Re: [Heb-NACO] To see - לראות

You’re right you’re right!—Joan On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 11:27 PM Galron, Joseph via Heb-naco < heb-naco@lists.osu.edu> wrote: > Colleagues, > > I believe (I hope I am not wrong) that לראות (to see) needs to be > romanized as Li-re’ot and not Lir’ot. Am I wrong? > > > > Yossi > > >

Re: [Heb-NACO] Date Status (DtSt) and Dates in the fixed field

I’d like to repeat and stress Jasmin’s endorsement of a “consistent, standard practice.” Certain questions like this one arise over and over again in Hebraica cataloging, and can be settled only by adopting a standard—there is one, generally used by the largest libraries. Teach the standard.

Re: [Heb-NACO] ALA/LC romanization(?) for Aramic as used in Babylonian Talmud, Talmud Yerushalmi, midrashitc texts

In my time at LC we never tackled this, mostly because we almost never needed it. Personally, I always turned to Jastrow first, but this practice was not codified. Joan Biella On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 9:17 AM Heidi G Lerner via Heb-naco < heb-naco@lists.osu.edu> wrote: > Dear

Re: [Heb-NACO] Romanization question (מתווה)

Chiming in late, I agree that we should follow Even-Shoshan, but adding this to the Miss Romanization page is a good idea. —Joan On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 11:32 AM Rachel Simon via Heb-naco < heb-naco@lists.osu.edu> wrote: > I asked mainly because LC had both forms. So, maybe enter it the >

Re: [Heb-NACO] romanization question

From:* Heb-naco *On Behalf Of *Joan > Biella via Heb-naco > *Sent:* Thursday, February 3, 2022 10:04 PM > *To:* Hebrew Name Authority Funnel ; Nancy < > s...@hawaii.edu> > *Subject:* Re: [Heb-NACO] romanization question > > > > Maybe we should declare a

Re: [Heb-NACO] romanization question

Maybe we should declare a holiday to celebrate romanization! Joan On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 12:45 PM Nancy via Heb-naco wrote: > Hi, Rachel! > Are you still romanizing? How are you? > > Nancy > > On 2/3/2022 5:33 AM, Rachel Simon via Heb-naco wrote: > > How is כאילו romanized? I saw several

Re: [Heb-NACO] Birth date

We used to say, if a heading is not WRONG, don’t change it, because of the incalculable number of physical catalog cards that would have to be manually changed to match. Perhaps in the digital era we should forget this? Joan On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 10:06 AM Rachel Simon via Heb-naco <

Re: [Heb-NACO] בגלל

Jasmine writes: בגלל has a direct entry, so I’d think it would be romanized biglal (NOT bigelal because as a whole word, the sheva would be considered merahef, ignored in romanization), but the entry also says “see גלל”. So which is it: Biglal or Bi-gelal? Doesn't HCM say, more or less, "If

Re: [Heb-NACO] פלסטינים

xcept by giving lots and lots of 246s. So give them! My two agorot. Joan Biella On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 5:26 AM Yossi Galron via Heb-naco < heb-naco@lists.osu.edu> wrote: > and what about פלשתינאים? > Is it also with an F? > > Yossi > > > On Fri, May 17, 2019, 08:22 Kuperman

Re: [Heb-NACO] geo. subdivision for Eruv

Perhaps no one thought there was “literary warrant” before. Make a case to the policy folks! Joan Sent from my iPad > On Feb 28, 2019, at 2:09 PM, Shinohara, Jasmin via Heb-naco > wrote: > > Hi, the LCSH term Eruv is not geographically sub-dividable, while the LCSH > term Mikvah is. Do we

Re: [Heb-NACO] romanization of בהרב

We don’t “typically” follow E.-Sh. We follow him slavishly! Am I right? Joan Sent from my iPad > On Aug 28, 2018, at 5:11 PM, Shinohara, Jasmin wrote: > > Hi all, the above word appears on Princeton's wonderful > abbreviation/initialism page as beha-rav (and that is the predominant form >

Re: [Heb-NACO] ʻatsbekha or ʻotsbekha?

