A NÁLISIS DEL N OTIFICATION S ERVICES DE TAO. M ODELO P ROVEEDOR /C ONSUMIDOR

The mishnaic Hebrew was in the main adopted by subsequent Hebrew writers of prose, while the classical Hebrew served as the model for poetic expression even during talmudic and medieval periods. A vast literature, talmudic, midrashic and li-turgical, was written in mishnaic Hebrew. During the Spanish period, the so-called Golden Age in the diaspora history of Jewish literature and of the Hebrew language, which lasted about three centuries (tenth to thirteenth), the Hebrew lan-guage was enriched with many new forms and terms. The chief contributions in this respect were made by the Tibbonids (Judah ibn Tibbon and his son Samuel), who translated from Arabic into Hebrew philosophical and grammatical works written by such outstanding men as Bahyah, Ibn Gabirol, Judah Halevi, Ibn Janah, Saadia, and Maimonides. Their style be-came the model of scientific Hebrew during the Middle Ages.

The grammarians of that period, on the other hand, pursued with unparalleled zeal and keen insight the study and investiga-tion of the Hebrew language, and unraveled its intricacies,

ren-dering it a ready and wieldy instrument for self-expression.

Thus was blazed the path for the creative poets of that period, who soon “began to chirp” in novel metrical forms and on original diversified themes. The legacy in the field of Hebrew poetry, philosophy and philology which that period left has been an inexhaustible source of inspiration and guidance to subsequent generations.

The Spanish period stands out as a beacon in the history of the Hebrew language and literature. The Spanish Jewish com-munity of the Middle Ages enjoyed for a good many years the blessings of economic and political freedom and of unham-pered cultural pursuits no less than does the modern Jewish community in the United States. But while maintaining close contact with the people of the land and making themselves acquainted with their language and their literature and some-times even surpassing them in that knowledge, they, neverthe-less, did not neglect their own language and literature. For a period of some five centuries the Spanish Jews pursued the study of the Hebrew language and its literature with a zeal and a love which has not since been equaled. They wrote a glori-ous chapter in the history of Judaism, which will continue to serve as a source of pride as long as Judaism lives. They did write some of their philosophical and philological works in Arabic largely because the Hebrew language lacked at that time an appropriate terminology in these literary fields; also because Arabic was then the language of the learned, just as Latin was later, and it was natural to resort to that language when think-ing about philosophic or scientific problems. But they never forgot that the Hebrew language is the most effective, nay, the sole medium for the creativity and full self-expression of the Jewish soul. Hence they wrote their poetry and liturgical com-positions exclusively in Hebrew. Furthermore, they were con-stantly seeking, with boundless interest and zeal, to investigate the language and to coin new words and expressions in order to increase its effectiveness as a medium of Jewish self-expres-sion even in the field of scientific research. The names of the

poets Judah Halevi and Gabirol, of the philologists Hayyuj and Ibn Janah, of the grammarians and commentators Ibn Ezra and RaDaK, and of the philosophers Maimonides and Crescas will always occupy a dominant place in the constellation of Jewish creative writers and thinkers.

The Spanish period enriched the Hebrew language. A num-ber of new words coined during that period, especially in the field of philosophical and philological terminology, have be-come an integral part of the language. Hebrew could not con-ceivably be employed in modern times without such words as merkaz (center), aklim (climate), kotev (axis), hishta‘el (coughed), ophek (horizon), tib‘i (natural), mlakhuti (artificial) and the whole grammatical terminology, which were origi-nated in the main by the Tibbonids. Some of these words are directly borrowed from Arabic, while in others the Arabic in-fluence is distinctly evident. These words are now taken for granted as legitimate and indispensable members of the He-brew language. But the purists of the period must have looked askance at the process of adding “indiscriminately” the suffix ut, characteristic ending of abstract Hebrew words, to the inter-rogative words eikh (how?), kammah (how much?), mah (what?), resulting in such “monstrous” coinages, after the model of Arabic, as eikhut (quality, literally howness), kammut (quan-tity, literally howmuchness), mahut (natur e, literally

“whatness”).¹ However, the Jewish intellectual horizon wid-ened, creative Jewish experiences expanded and deepwid-ened, and the need for self-expression called for the coinage of new terms and linguistic forms to keep up with the progress of the Hebraic mind.

