Monday, June 11, 2007

The Americanization of Israel and Hebrew

Rating Advisory: P

In a previous post I discussed how the ubiquitous Israeli shopping mall is indicative of the rise of materialism and consumer culture in the Holy Land (click here). Don’t get me wrong. There are a lot of changes in Israel I am happy to see as a result of this. I, for one, never enjoyed buying milk in plastic bags; cartons are definitely a step in the right direction.

I also don’t mind the availability of American products on supermarket shelves. When I was in yeshivah in 1992/3, American food products were first starting to make their appearance. The trail was initially blazed by chocholate products like Mars bars and M & Ms (which at that time were not yet kosher in America.) But that was about it. Eli, for example, came back from a visit to his parents in New York with a suitcase stuffed with little Heinz ketchup packets. At the time we all mocked him (he was the softest among us when it came to “roughing it” in Israel), though secretly I was jealous of him as I am clinically addicted to Heinz ketchup.

Then a major supermarket chain (I think it was Supersol) promoted shavu’ah America (“America week”), during which shelves were stocked with products imported from America. We were in the middle of nowhere and there was no Supersol to be found for miles around us, so we all hitchhiked to Jerusalem to enjoy some gustatory comforts from home.

Of course today the supermarkets are full of American products:
I am happy to report that on my most recent trip to Israel I was able to find Heinz ketchup at the local corner makolet (grocery store) for just 15.90 shekel.

"There is no meal without Heinz ketchup"
(Click to enlarge)

* * *
Since the 1990s, Israelis who are enamored with American culture have not looked back.

Which is fine.

Except when it comes to Hebrew language.

I can understand Israelis’ infatuation with American food, music, celebrities, etc., but why do they feel the need to pervert the Holy Tongue with English vocabulary. Don’t get me wrong. I understand very well that Hebrew, like all languages is dynamic and evolves from era to era, if not from generation to generation. The Hebrew of Moses, Isaiah and Hillel each differs from one another, to say nothing of later eras until today. Each generation adapted Hebrew for its own needs, which always included a significant amount of borrowing from the dominant contemporary regional language.

So I understand that there is really no such thing as “pure” Hebrew. (Among the reasons I was once rejected for a teaching position at a local high school was that my Hebrew is not “pure” enough.) Yet I am still disturbed when I hear (and read) Israelis who callously and capriciously corrupt Hebrew when it is completely unnecessary. I don’t expect Israelis to incorporate every recommendation of the Academy of the Hebrew Lanaguage into their daily usage, especially technical terms, but why do Israelis have to throw away perfectly good words that have been in common use and accepted by the masses for thousands of years. (The Academy of the Hebrew Language serves as the guardian of the Holy Tongue and is responsible, among other things, for designating official neologisms wherever necessary.)

Take the Hebrew word for chicken, עוף oaf, for example. This word appears throughout the Bible and continues to be recognized (or should be) by every first-grader. Even my galut-raised two-and-a-half-year-old son knows this word. Yet the Israeli Burger King franchises seem to think that their customers are more familiar with the English word “chicken” than the Hebrew word oaf. You think I am kidding? Then how else to explain the fact that the menu in this fine culinary establishment lists צ'יקן פילה chicken fillet?
(Click on images to enlarge.)

(Yes, as American tourists we do get our kicks by eating in the American chains that have opened in Israel.
But for the record, Burger Ranch is better than Burger King. Also, while Pizza Hut is quite good, the average Israeli pizzeria is just as good as Dominoes. Be sure to check each individual location for a kashruth certificate.)

Another thing I just don’t get is why Israeli stores prefer English-only signs. (I’m not talking about those businesses that are targeted specifically at tourists.) This store on Ben Yehudah in Jerusalem, for example, has not one Hebrew word in its sign, yet I still could not figure out what they sold.

To be continued . . . (Our favorite place in the world: Mahane Yehudah)

Labels: , , , , ,

13 Comments:

Blogger Rafi G said...

I think it is pretty obvious what they sell..... "c cup and up.."

Monday, June 11, 2007 2:23:00 AM  
Blogger Ari Kinsberg said...

i didn't go in, so i can't confirm what they actually sell. but i'll take your word for it.

Monday, June 11, 2007 2:30:00 AM  
Blogger Simon said...

I don't think you can blame Israelis for Burger King... they do the same thing in Arabic.

Monday, June 11, 2007 3:09:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I imagine BK was just trying to give it an American flavor. Actually, even better than fileh oaf would probably be...shnitzel!
Look, from your Zionist perspective you should prefer that America go to Israel rather than the Israeli go to America. (And aren't Israelis entitled to all the amenities Americans are entitled to? Sorry we aren't keeping up our end of the chulutz ideology for you all in the US...)
I also wonder who is reading all those store signs in English -- are Israelis so literate in English? How do they list those stores in the phone book?
What should gall you even more is that it's considered hip to use American phrases like "Give me a break." I get especially turned off when Israelis use "face to face." In English!

s

Monday, June 11, 2007 3:41:00 AM  
Blogger Rafi G said...

