RE: Imre be-ma'arava? Imri bi-me'arava? Or something else?

[Barry Walfish]

Sorry, that should probably be the sages of Erets Israel, which is west of 
Babylonia.

Dr. Barry D. Walfish
Judaica and Theology Specialist
Collection Development Department and
Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library
University of Toronto Library
130 St. George St.
Toronto, ON
Canada M5S 1A5
phone: 416-946-3176 or 416-978-4319
fax: 416-978-1667 or 416-946-0635
e-mail: barry.walf...@utoronto.ca


-Original Message-
From: owner-heb-n...@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu 
[mailto:owner-heb-n...@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Talbott
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 15:58
To: hebnaco
Subject: Imre be-ma'arava? Imri bi-me'arava? Or something else?

Folks:

I have a book with troubling romanization issues:

alef-mem-resh-yud bet-mem-ayin-resh-bet-alef.

The record in OCLC provides "Imre be-ma'arava (sayings in the west)," 
but in light of the fact that book is about the differences in the 
arguments and argumentation in the two Talmuds (Talmudlar? Talmudok? 
Talmudim? Talmudayim?  Pick your poison) and the apparent grammatical 
structure of the title, I smell a rat.  A large, mis-vocalizing, 
ungrammatical rat.

I suspect that the title should be correctly romanized as, "Imri 
bi-me'arava," reading the alef-mem-resh-yud as a verb, allowing for a 
bit of flexibility in the prepositional particle, and vocalizing the 
last as a peal participle with an article, "I spoke of the mixture."  
But I may be barking up the wrong tree in a strange neighborhood of a 
city that isn't my own. I fear I know just enough to really screw things 
up, thus I ask for assistance.

Please help.

Bob

RE: Imre be-ma'arava? Imri bi-me'arava? Or something else?

[Barry Walfish]

My guess would be: amre be-ma'arava, meaning "they say in the west", referring 
to the sages of Babylonia, but I'd need more context to be sure.

Barry

Dr. Barry D. Walfish
Judaica and Theology Specialist
Collection Development Department and
Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library
University of Toronto Library
130 St. George St.
Toronto, ON
Canada M5S 1A5
phone: 416-946-3176 or 416-978-4319
fax: 416-978-1667 or 416-946-0635
e-mail: barry.walf...@utoronto.ca

-Original Message-
From: owner-heb-n...@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu 
[mailto:owner-heb-n...@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Talbott
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 15:58
To: hebnaco
Subject: Imre be-ma'arava? Imri bi-me'arava? Or something else?

Folks:

I have a book with troubling romanization issues:

alef-mem-resh-yud bet-mem-ayin-resh-bet-alef.

The record in OCLC provides "Imre be-ma'arava (sayings in the west)," 
but in light of the fact that book is about the differences in the 
arguments and argumentation in the two Talmuds (Talmudlar? Talmudok? 
Talmudim? Talmudayim?  Pick your poison) and the apparent grammatical 
structure of the title, I smell a rat.  A large, mis-vocalizing, 
ungrammatical rat.

I suspect that the title should be correctly romanized as, "Imri 
bi-me'arava," reading the alef-mem-resh-yud as a verb, allowing for a 
bit of flexibility in the prepositional particle, and vocalizing the 
last as a peal participle with an article, "I spoke of the mixture."  
But I may be barking up the wrong tree in a strange neighborhood of a 
city that isn't my own. I fear I know just enough to really screw things 
up, thus I ask for assistance.

Please help.

Bob

Benn

[Barry Walfish]

Dear Safranim,

This is for Joan or someone else at LC who deals with Name headings. Would it 
be possible to get the heading Benn, Bencjon, 1905- changed to Benn, 1905-1989. 
The Jewish artist in question, Benn, originally from Poland, used the name Benn 
throughout his career. I don't believe there is a single publication or work of 
art by him that has the name Bencjon on it. The EJ2 simply lists him as Benn. 
Since he's an artist, other reference works may be called into play, but it 
should be obvious that the LC form is not the commonly used form of the name, 
and its use is perpetuating this distortion of the artist's public persona. 