Seems to me this must be the construct of עוצב (ʻotsev) "pain": ḥodesh > ḥ odshekha, ʻotsev > ʻotsbekha (cf. Isaiah 14:3). Joan On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:49 AM, Robert M. TALBOTT < rtalb...@library.berkeley.edu> wrote: > Hi folks: > > I'm cataloging "בהלמות הפטיש עצבך יפג" and discovered that

Re: [Heb-NACO] moladeti or moladti

. Thanks, Jasmin > > From: Heb-naco [mailto:heb-naco-boun...@lists.osu.edu] On Behalf Of Joan > Biella > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 12:22 PM > To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel > Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] moladeti or moladti > > A similar problem occurs with “hulad(e)t

Re: [Heb-NACO] moladeti or moladti

My opinion, same as it always was: the tav can’t have a dagesh if a vowel (even a sheva!) precedes it. And it does have a dagesh, so ... Regards to all from Joan Sent from my iPad > On Apr 11, 2018, at 3:51 PM, Shinohara, Jasmin wrote: > > I would think it’s the

Re: [Heb-NACO] help with romanization of surname

This situation is discussed (with other examples) in HCM, not so? Joan On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Heidi G Lerner wrote: > Thanks. > > > Rieder it is. > > > Heidi G. Lerner > > Metadata Librarian for Hebraica and Judaica > > Metadata Dept. > > Stanford University

Re: [Heb-NACO] vocalizing a word question

Here are two cents that I almost hate to throw in--isn't this word written "Yiddish-style," so shouldn't we romanize it "deyt"? As in "Leykvud"? Joan On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Robert M. TALBOTT < rtalb...@library.berkeley.edu> wrote: > I was hoping for a "standard" instead of a

Re: [Heb-NACO] Nokhehim? Nokhhim?

t; says we do. >> >> >> "nokheḥut". >> >> >> Thanks, Heidi >> >> >> Heidi G. Lerner >> >> Metadata Librarian for Hebraica and Judaica >> >> Metadata Dept. >> >> Stanford University Libra

Re: [Heb-NACO] Nokhehim? Nokhhim?

Yossi knows us well. I don't think you'll find a rule in the HCM even now that would justify an /e/ between the khaf and the het, no matter how they have to be pronounced. Joan On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Yossi Galron wrote: > Bob, > Hebrew is a living language. I

Re: [Heb-NACO] Ladino romanization help

Just one quick remark from a lurker--no, I don't think there's any way to know whether it's "segun" or "sigun" except by comparison with Spanish. And, as a person who's never studied Ladino per se, I don't even know that "segun" is closer to real Ladino pronunciation than "sigun" is! But since

Re: [Heb-NACO] romanization of כמעט

If you can find the word by looking under both K and M, then you romanize according to the "more analytical" interpretation--ki-me'at in this case--so that a search under "me'at" will discover the phrase. The same words cause trouble over and over. Perhaps we should have a list of "words

Re: [Heb-NACO] words starting with דרמ-

t;> >> >> I cannot find any logic behind which words are vocalized and which are >> not, but it contradicts Heidi’s principle below that words based on a word >> with a sheva would also have a sheva. >> >> >> >> Nevertheless, Alcalay is

Re: [Heb-NACO] words starting with דרמ-

The rule being followed here is the one that says Alcalay's vocalization determines the romanization of words with ambiguous initial shevas. If his dictionary prints the sheva, we romanize it as "e." This rule was laid down for the benefit of catalogers who don't have access to spoken Hebrew

Re: [Heb-NACO] אחוה

Yes!!! Joan On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Shinohara, Jasmin wrote: > Even-Shoshan has changed the vocalization under the ח from a hataf-patah > to a sheva. Morfix > still has it with a hataf-patah. Since we go

Re: [Heb-NACO] Explicit shevas in consonantal clusters in loans

My half-cent goes with Jasmin on this--I think a ref from "Silaned" would be somewhat beyond even optional. It does no harm, but wastes keystrokes. On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Heidi G Lerner wrote: > Hi Bob, > > This case is a good example. I believe that we can

Re: [Heb-NACO] Romanization Question: another word

Replying to Barry's comment--is this a case where we should consult Alcalay about the quality of the Sheba in the first syllable of p(e)sifas, per HCM? On November 5, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Rachel Simon wrote: How aboutבלגן ? the title is: נוער בבלגן So, is this

Re: [Heb-NACO] safah berurah

This question has raised its (ugly) head before and been swept under the carpet (is that a mixed metaphor?), especially with regard to "Mishnah v/berurah." I think Cliff Miller will remember. The "rules" say to imitate the vocalization of the Bible when the phrase is from the Bible, but the

Re: [Heb-NACO] Tsarfat or Tsarefat?

This was one of the many pesky changes in the 2003 Even-Shoshan. "Tsarfat" is now the authorized romanization (along with Tsarfati and other derivatives, if my memory is correct). Joan Biella On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Robert M. TALBOTT < rtalb...@library.berkeley.edu>