Close to three thousand philosophical and scientific terms were coined during the Middle Ages by the Tibbonids and others. Only about eighty of these terms, or about two and a half per cent, are words and stems borrowed directly from Arabic. A good many of the other terms were coined by a process of loan-translations, that is, by borrowing the Arabic

words and their concepts, and then translating these words into the respective Hebrew etymological equivalents, thus giving the original Hebrew words an entirely new meaning.²

To illustrate: the English word conscience was borrowed directly from the Latin conscientia, where it originally meant

“knowledge” but later assumed the connotation of moral judg-ment and feeling applied to conduct in terms of standards of right and wrong. When this Latin word, in its new connotation, was translated into German, the term Gewissen (derived from Wissen, “knowledge,” with ge as the equivalent of con, as in

“conscience”) was employed. On the same principle, the Arabic equivalent damir (originally “hidden” but later “conscience”) was rendered in Hebrew by the biblical matzpun (hidden place).

Similarly, the Arabic hadd, originally signifying “limit” or “bound-ary,” came to be used in Moslem philosophical literature also in the sense of “definition.” Hence the concept “definition”

was rendered in Hebrew by the word geder (fence) —an approximate etymological equivalent of the Arabic word hadd.

The majority of medieval Hebrew coinages originated along these lines.

Special mention should be made of Maimonides’ contribu-tion to the growth of the Hebrew language. Although he wrote mainly in Arabic, he was a masterful Hebrew stylist and manip-ulated the Hebrew language dynamically and creatively. His chief contribution was manifest in his attempt to convert talmudic Aramaisms into Hebraic forms. In his Mishneh Torah, where talmudic sources are paraphrased, abridged and simplified, Maimonides consistently endeavored, whenever possible, to translate Aramaic words and phrases into Hebrew. By a slight modification in form, Maimonides Hebraized the Aramaic words and thereby enriched the Hebrew language with new coinages.

Thus the Aramaic ma‘abarta or ma‘aborta (Tefillin holder, also ferry boat; Men. 35a) and shuma (estimate, appraisal) were converted by Maimonides into the Hebraic forms ma‘aboret (Hilkhot Tefillin III, 1) and shumah, which he declines as a regular feminine form (Hilkhot Ishshut V, 9).

Rashi’s Contribution to the Development of Hebrew It is important to bear in mind at this juncture that the Spanish Jews were not alone in their lively interest and crea-tive efforts in the field of Hebrew literature and language dur-ing the Middle Ages. The Jews in the rest of the world were likewise zealous in their pursuit of Jewish studies and Hebraic learning. The foremost and most popular Hebrew scholar and writer of the medieval period outside of Spain was Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki, who is better known by the abbreviation RaSHI.

Rashi was born (1040) in Troyes, France, and there he died (1105). He wrote commentaries on nearly the entire Bible and Talmud. The popularity of his commentaries is due mainly to his ability to integrate his interpretations of the Bible with midrashic tales and rabbinic expositions. Although he appar-ently knew French well and employed it extensively in his com-mentaries when citing equivalents of certain Hebrew words and expressions, his Hebrew is nevertheless free from any for-eign influences and displays a matchless ease and charm. He enriched the Hebrew language exceedingly by extending the meanings of numerous old words and expressions, by con-structing new word-combinations, and by coining new words and word-forms. He is credited with having coined over thir-teen hundred new words on the basis of biblical and talmudic stems. Some of these words are part and parcel of modern Hebrew and could not be dispensed with, as, for example, hatzlahah (success), badhan (jester), haskamah (consent), yahadut (Judaism),³ peredah (departure), bi’ur (commentary), and the like. Some of the words coined by Rashi have been restored only recently, such as hablagah (self-restraint) and hagannah (protection).

Yet it cannot be gainsaid that the literary interests and the creative horizon of the Jews outside of Spain during the Middle Ages were generally rather limited and circumscribed within the confines of Bible, Talmud and liturgy. The Jews of Spain,

however, exhibited a much more universal range of literary interests and activity, and they are therefore justly credited with being the initiators and creators of the “Golden Age” in medi-eval Jewish literature.

The Expansion of Hebrew in Paytanic Literature Our account of the medieval contribution to the develop-ment of the Hebrew language would be incomplete without mention, however brief, of a type of literature in vogue during that period, known as piyyut (probably from the Greek poyeton,

“poetry”). The writers of the piyyut were designated as pay-tanim (Aramaic paytana, “poet”).

The piyyutim (poetic compositions) are liturgical or syna-gogal poems, in which were articulated the experiences of the Jewish people: their sufferings, yearnings, hopes, fond mem-ories of past glmem-ories and aspirations for their speedy restoration.