I have never seen it before or been inside either, but I think it is pretty obvious from the sign...

Monday, June 11, 2007 4:51:00 AM  
Blogger Ari Kinsberg said...

SIMON:

i can't read arabic charachters. is chicken transliterated into arabic also?

(just to clarify, my issue is not that "chicken" appears on the menu in english, but rather that it is spelled out in hebrew charachters.)

S:

i think i remembe menachem begin (or shamir or someone else) refusing to attend the opening of a shopping strip because some stores did not have any hebrew in the signs

"shinitzel"

i don't think they actually prepare it the same way as shnitzel

"And aren't Israelis entitled to all the amenities Americans are entitled to?"

BK = amenity?

"Sorry we aren't keeping up our end of the chulutz ideology for you all in the US..."

you know we expect that theme park image we have of israel to be accurate when we visit.

RAFI:

ok, i'll concede!

Monday, June 11, 2007 10:42:00 AM  
Blogger Steg (dos iz nit der šteg) said...

the bottom line of arabic says "wjbä king chicken filet" (don't remember what the vowels there are... wajabat maybe)

Monday, June 11, 2007 12:02:00 PM  
Blogger Ari Kinsberg said...

steg:

thanks for the clarification

Monday, June 11, 2007 12:26:00 PM  
Blogger Mississippi Fred MacDowell said...

I think the great dream of the revival of Hebrew was that it should become the natural, un-selfconscious medium of expression. This includes the natural admixture from other languages. Davka policing the language is what is unnatural. I think the fact that Israelis have dropped pronunciation of the heh is beautiful. It represents an internal, home grown development, no less legitimate than the adoption of -in for -im long ago. Lest one argues that that was an Aramaism and is also unfortunate, what of the many Aramaisms in Biblical Hebrew?

Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:49:00 AM  
Anonymous ari kinsberg said...

FRED:

"This includes the natural admixture from other languages."

i think that the extent to which neologism (especially from other languages) should be used was a matter of debate among those involved in the modern revival of hebrew.

in any case, were biblical aramisms used because there was no vocabulary/idiom "native" to hebrew to express a particular idea, or did they replace established usages?

i guess it doesn't really matter, since i myself recognized that hebrew has constantly developed through the ages. i guess it just hurts to see the process for some reason. especially since where you see something beautiful, i just see a development that is part and parcel of a general aping of western culture.

"Davka policing the language is what is unnatural."

a la france?

but where do you draw the line? what do you tell your kid when he explains that he failed english class because he prefers his own "natural, un-selfconscious medium of expression"?

Tuesday, June 12, 2007 11:33:00 AM  
Blogger Mississippi Fred MacDowell said...

Honestly? I'm not so enamored with the rules in English classes. However, I recognize on the practical level that while there aren't correct and incorrect ways of speaking a language (on the part of native speakers) how one speaks can determine how one is perceived--and that itself is natural as well. So while I don't think that it makes the slightest difference if one ends an English sentence with a preposition--I understand that rule was artificially imposed onto English because in Latin one can't end a sentence with a preposition; but in English one very much can; we're simply told that we may not--I certainly would not encourage my child to end sentences with a preposition and expect success doing so.

The truth is that the idea of purity in language is an illusion. What is French but degraded Latin with the silly tendency to not pronounce half the consonants? (but the result sounds fairly pretty!)

On the other hand, I am glad that by virtue of the fact that Hebrew was not a spoken, native tongue and also that its orthography was partially frozen at an early date that today we have a close connection with Hebrew in all its phases, unlike English, where even to comprehend English from 600 years ago is a chore. So I am actually not as descriptive as I pretend to be, I just play one on TV. Kidding aside, I really stand closer to the middle of the issue, it is just that I like to be a counterbalance. I appreciate the pedant's point of view, but I also don't see how it can be justified by any realistic historical approach to language. Even the vowels make a mockery of Hebrew as a vital, spoken language. There is no such thing as a language where every syllable and consonant is consistently pronounced only one way due to nature. And come to think of it, isn't Tiberian Hebrew itself the outgrowth of grassroots changes? How do you think the BGDKPT arose?

Friday, June 15, 2007 11:13:00 AM  
Blogger Special Ed said...

rafi got this one right, I went in once on one of those early shana aleph dares.

Tuesday, June 19, 2007 11:07:00 PM  
Blogger Ari Kinsberg said...

Special Ed:

i never really doubted rafi.

so tell me, what passes for a shanah bet dare?

Wednesday, June 20, 2007 12:09:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home