Thanks,

Barry


Barry Dov Walfish, Ph.D.
Judaica Specialist
University of Toronto Libraries 
Toronto, ON M5S 1A5
Canada

Between worlds

[Barry Walfish]

LC Control No.:  89026341
LCCN Permalink: http://lccn.loc.gov/89026341
Type of Material:Book (Print, Microform, Electronic, etc.)
Personal Name:   Tirosh-Samuelson, Hava, 1950-
Main Title:  Between worlds : the life and thought of Rabbi David ben Judah 
Messer Leon / Hava Tirosh-Rothschild.
Published/Created:   Albany : State University of New York Press, c1991.
Description: viii, 385 p. ; 24 cm.
ISBN:0791404471 (alk. paper)
079140448X (pbk. : alk. paper)
Notes:   Includes bibliographical references (p. 343-375) and index.
Subjects:Judah ben Jehiel, 15th cent.
Rabbis --Italy --Biography.
Rabbis --Turkey --Biography.
Jewish philosophers --Biography.
Judaism --Doctrines --History --16th century.
Series:  SUNY series in Judaica : Hermeneutics, mysticism, and religion
SUNY series in Judaica.

This book about David ben Judah Messer Leon does not list him as a subject, 
only his father, Judah ben Jehiel. Odd, no?

Barry


Barry Dov Walfish, Ph.D.
Judaica Specialist
University of Toronto Libraries 
Toronto, ON M5S 1A5
Canada

Cabala vs. kabbalah

[Barry Walfish]

 I guess this is for Lenore, but I'm curious if other people agree.

LC uses Cabala as  a subject heading, which is a form of kabbalah which is 
hardly used these days. Wouldn't it be nice to join the parade and use the form 
of the term that is most common?

Barry


Barry Dov Walfish, Ph.D.
Judaica Specialist
University of Toronto Libraries 
Toronto, ON M5S 1A5
Canada

Hatam Sofer

[Barry Walfish]

Radak is not a good analogy because it's a stand-alone. It seems likely that 
Hatam is in semikhut with Sofer. Why wouldn't it be? Furthermore, Orthodox 
Ashkenazim pronounce his name Chasam Sofer. If there were a kamats under the 
het and tav it would be Chosom.

Barry 


Barry Dov Walfish, Ph.D.
Judaica Specialist
University of Toronto Libraries 
Toronto, ON M5S 1A5
Canada

Hatam Sofer

[Barry Walfish]

Unless there's a kamats under the het, which I strongly doubt, I see no reason 
for he-Hatam Sofer. It should be ha-Hatam, like la-hakham, etc.

And before you go changing all the he-hags, please note that there are 4 
he-hags, 4 be-hags and 1 ke-hag in the Tanakh. It's the kamats that demands the 
segol.

Barry


Barry Dov Walfish, Ph.D.
Judaica Specialist
University of Toronto Libraries
Toronto, ON M5S 1A5
Canada

From: owner-heb-n...@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu 
[owner-heb-n...@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu] On Behalf Of 
heb-naco@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu [heb-n...@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 12:06 AM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel
Subject: HEB-NACO digest 1376

HEB-NACO Digest 1376

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) he-hag no more
by "Joan C Biella" 

--

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:43:02 -0500
From: "Joan C Biella" 
To: 
Subject: he-hag no more
Message-ID: <4b4f3b8602e600096...@ntgwgate.loc.gov>

Dear colleagues,

Recently in leafing idly through the new edition of Even-Shoshan I
noticed that one of my favorite off-the-wall Hebrew romanization
oddities exists no more.  In the article on “hag [subscript dot under
the h]” we are no longer instructed to romanize the singular with the
definite article as “he-hag” (with segol and kamats).  I counted six
uses of “ha-hag” (two patahs) in the article.

The LC database had 49 hits for “he-hag,” 29 for “ha-hag.”
I’ll get started fixing the 49.

In the grip of fear for other old favorites, I checked the articles
which cover “he-hasid,” “he-hakham,” “he-haver,” and
“he-‘arim.”  I didn’t see any evidence that these need to
be changed.  he-Hatam Sofer is also safe for the moment.