The piyyutim are incorporated into the ritual of the high holy days, holidays and festivals. Some of the piyyutim were appar-ently composed for the purpose of edification and instruction.

It is assumed by some that the piyyutim originated to serve in place of midrashic lectures and addresses, which were forbid-den at one time by the Byzantine emperor. Since prayers were permitted, the liturgical form of instruction served as a conven-ient subterfuge.

In form, the piyyutim were cast in a conventional mold or pattern. Originally the writers operated with alphabetical acros-tics at the beginning of the verse in varied orders; such as the usual alphabetical order (aleph, bet, gimel, dalet), the inverted order (taw, shin, resh, koph), or a combination of both (aleph, taw, bet, shin). In some instances the name of the author was indicated by the order of the initial letter in each line. Some of the later poems employ meter and rhyme. This is particularly true of the piyyutim composed in Spain, where the intricate pattern of Arabic prosody in vogue served the Hebrew paytanim as a model. Many of these poems were set to music, and their meter was therefore an essential element.

The rise of the piyyut literature can be traced to the early Gaonic period in Palestine (seventh century). It is probable that the later paytanim were influenced in their literary com-positions and musical settings by the troubadours and minne-singers who flourished from the eleventh to the latter part of the thirteenth century, principally in the South of France, Cata-lonia, Aragon, Germany and northern Italy. It was during that period and in those localities that most of our piyyutim were composed.

The language of the piyyutim is of great significance in the study of the development of the Hebrew language. Besides utilizing talmudic and midrashic sources, the paytanim coined a large number of words formed on the models and from roots to be found in these sources. A great many of the new forma-tions were wild aberraforma-tions from the standpoint of Hebrew gram-mar and were the target for violent attacks by Saadia, Ibn Ezra and others. Some of the paytanic coinages were discarded, but others gained currency and were incorporated in the language.

Among the best known of these coinages in modern Hebrew are meretz (energy), miklahat (shower; cf. Saadia, Hoshanot), lahan (melody), from which is derived the modern term malhin (composer), piryon (fertility; Shabtai, Ofan Pesah).

The paytanic school began with Yose be Yose (seventh cen-tury?) and reached its earlier climax in the works of Eliezer ha-Kalir (eighth or ninth century). It began to wane toward the end of the eleventh century, but the tendency toward versifi-cation persisted in all aspects of literary self-expression: in philosophy, grammar, liturgy, and the like. These versifiers were, however, eclipsed by the bright poetic luminaries who appeared on the horizon in Spain between the tenth and thir-teenth centuries.

The Scene of Hebrew Development Shifts to Italy, Germany and Eastern Europe

After the Spanish period, the next milestone in the develop-ment of the Hebrew language and literature was the Haskalah

period, generally regarded as the period of the renaissance of modern Hebrew literature. Moses Hayyim Luzzatto (1707–1747), a mystic-poet, born in Padua, is credited with having inaugu-rated the new trend. Luzzatto’s work marked in effect the cul-mination of an unbroken chain of a Hebrew literary tradition which flourished in Italy since the days of Immanuel ha-Romi, a contemporary of Dante, who also wrote a book of poetic visions of the other world (Mahberot ha-Tofet we-ha-Eden), patterned after the Divine Comedy. This tradition was in the main under the influence of the Sephardi poetic tradition. But none of the poets in Italy, with the exception of Immanuel, achieved any great heights of poetic creativity or influence.

After several centuries of comparative literary sterility, the Hebrew language and literature received at the hands of Luz-zatto a fresh start and a new lease of life. He wrote in a pure and simple biblical style with masterly skill and artistry. He was followed by Mendelssohn (1729–1786) and his disciples, who started the publication of the first modern Hebrew journal Ha-Meassef (The Compiler), in which they preached the gospel of spiritual and cultural emancipation and de-ghettoization. This magazine, founded in 1784, continued as a monthly, although irregularly, for fifteen years and exerted a considerable influ-ence on the development of the Hebrew language and litera-ture. Its publication was resumd in 1809 and continued to 1811.

Mendelssohn, as well as some of the members of his en-tourage, were sincere in their desire to revive the Hebrew lan-guage and to make it an effective instrument for modern liter-ary expression. Mendelssohn himself wrote a beautiful Hebrew with a strong biblical coloring. So did his chief collaborator, Naphtali Herz Wessly (1725–1805). However, Mendelssohn’s later disciples were more interested in assimilation than in the He-brew language. It devolved upon the adherents of the Haskalah in Eastern Europe, Austria and Russia to resume the thread of linguistic and literary progress.

