Author:
Belk Zoë,Kahn Lily,Szendrői Kriszta Eszter
Abstract
AbstractYiddish was the everyday language spoken by most Central and East European Jews during the last millennium. As a result of the extreme loss of speakers during the Holocaust, subsequent geographic dispersal, and lack of institutional support, Yiddish is now an endangered language. Yet it continues to be a native and daily language for Haredi (strictly Orthodox) Jews, who live in close-knit communities worldwide. We have conducted the first study of the linguistic characteristics of the Yiddish spoken in the community in London’s Stamford Hill. While Krogh (in: Aptroot, Aptroot et al. (eds.) Leket: Yiddish studies today, Düsseldorf University Press, Düsseldorf, pp 483–506, 2012), Assouline (in: Aptroot, Hansen (eds.) Yiddish language structures, De Gruyter Mouton, Berlin, pp 39–62, 2014), and Sadock and Masor (J Jew Lang 6(1):89–110, 2018), investigating other Hasidic Yiddish-speaking communities, observe what they describe as morphological syncretism, in this paper we defend the claim that present-day Stamford Hill Hasidic Yiddish lacks morphological case and gender completely. We demonstrate that loss of morphological case and gender is the result of substantial language change over the course of two generations: while the case and gender system of the spoken medium was already beginning to undergo morphological syncretism and show some variation prior to World War II, case and gender distinctions were clearly present in the mental grammar of both Hasidic and non-Hasidic speakers of the relevant Yiddish dialects at that stage. We conclude the paper by identifying some of the language-internal, sociolinguistic and historical factors that have contributed to such rapid and pervasive language change, and compare the developments in Stamford Hill Hasidic Yiddish to those of minority German dialects in North America.
Funder
University College London
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
Reference54 articles.
1. Allen, Cynthia L. 1997. Middle English case loss and the ‘creolization’ hypothesis. English Language and Linguistics 1 (1): 63–89.
2. Assouline, Dalit. 2014. Language change in a bilingual community: The preposition far in Israeli Haredi Yiddish. In Yiddish language structures, ed. Marion Aptroot and Björn Hansen, 39–62. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
3. Assouline, Dalit. 2017. Contact and ideology in a multilingual community: Yiddish and Hebrew among the Ultra-Orthodox. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
4. Assouline, Dalit. 2019. Subordination in American and Israeli Haredi Yiddish. Paper presented at YiLaS 2, University of Düsseldorf, 11–13 June 2019.
5. Bates, Elizabeth, Angela D. Friederici, and Brian Wulfeck. 1987. Grammatical morphology in aphasia: Evidence from three languages. Cortex 24 (3): 545–574.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献