to the kingdom of Judah.
What other name could possibly represent such historic continuity?
Not even Israel, because Judaism descends predominantly from the southern kingdom, not as much the North.
and what is so unflattering about mohemmedans????
i suppose in English, which leaves the D out for some reason, it doesn't evoke Judah as much as the spanish or german, but i doubt anyone would be very enthusiastic about using the german version.
Hey. First of all, thanks for reading : ), I know my style is a little unreadable.
Secondly: "Jew (Judio) is the most flattering name I can think of; it comes from Tanakh and refers to the kingdom of Judah...i suppose in English, which leaves the D out for some reason, it doesn't evoke Judah as much as the spanish or german"- Yes, that's what I meant to say, without the D I don't really think of . Though even "H'udio", if it's used in a derogative context it's not so good. Like "Arab", in English it sounds...well it doesn't sound quite flattering, and it rhymes with words like "crab". Yet in Arabic, "العرب" is evocative of the spiritual and racial purity of Arabia that all Arabs strive for, so...even a proper transliteration can go sour.
"and what is so unflattering about mohemmedans????"- Well, it's representative of a great ignorance of Islam to call them only by the name of their follower. It's kind of like calling Christians "Jesus people", or Jews "Moseseans" (which reminds me of an anecdote involving this Haitian chef I worked with who once told me in passing "The Christians believe in Jesus and the Jews, they believe in Moses, right?" As if we deify him. Which, by the way, is why I think the Christians insist on calling the Torah "[The Law of Moses", as if to imply it wasn't really G-d's idea).
*ahem*, anyway, calling them by their own name "Musl'min" (משורש המילה לשלמות) is a lot more thoughtful.
"i doubt anyone would be very enthusiastic about using the german version."- Well I think "Yood" sounds a lot more like "Yehoodi" than some of the other European names. In Russian it's "Ivreski" (Hebrew) which is also not so bad. But like I said, it's all about intent.
Whoops, "Yes, that's what I meant to say, without the D I don't really think of [מלכות יהודה]." Left out the Hebrew there.
"it's representative of a great ignorance of Islam to call them only by the name of their follower"- Name of their "prophet" I think I meant to say. ..gotta start reading before publishing...
I'm with kisarita on this one.
"Like "Arab", in English it sounds...well it doesn't sound quite flattering, and it rhymes with words like "crab"." -- I'm sorry, but that is one of the most childish arguments I have ever heard. I don't see anything 'wrong' with the way Arab sounds in English, unless it is in the tone of voice the speaker uses.
"It's kind of like calling Christians "Jesus people"" -- That's pretty much what it is though. Christians = followers of Jesus _____.
"In Russian it's "Ivreski" (Hebrew) which is also not so bad." -- In Russian, Jew is 'Ivrey,' the plural of which is 'Ivreyi.' 'Ivreski' is the adjective form -- 'Jewish.'
"I don't see anything 'wrong' with the way Arab sounds in English, unless it is in the tone of voice the speaker uses"- I still disagree, friend. I feel that the sound itself is unflattering. If an English speaker had the choice to be called either "Arab" or "Christian" without having any knowledge of the meaning of either word, I'm afraid he's pick the latter.
"That's pretty much what it is though. Christians = followers of Jesus _____"- Yes, obviously. What I was trying to point out though was that the speaker here has no sympathy to what they're 'actually' called, and just calls them by their leader (though that is a horrible example, since all they are is followers of the Nazarene. For Muslims it's offensive to suggest divinity to Muhammad).
"In Russian, Jew is 'Ivrey'"- Oh man, I knew I was making some mistake! I've got to brush-up on my Russian!
*he'd* pick.
Post a Comment