The eastern Haskalah was primarily interested in the en-richment of Judaism and Jewish life by a transfusion of worldly

knowledge and universal culture. Hence its adherents persisted in the use of the Hebrew language as a means of expression and communication of their ideas. They were eager to see the spread of “enlightenment” (haskalah) among Jews, but within a Hebraic framework. They thus brought about a renascence both of the Hebrew language and of Hebrew letters. However, the revolt of the Haskalah writers against what they called the

“rigorism” and “narrow-mindedness” of Rabbinism and the Tal-mud prompted them to frown upon mishnaic or medieval He-brew, which was symbolic, in their minds, of rabbinic thought and life-patterns. They preferred, instead, to restore and to re-vive biblical Hebrew also in the writing of prose. But only the great literary masters, such as Abraham Mapu (1808–1867), suc-ceeded in recapturing the grandeur and idyllic beauty of the old classical models. In the case of the majority of the writers, these attempts degenerated into a hodge-podge style, a sort of mosaic of biblical expressions and turns of speech, lacking spontaneity and virility. Instead of mastering the biblical style and making it serve the purposes of literary expression, these writers often became subservient to it and forced their think-ing and feelthink-ing into the classical molds. Under such circum-stances no creative achievement in language or in literature could be expected. Twenty centuries of linguistic develop-ment cannot be erased with impunity to cultural growth and progress.

Some curious examples may be culled at random from the writings of the Haskalah authors to illustrate their slavish ad-herence to biblical stereotypes. In describing blighted trees that will no longer bear fruit, or whose fruit will be rotten and poisonous, Kalman Shulman, one of the most prominent au-thors of that period, uses a mosaic of biblical phrases which yield the following literal translation: The trees will yield no fruit, and even the trees that will not cease from yielding fruit (Jeremiah 17.18) their fruit will be wild grapes (Isaiah 5.2) . . . and all that devour them shall be held guilty (after Jeremiah 2.3). In bewailing the desolation of the Holy Land, the same

author gives vent to his emotions in an ensemble of biblical phrases, constituting an appeal to the reader, a literal transla-tion of which would run as follows: Can thy heart endure (Ezekiel 22.14) and its thoughts not be broken off (after Job 17.11), on the day when thine eyes look right on (after Proverbs 4.25) how cruel strangers rule over it (probably after Isaiah 1.7) with great dominion (Daniel 11.3) . . . ?

These writers were especially befuddled when confronted with the need of translating or naming things and creatures for which no apparent name is found in the Bible. They resorted to all kinds of circumlocutions and descriptions within the frame-work of biblical phraseology in order to meet this need. Thus, a nightingale is rendered by the phrase noten zemirot ba-laylah (one who gives song at night), after Job 35.10. For a parrot the biblical phrase maggid le-adam mah seho (one who declares to man what is his talk, actually thought: Amos 4.13) is employed.

The term “admiral” is translated by Joshua Steinberg, the gram-marian and lexicographer of that period, by moshel be ge’ut ha-yam (he who rules the proud swelling of the sea: Psalms 89.10).

The expression bamat yishak was employed to denote a thea-tre. This expression found in Amos 7.8, literally means the high place of Isaac, where the word yishak (for Yitzhak) is used to symbolize the people of Israel. But by a play of words this name was interpreted in the sense of sihek (he played, or acted), with the result that bamat yishak came to signify a platform or place where a play is performed. All these and even more ludi-crous circumlocutions are rendered in modern Hebrew by sin-gle words, frequently drawn from talmudic or later Hebraic sources.

Perhaps one of the most extravagant of these circumlocu-tions was employed to indicate a microscope. No less than two biblical phrases were drawn upon for this purpose, namely, zekhukhit asher ba‘adah ha-ezob asher ba-kir (after 1 Kings 5.13) ke-erez ba-lebanon yisgeh (Psalms 92.13), a literal transla-tion of which is as follows: a glass through which the hyssop

Perhaps one of the most extravagant of these circumlocu-tions was employed to indicate a microscope. No less than two biblical phrases were drawn upon for this purpose, namely, zekhukhit asher ba‘adah ha-ezob asher ba-kir (after 1 Kings 5.13) ke-erez ba-lebanon yisgeh (Psalms 92.13), a literal transla-tion of which is as follows: a glass through which the hyssop