Joan


--

End of HEB-NACO Digest 1376
***

yerah she-marbin bo be-simhah

[Barry Walfish]

That would be Adar.
 
Barry

supercommentaries

[Barry Walfish]

I would say, two subject headings,
 
one Bible. 
O.T.Pentateuch.vCommentaries
 
and one for Rashi. Perush al ha-Torah
 
Barry
 
Date: Mon, 6 
Mar 2006 10:34:31 -From: "Silke Schaeper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Subject: supracommentary on Rashi's 
Pentateuch commentaryMessage-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Dear all,would one create the 
subject heading+aBible.+pO.T.+pPentateuch+vCommentaries+vCriticism, 
interpretation, etc.for a supracommentary on Rashi's Pentateuch 
commentary?Silke Schaeper, 
Oxford

sevak/sabak

[Barry Walfish]

Perhaps the book is referring to Tverski as 
ha-Sav/saba ha-kadosh.
 
Barry

Bet genazai

[Barry Walfish]

The word genazim does not seem to appear in the singular, so ginzi is out.

ginze would be the bound form of genazim, so unless it's bound to another
noun, that is out.

Ezra 7:20 has bet ginze malka, the king's treasury.

That leaves genazai, the plural form with the first person possessive
pronoun. Bet genazai would be "my treasurehouse."

Barry
- Original Message -
From: 
To: "Hebrew Name Authority Funnel" 
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 12:55 AM
Subject: HEB-NACO digest 1028


> HEB-NACO Digest 1028
>
> Topics covered in this issue include:
>
>   1) bet ginze?
> by "Joan C Biella" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>   2) help with transcription
> by "Heidi Lerner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>   3) Re: thoughts on agadta/agadeta
> by "Benjamin S Fryser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>   4) Re: help with transcription
> by Clifford Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> --
>
> Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 09:10:33 -0400
> From: "Joan C Biella" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: bet ginze?
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I'm working on a couple of those books by Mosheh Lurya that are called =
> "Sefer Bet ginze."  Or "Sefer Bet genazai."  Our database has both forms,
=
> and in RLIN you can even find "Sefer Bet ginzi."
>
> "Bet ginze" occurs in Ezra 7:20.  Are the other forms, or either of them,
=
> also quotations?
>
> What's the best way to romanize this phrase?
>
> Thank you for your expertise--
> Joan
>
>
> --
>
> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 09:45:32 -0700
> From: "Heidi Lerner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: help with transcription
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> --=_NextPart_000_002C_01C5B45A.0E489020
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="utf-8"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Dear Group,
>
> I am cataloging a book with the title:
>
> Hakhi "gimel,resh,sameh,yud,nun,nun sofi" (in Hebrew charachters  =
> "=D7=94=D7=9B=D7=99 =D7=92=D7=A8=D7=A1=D7=99=D7=A0=D7=9F").
>
> Would this be transcribed "Hakhi garsinan".
>
> Thanks, Heidi
>
>
> Heidi G. Lerner
> Hebraica/Judaica Cataloger
> Catalog Dept.
> Stanford University Libraries
> Stanford, CA  94305-6004
> ph: 650-725-9953
> fax: 650-725-1120
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --=_NextPart_000_002C_01C5B45A.0E489020
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="utf-8"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> =EF=BB=BF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Group,
>  
> I am cataloging a book with the =
> title:
>  
> Hakhi "gimel,resh,sameh,yud,nun,nun =
> sofi" (in=20
> Hebrew charachters  "=D7=94=D7=9B=D7=99 =
> =D7=92=D7=A8=D7=A1=D7=99=D7=A0=D7=9F").
>  
> Would this be transcribed "Hakhi=20
> garsinan".
>  
> Thanks, Heidi
>  
>  
> Heidi G. LernerHebraica/Judaica=20
> CatalogerCatalog Dept.Stanford University LibrariesStanford, =
>
> CA  94305-6004ph: 650-725-9953fax: 650-725-1120e-mail: =
>  href=3D"mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]<=
> /BODY>
>
> --=_NextPart_000_002C_01C5B45A.0E489020--
>
>
>
> --
>
> Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 14:50:25 -0400
> From: "Benjamin S Fryser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: Re: thoughts on agadta/agadeta
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Here are my two "agorot" to the discussion.=20
>
> Whom are we cataloguing Hebrew works for?  Define your patrons and you =
> have an answer.
>
> Do our typical Hebrew language patrons care about esoteric grammatical =
> rules and how cataloguers  reflect these  in their romanization scheme?=20
>
> It seems to me that most of them would search the online catalogue using =
> Hebrew script, and if they do resort to romanization,  most of them,  =
> including native speakers like me,  would  have a hard time pronouncing =
> let alone searching  "likatti/hagadta/huladto. =20
>
> I vote for  likateti/hagadeta/huladeto,  etc.  because these forms =
> represent searching reality.   Since we need to standardize our practice,
=
> we can add an "exception" note to the revised HCM,  and if you wish, =
> instruct those purist among us to add a 246 field with the "correct" form
=
> when appropriate.=20
>
> This is my personal opinion and should not be considered a formal Library
=
> of  Congress position.
>
>  Benjamin
=
> Fryser
>  Senior =
> Cataloguing Specialist
>  Library =
> of Congress
>=20
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/26/05 10:07 am >>>
> Our databases are very inconsistent in romanizing the sequence "dalet (or
=
> other dental consonant) with sheva nah-tav with dagesh." Some examples are
=
> agadta/agadeta, huladto/huladeto, and (closely related) likatti/likateti.
>
> This problem is not discussed in HCM, probably because the author didn't =
> en

