Filtern
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (34)
Dokumenttyp
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (34) (entfernen)
Sprache
- Englisch (34) (entfernen)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- nein (34) (entfernen)
Institut
- Institut für Jüdische Studien und Religionswissenschaft (34) (entfernen)
The Ram Bible (Tanakh Ram) is a recently-published Bible edition printed in two columns: the right-hand column features the original biblical Hebrew text and the lefthand column features the translation of the Bible into a high-register literary Israeli (Reclaimed Hebrew). The Ram Bible edition has gained impressive academic and popular attention. This paper looks at differences between academics, teachers, students, media personalities and senior officials in the education system, regarding their attitude to the Ram Bible. Our study reveals that Bible teachers and students who make frequent use of this edition understand its contribution to comprehending the biblical language, stories, and ideas. Opponents of Ram Bible are typically administrators and theoretician scholars who advocate the importance of teaching the Bible but do not actually teach it themselves. We argue that the fundamental difference between biblical Hebrew and Israeli makes the Hebrew Bible incomprehensible to native Israeli speakers. We explain the advantages of employing tools such as the Ram Bible.
Scholars of modern Jewish thought explore the hermeneutics of “translation” to describe the transference of concepts between discourses. I suggest a more radical approach – translation as transvaluation – is required. Eschewing modern tests of truth such as “the author would have accepted it” and “the author should have accepted it,” this radical form of translation is intentionally unfaithful to original meanings. However, it is not a reductionist reading or a liberating text. Instead, it is a persistent squabble depending on both source and translation for sustenance. Exploring this paradigm entails a review of three expositions of the Korah biblical narrative; three readings dedicated to keeping an eye on current events: (1) Tsene-rene (Prague, 1622), biblical prose; (2) Yaldei Yisrael Kodesh, (Tel Aviv, 1973), a secular Zionist reworking of Tsene-rene; and (3) The Jews are Coming (Israel, 2014–2017) a satirical television show.
This article explores an instructive case of translation critique against the background of the rise of Zionism in Europe at the turn of the previous century. It seeks to answer the question: Why did David Frishman, one of the most prolific Hebrew writers and translators of the late 1890s and early 1900s, criticize Vladimir Jabotinsky’s Russian translation of Hayim Nahman Bialik’s Hebrew poems? Both Bialik and Jabotinsky were major figures in the field of Hebrew culture and Zionist politics in the early 1900s, while Frishman generally shunned partisan activism and consistently presented himself as devoted solely to literature. Frishman perceived literature, nevertheless, as a political arena, viewing translation, in particular, as a locus of ideological debate. Writing from the viewpoint of a political minority at a time in which the Hebrew translation industry in Europe gained momentum, Frishman deemed translation a tool for cementing cultural hierarchies. He anticipated later analyses of the act and products of translation as reflective of intercultural tensions. The article suggests, more specifically, that it was Frishman’s view of the Hebrew Bible that informed his “avant-garde” stance on translation.
Kotzo shel yod by Y. L. Gordon (1832–1892) – one of the prominent intellectuals of the Jewish Enlightenment period – is a well-known Hebrew poem. This poem is characterized by a daring, sharp criticism of the traditional Jewish institutions, which the author felt required a critical shake-up. Gordon’s literary works were inspired by the Jewish Ashkenazi world. This unique and pioneering literary work was translated into Judeo-Spanish (Ladino). The aim of this article is to present the Sephardic version of Gordon’s poem. The article will attempt to examine the motives behind the translation of this work into Ladino, the reception of the translated work by its readership and the challenges faced by the anonymous translator who sought to make this work accessibleto the Ladino-reading public, in the clear knowledge that this version was quite far removed from the Ashkenazi original from which it sprang.
In this article we analyze several examples of the syntactic structure ansí un...(Eng. such a...) apparently calqued from the German expression so ein... that can be found in different Judeo-Spanish texts since the second half of 19th Century. Although the eldest examples appeared in Judeo-Spanish translations of German novels, published in Vienna – what suggests that they could be mere cases derived from a kind of translation too attached to the original –, we can also find more examples in Sephardic texts produced outside the German speaking area (Bosnia, Bulgaria, etc.), not being necessarily translations of a German original. Dealing with all these cases, we will try to trace (and explain) the spread of the ansí un syntactic structure in modern Judeo-Spanish prose.
The political and social changes with which the 19th century began in the Balkans after a great part of their territories were taken over by the Austrian Empire, also resulted in social and intellectual activity and created a new framework in the relationship with the Ottoman Empire. Vienna turned into the shelter of many citizens from the Balkans who then became the transmitters of innovation to their co-citizens through their contact with central European culture. In this sense, the members of Jewish communities participated as much as members of other ethnical and social groups. The most prominent of these Jews was Israel Hayim de Belogrado (‘of Belgrade’), who developed an important intellectual work in the Austrian capital between 1813 and 1837. He even reformed Judeo-Spanish spelling and introduced new methodologies for learning Hebrew as a second language, based on the use of a trilingual nomenclature (Hebrew, Judeo-Spanish, German) when presenting the lexical repertoire.
This paper explores questions surrounding corporeality and heavenly ascent, in texts ranging from 1 Enoch to the Hekhalot literature, including Philo’s works. It examines both descriptions of the heavenly realms and accounts of the ascent process. Despite his Platonic apophaticism, Philo superimposes cosmological and spiritual heavens, and draws upon the biblical imagery of dazzling glory. Although they do not express themselves in philosophical language, the heavenly ascent texts make it clear that human beings cannot ascend to heaven in their earthly bodies, and that God cannot be seen with terrestrial eyes. In terms of ideas they are not so far from the philosopher Philo as might at first appear.
This article examines Pierre Nora’s concept of memory using the examples of York and Winchester to demonstrate the individuality of local approaches to the memory of medieval Anglo-Jewries. Overall, this paper will highlight how memory can be rescued from a period of prolonged silence and reintegrated back into a wider historical narrative. Conversely it will also examine how in stark contrast to this new attitude of remembering the silence surrounding Jewish memory continues to exist elsewhere. Finally this paper will ask why this silence remains, and question whether Nora’s theory that memory is constantly evolving is applicable to the experiences of Jewish memory in York and Winchester.
This article considers one of the major weaknesses in the existing historiography of Irish Jewry, the failure to consider the true extent and impact of antisemitism on Ireland’s Jewish community. This is illustrated through a brief survey of one small area of the Irish-Jewish narrative, the Jewish relationship with Irish nationalist politics. Throughout, the focus remains on the need for a fresh approach to the sources and the issues at hand, in order to create a more holistic, objective and inclusive history of the Jewish experience in Ireland.