aem wrote:
> sarah bennett wrote:
>
>>The *meaning of the word* is "abomination, unclean thing".
>
>
> No, that's the meaning of the Hebrew root. Females are not treated
> terribly well in the languages of ancient patrimonial cultures.
> Etymology is not definition.
The root of the word has nothing to do with gender. "shiksa" and
"shaygez" have the same root. In Hebrew, as I have already stated,
three-letter "roots" make up multiple words with similar meanings.
> The meaning of 'shiksa' as used in Yiddish and English today is to be
> found in a current dictionary and by agreement among the language's
> community.
>
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/shiksa?view=uk
I am sure there are many casual speakers of Yiddish and Hebrew who have
no knowledge that this is an offensive word. I am certain that those who
know the actual meaning of the word are not terribly interested for non-
Hebrew and Yiddish speakers to understand how offensive the word really
is. Considering how I was told to not make a fuss about this particular
issue when I was in high school, when I objected to the use of the term
casually, I was told that since Jews "are" the people who chose the
Torah, that there was nothing wrong with calling non-Jews "abominations"
in this sense. Of course, none of these people would have been caught
dead using the word "schvartzeh" (black), which has negative
connotations used in a certain sense, but not in a general sense.
>
>>In hebrew,
>>all words are based on three-letter "root words" that tie together
>>different words with correlative meanings.
>
>
> True, with prefixes, infixes and suffixes. But completely irrelevant.
>
It's not irrelevant. You are just not familiar with Hebrew grammar and
word construction.
http://www.hebrewatmilah.org/index.htm
In Hebrew, the root is the base meaning of the word. Other letters added
on simply state the specific use of that idea. For instance, the
three-letter root "k-t-v", or "write" is used in the words "ketubah"
(marriage contract), "hichtiv" (dictated) "ketiv" (spelling), "machtav"
(letter) and "katvan" (scribe)
Therefore, *any* word based on the Hebrew root "sh-k-tz" will have a
meaning related to "abomination, or unclean thing".
>
>>Yiddish is an amalgamation of
>>Hebrew and German, often with Hebrew roots used in a germanic fashion.
>
>
> Partly true. Still irrelevant.
>
>
>>It is not my fault that people don't bother to know what the words they
>>use mean.
>
>
> Ah but they do. It's you who are confused by mistaking etymology for
> meaning. A non-professional cook is an amateur. He or she may or may
> not love cooking, in spite of the origin of the word. December is
> derived from the Latin for "tenth month." It was once, it ain't now.
> It's still December. The etymology of 'gourmet' goes back to Old
> French for 'wine taster' or 'wine servant' but you can be a gourmet
> and a teetotaler today. Etymological dictionaries are fun and
> informative but they themselves will tell you that origins are not
> definitions. -aem
>
In Hebrew, origins *are* definitions. I am not talking about words from
one language that mean something else in another. I am talking about a
Hebrew word used by people who spoke Hebrew and combined that alphabet
and some of the words ("sheygetz", "gonif","nachas" and "goy" among
them) with the German they spoke in their secular lives. The Hebrew root
words still apply, certainly from the words taken directly from Hebrew
and used in the exact meaning. Of course, we live in a world where
"nucular" has become accepted pronunciation, and "****ardly" is no
longer an acceptable word to use, so I suppose we should just let the
ignorant people write the dictionaries from now on.
--
saerah
"Peace is not an absence of war, it is a virtue, a state of mind, a
disposition for benevolence, confidence, justice."
-Baruch Spinoza
"There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly
what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear
and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There
is another theory which states that this has already happened."
-Douglas Adams
