 |
|
 |
 |
|
|
Forum
-> Household Management
-> Kosher Kitchen
|
amother
OP
|
 Tue, Aug 04 2020, 7:54 pm
|
I've find it unnatural to refer to "fleishigs" and "milchigs" in the plural and the usage sounds totally bizarre to me even after hearing it many times. Is this a "yeshivish" dialectic thing, kind of like "eating by"? I'm not a Yiddish grammar expert -- why is an English plural (-s) lumped onto fleishig and milchig?
| |
|
| Back to top |
 1
|
|
amother
Tangerine
|
Tue, Aug 04 2020, 8:14 pm
|
I don’t say it in plural 🤷♀️
| |
|
| Back to top |
7
|
|
amother
Silver
|
Tue, Aug 04 2020, 9:14 pm
It's Yiddish, the "s" at the end isn't Englsh plural. Fleishig is an adjective describing a food. Fleishigs is a noun, it means fleishig foods.
I'm preparing a fleishig meal- the word fleishig is describing the type of meal.
I'm cooking fleishigs - fleishigs is a noun, it's what I'm cooking - foods made with meat.
| |
|
| Back to top |
18
|
|
amother
Pink
|
Tue, Aug 04 2020, 9:42 pm
It is like adding an ‘s when something belongs to.
Belongs to the Friedman’s etc.
The food belongs to the Fleishig’s category.
| |
|
| Back to top |
3
|
|
amother
Silver
|
Tue, Aug 04 2020, 9:56 pm
| amother [ Pink ] wrote: | It is like adding an ‘s when something belongs to.
Belongs to the Friedman’s etc.
The food belongs to the Fleishig’s category. |
Not exactly. You're trying to explain a Yiddish word using English grammar. You can't use the grammar of one language to explain a word in a different language. The s doesn't indicate possession.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
singleagain
|
Tue, Aug 04 2020, 10:00 pm
| amother [ Silver ] wrote: | | Not exactly. You're trying to explain a Yiddish word using English grammar. You can't use the grammar of one language to explain a word in a different language. The s doesn't indicate possession. |
Personally, I always thought it was like that. But once you start mixing languages I for sure think that the grammar and translations of one can bleed into the other.
But in all honest I never give it much thought before reading the OP.
| |
|
| Back to top |
2
|
|
amother
OP
|
Tue, Aug 04 2020, 10:02 pm
| amother [ Silver ] wrote: | It's Yiddish, the "s" at the end isn't Englsh plural. Fleishig is an adjective describing a food. Fleishigs is a noun, it means fleishig foods.
I'm preparing a fleishig meal- the word fleishig is describing the type of meal.
I'm cooking fleishigs - fleishigs is a noun, it's what I'm cooking - foods made with meat. |
This makes perfect sense. Thanks.
| amother [ Pink ] wrote: | It is like adding an ‘s when something belongs to.
Belongs to the Friedman’s etc.
The food belongs to the Fleishig’s category. |
No offense, but your understanding of the applicable English grammar is not correct. "This challah cover belongs to the Friedman’s" would be incorrect -- you'd say "This challah cover belongs to the Friedmans." It's incorrect to make the name possessive in that case. A case where you could make the name possessive would be something like "This challah cover is part of the Friedmans' judaica collection."
| |
|
| Back to top |
2
|
|
amother
Pink
|
Tue, Aug 04 2020, 10:10 pm
| amother [ OP ] wrote: | | No offense, but your understanding of the applicable English grammar is not correct. "This challah cover belongs to the Friedman’s" would be incorrect -- you'd say "This challah cover belongs to the Friedmans." It's incorrect to make the name possessive in that case. A case where you could make the name possessive would be something like "This challah cover is part of the Friedmans' judaica collection." |
You are correct.
That is what I meant.
I know an s is generally not added in yiddish, but yiddish today has many inconsistencies since it is spoken mixed with English.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
|
amother
Cyan
|
Wed, Aug 05 2020, 5:28 am
|
Good point, I've never heard "parve's"...
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
zaq
|
Wed, Aug 05 2020, 9:26 am
|
I have no idea. I don't and no one in my extended family does. Maybe it's a regional thing.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
Thisisnotmyreal
|
Wed, Aug 05 2020, 9:34 am
|
It's definitely not proper Yiddish to say fleishigs.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
zaq
|
Wed, Aug 05 2020, 10:17 am
| amother [ Silver ] wrote: | | The s doesn't indicate possession. |
No?
Mein zuns kind = my son's child.
Dein shvesters man = your sister's husband
Names like Rivkis, Chaneles, Bashevis indicate that the individual so named is the child of Rivke, Chanele, Basheva.
When it comes to calling food fleishiks, though--that's just odd. Unless the intent is multiple foods of the fleishik persuasion, the way someone might show you a shoe display and say "these are the sevens and eights, the nines and tens are the next aisle over, and the elevens and up are in the back."
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
|
amother
Gold
|
Wed, Aug 05 2020, 10:35 am
| amother [ OP ] wrote: | | No offense, but your understanding of the applicable English grammar is not correct. "This challah cover belongs to the Friedman’s" would be incorrect -- you'd say "This challah cover belongs to the Friedmans." |
OTOH, "this challah cover belongs to the Friedman's aunt" would be 100% correct if the speaker were a Yekke and would mean it belongs to the aunt of an individual named Friedman, or, rather, "di Friedman". Germans refer to people as "the personsname". Can be given name or surname, as in "this is the Sarah's book." It sounds outright contemptuous in English--one might refer to a hated politician as "the Trump" for example--but in German it's not.
Funny story, I was visiting someone whose mother spoke only German and kept talking about someone called "Temima." I asked my friend how does her mother know my aunt Temima and why is she talking about her? Not Temima--Di Mima. Her dd Miriam was nicknamed Mima.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
|
Imamother may earn commission when you use our links to make a purchase.
© 2024 Imamother.com - All rights reserved
|  |
 |
|
 |
|
|