u-politit/ u-folitit

[Barry Walfish]

Found these:
 
 Ravitzky, 
Aviezer. Title: ha-Kahana’ut 
ke-tofa‘ah toda‘tit u-poli·tit / Avi‘ezer Ravits·ki. Publication info: Yerushalayim : Sifriyat Shazar, ha-Makhon le-Yahadut 
zemanenu, ha-Universi·tah ha-‘Ivrit bi-Yerushalayim, 1985. 
 
2 others as well.
 
 Gil‘adi, 
Dan 
Title: ha-Yishuv 
bi-te·kufat ha-‘aliyah ha-revi‘it (1924-1929) : be·hinah kalkalit u-foli·tit / 
Dan Gil‘adi. Publication info: Tel-Aviv : ‘Am ‘oved - Tarbut ve-·hinukh, 1973. 

 
I couldn't get into LC's catalogue this morning, 
but I assume they're both LC records.
 
Barry

She'elat Ya'avets/She'ilat Ya'vets/She'ilat Ya'bets?

[Barry Walfish]

Dear Learned Colleagues,

Here's a puzzler. R. Jacob Emden wrote a book of responsa called She'elat
(She'ilat?; there is a yod after the alef) Y.A.B.Ts.

The Eureka catalogue seems to be about evenly split between two forms:
She'elat Ya'avets and She'ilat Ya'vets.

Re She'elat/She'ilat, do we read the word differently because of the yod, or
ignore it and read it as she'elat as if the yod weren't there? I'm not sure.
But, why put the yod there if she'elat were the intended reading. It is not
ambiguous without the yod.

Re YABTs, this is obviously an acronym for Ya'akov ben Tsevi, but if this is
so, why the v and not b. Furthermore, there is a name Ya'bets in I
Chronicles 4:9-10. Furthermore, in the 1884 Lemberg edition that I am
cataloguing, Ya'bets is spelt as a single word without quotation marks
between the last two letters, indicating that it was meant to be pronounced
as the name in Chronicles.

Incidentally, there are many other books of Emden's in the catalogue which
use Ya'bets (Zohore Ya'bets, Toldot Yab'ets, etc.) and there are many other
books of responsa which use She'ilat. So, mah nishtanah ha-sefer ha-zeh?

Seems to me the correct romanization of the title should be She'ilat
Ya'bets. What say you?


Barry Walfish