Unacceptable Grammar

It’s Yiddish.

“Why is this acceptable? ”

what is the problem? , do you have trouble understanding any of those words? do you think there was anyone ever who was ever genuinely confused ” Taleisim what on Earth are those? Oh Talisos”

(My favorite is Yated Neman, which should be Yased Nemanah See Devarim 23:14 וְיָתֵ֛ד תִּהְיֶ֥ה לְךָ֖ עַל־אֲזֵנֶ֑ךָ)

Why is it a problem?

BTW, and what language are you objecting to (Yiddish, English) and which dialect (YIVO Yiddish, Queen’s English, Brooklynese).

It appears based on what one hears in America, that both Shabbos and Tallis are evolving masculine form plurals. Such happens in living languages, such as Yiddish and the developing “frum” dialect of English.

I suggest it is actually the initial period of a new Jewish language but that will take a while to settle down before scholars decide that Judeo-English is a language (in all fairness, many argued that Yiddish was just a type of German “jargon” until World War II when we decided we didn’t want to speak German anymore).

Shtusim

Lol

You wanna keep Ashkenaz Havara?

No. I want to say “ameilus”. And “lomdus”. And “taleisim”. Etc. And it really doesn’t matter that you think they’re not real words. I’ll use them anyway.

Oh, by the way, “wanna” isn’t really a word.

@YabiaOmer – if you’re going to rant against others’ grammar, make sure your own is correct. It’s not “tallisos” but “talliyos”.

the plural of טלית is טליתות

I always find it funny when people rant against the errors of others while remaining ignorant of their own deficiencies. In a famous story, a man came to Rav Moshe Feinstein to complain about the lack of knowledge of dikduk among yeshivaleit. In the way common among Americans, the man vocalized diduk with the stress mile’eil – DIK-duk. Rav Moshe gently corrected him, saying, “it’s actually dik-DUK.”

midwesterner, If the title is based on that posuk then it’s certainly an error. In the posuk the feminine יתד is being put in a מקום נאמן; since מקום is masculine, the adjective is too.

midwesterner

thanks, though וּתְקַעְתִּ֥יו יָתֵ֖ד בְּמָק֣וֹם נֶאֱמָ֑ן וְהָיָ֛ה לְכִסֵּ֥א כָב֖וֹד לְבֵ֥ית אָבִֽיו׃, (courtesy of sefaria) in that passuk the “place” is neeman, not the “yated”

YO
“…These are NOT words. …You wanna keep …”
congrats you win the internet for today!

It’s disturbing when people say “Dvar Toros” instead of the Divrei Torah.

Trivia note: The Malbim’s peirush on Tanach includes a volume called “Tehillos” rather than “Tehillim”.

If your set of Malbim doesn’t, that may be a modern publisher’s modification. The set in my Shul has it the way I described.

“Zechus” in Hebrew is feminine, and the plural is “Zechuyos”. “Zechusim”, like “Shabosim”, “Taleisim”, “Taneisim”, etc., is correct Yiddish.

YO
“I don’t think there’s any excuse for soaking poorly like that”

what was your excuse for this “You wanna keep Ashkenaz Havara” ?

“What does Shalos Seudos even mean? Three meals . But you’re trying to say Third Meal. Never understood that.”

Ask and you shall receive?
There is a classic vort I believe attributed to the Minchas Elazar, that by eating the third meal, you get schar for all three, hence “shalosh Seudos”. how so? Eating a Friday night mea, isnt necessarily done lekavod Shabbos, we eat supper every day. similarly the second meal, we eat lunch every day. However a third meal, especially on a short afternoon, THAT is unusual, most of u s dont sit down to wash have a meal 3 hours after lunch. by doing so we get credit for all three meals, as this shows out eating is (and was) lekavod Shabbos .

Seriously though, the question is a bit silly. expressions dont always “make sense” my kid asks “why do you say take a bath, where do you take it?” Language often has quirks that arent “logical” per se

rational
do you have an example where יתד operates in the masculine?

Ubiquitin: Here you go

“אִם יִקְחוּ מִמֶּנּוּ יָתֵד לִתְלוֹת עָלָיו כָּל כֶּלִי” (יחזקאל טו:ג

“תוקע יתד בארץ וסומך עליו את הקורה” (תוספתא בבא בתרא א, ג

rational
Thanks a ton!

YO
sure!

Or,

it is just a colloquial expression, that doesn’t technically make sense . Language is peppered with countless examples. ( Take a bath, redundancies like ATM machine PIN number)

take your pick of the above, whichever helps you sleep better

Though hopefully nobody greets you with a “Good/gut Yontiff” since I’ll bet that one will really make your head spin, and I dont even have a vertel to explain why “yom-tov” became yontiff (does anybody?)
and on top of that all if you are a literalist and translate Yom Tov/ Yontiff as “good day” then if you were to be wished “gut Yontiff” they would be saying “good good day”
oh boy

wishing you and your family a Great yontif (oops)

and as the the old joke (?) goes if you meet the pope, on Shavuos be sure to greet him with a hearty “good Yontiff pontif”

To Milhouse: Regarding your post on another thread, to me, ‘hakkeh es shinov’ means knock his teeth out. I tune out when people tell me otherwise. I do my best to forget that this is incorrect, because ‘punch the villain in the mouth’ is a lot more fun than whatever the phrase really means.

There is also a Kabbalistic reason for calling it Sholosh Seudos. Friday night the Yidden are in a state of kabbalah — accepting the kedushah from Shabbos. It is for that reason we say “Viyanuchu bah” — loshon nikaivah, during Friday night maariv, because loshon nikaivah is used in Kabbalah to indicate reception.

Shabbos by day we are in bichinas mashpiah — the state of influencing, that is, we bring kedushah into the world. This is why we say during davening by day on Shabbos, “Viyanuchu bo” — loshon zachor, because loshon zachor is used in Kabbalah to indicate giving, emitting.

During the time of “Sholoh Shudos” (Sholosh Seudos), we are in a third state: that of both receiving and giving at the same time. Therefore we say “Viyanuchu bom,” loshon rabim during minchah on Shabbos.

Therefore, “Sholo Shudos” is a time where all three seudos Shabbos come together and act as one, which is why we call it Sholosh Seudos” instead of Seudat Shlishis.

Technically Taliyyos and Talisos are both considered acceptable and even correct. Taleisim is not, though you could argue that it is Yiddish. What bothers me more, is hearing talmidei chakhamim say, v’aHAVta or v’dibBARta in K’rias Sh’ma, considering I assume they would want to be yotzei l’khatt’chila, or saying, v’aKHALta in K’rias Sh’ma or bentching, both of which are d’Oraisa. BTW, it’s Divrei Sorah, Shom’rei Sorah, Machazikei Sorah and the like, after eheve”i — rafa, except if it were the first of a repeated letter, or occasionally two letters from the same motza, especially s’fasios, i.e., buma”f. In mikra, it works only after a m’shares, not a mafsik. You find it a little more often in Sifrei Eme”s, which allow two consecutive m’shar’sim in situations where Sifrei Khaf-Alef do not. That said, in transliteration, it is acceptable to leave the dagesh kal.

Rational
I’m not sure what you are saying keneged does mean “against” see Rashi to “ezer kinegdo”

Against has multiple definitions including facing which is the sense that it is meant here, though perhaps corresponding would be a better word choice