The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Very erudite discussion that doesn't arrive at a consensus about whether this is a real topic or original research. Sandstein 15:27, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mizrahi Hebrew[edit]

Mizrahi Hebrew (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced OR / POVFORK of Modern Hebrew / Sephardi Hebrew. A word of explanation - Mizrahi is a (mainly) Israeli term for non-European (Askenazi) Jews. Outside of Israel, these were separate communities with separate secular languages (e.g. Judeo-Persian, Judeo-Yemeni Arabic, Judeo-Arabic languages, Judaeo-Spanish) and liturgical Hebrew variants (e.g. Yemenite Hebrew, Sephardi Hebrew). In Israel while Mizrahim are defined as a label - they do not have a separate dialect. Per this source - "Generally speaking, Modern Hebrew lacks dialects, though there are sociolects, ethnolects, relgiolects, and many other varieties of the language". Note that the Hebrew Wikipedia lacks an article on this subject (as it does not exist!), and that current cross wikis are either stubs or rather clear translations of our enwiki article. I will note that some sources do refer to a minor accent variation, common among many first and second generation Mizrahim, that has a more proper or stressed prounounciation of the guttural ח and ע (this is covered in Modern Hebrew#Pronunciation]).Icewhiz (talk) 20:03, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 20:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 20:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 20:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment the article doesn’t claim there’s a dialect, just a distinctive pronunciation system. There are sources provided so I’m not really clear why it’s dscribed by the nominator as ‘unsourced.’
• Keep. (Or maybe merge with something??) While there may not be proper dialects in Modern Hebrew, this article refers to the pronunciation of Biblical Hebrew among Mizrachim. It seems to be in the same vein as Sephardi Hebrew and Italian Hebrew-- while these are not really dialects present among Modern Hebrew speakers, it is possible to have well-sourced articles about different groups' liturgical pronunciation systems. Gilded Snail (talk) 21:27, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @Gilded Snail:, see Sephardi Hebrew that much of this article is copied from. Note that some Mizrahim use a totally different systems, in particular Yemenite Hebrew - the division is not per Mizrahi/non-Mizrahi lines. The present article is factually inaccurate to the point of even perhaps WP:HOAX (in particuar the assertion that Sephardi Hebrew is disjoint).Icewhiz (talk) 22:17, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Clearly distinct and well-sourced. It is not exactly controversial that traditions of Hebrew that developed in the Iberian Peninsula (Sephardic) maintained major differences from traditions of Hebrew that developed in Egypt or Iraq or Yemen (Mizrahi). It's not just the more emphatic pronunciations of heth and ayin, but also often teth, sadhe and qoph and a distinction of ghimel from gimel. Just because these varieties may have become scarce among Mizrahim in Israel today, does not mean they are not historically distinct up until the mass-evacuations of Jews from Arab countries in 1948, and may still be distinct among the few Jews who remained in the other countries. That event was an attrition of culture as much as it was a humanitarian crisis; it is commonplace for people trying to adapt in a new society to lose traditions that previously made them distinct, especially when those traditions are stigmatized and devalued by the establishment and hinder newcomers' ability to succeed. - Gilgamesh (talk) 03:01, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Much of the assertions abpve are false - e.g. gimel is different only in Yemenite Hebrew - which is completely different (and actually closer to Ashkenazi is some respects) from Sephardi Hebrew (which in the 500+ years since 1492 - merged with Hebrew in North Africa). The distinction between Sephardi Hebrew (Iberian only in name) and most of the Hebrew varities spoken in what is termed in Israel as Mizrahi - is non-existent. Our article which states Sephardi was different - is unsourced OR.Icewhiz (talk) 04:42, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  And lest I be accused of OR:

  1. "Sephardi Hebrew, that originally marked the speech of the mass immigrations from Arabic-speaking countries. Their transfer of consonant distinctions from Arabic made their speech ethnically distinctive. Equally important, their ..." "Sephardi+Hebrew"&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjOk4iqtbrgAhVRDuwKHcwvDkQQ6AEIKzAB#v=onepage&q="Sephardi%20Hebrew"&f=false
  2. "Certainly not a Yemenite Jew, whose accent was in many ways more similar to Ashkenazic dialects.59 In light of these many variations, it is likely that contemporary Jews defined Sephardic Hebrew by what it was not. In all its diverse intonations, this Hebrew pronunciation was unmistakably distinctive from all Ashkenazic dialects." "Sephardic+Hebrew"&oq="Sephardic+Hebrew"&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp.3...6383.12047.0.12709.10.10.0.0.0.0.160.1109.0j8.8.0....0...1c.1j4.64.mobile-gws-serp..2.7.982...41j30i10k1.0.rHF-27a0eC0

  There is a distinction between Western Sephardic and Eastern Sephardic - but most Mizrahi Jews spoke Sephardic (and modern Hebrew is a "dumbed down" Sephardic - based on Sephardic, but losing Het and Ayin - which makes correct Sephardic speakers stand out).Icewhiz (talk) 04:59, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I said ghimel (soft fricative consonant) being different from gimel (hard plosive consonant), not hard gimel itself being different from other varieties' hard gimel, with the exception of Yemenite which I already knew is different in that respect. And if you're asserting most of what I'm saying is false, then are you claiming that there are no recently extant non-Yemenite Middle Eastern Hebrew traditions that pronounce teth (emphatic) differently from hard taw (non-emphatic), or hard kaph (non-emphatic) differently from qoph (emphatic), or sadhe as an emphatic fricative rather than as an affricate? - Gilgamesh (talk) 11:42, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I notified the Hebrew Wikipedia noticeboard of this discussion.Icewhiz (talk) 06:27, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong delete. The article is preposterous. For the umpteenth time, "Mizrahi" is a label arbitrarily imposed on disparate communities which have virtually nothing in common, originally; the term became convenient, and in English Wikipedia it is anachronistically conferred on these communities as if they were always "Mizrahim". The article at question is absolutely not well sourced. The Sephardi, Yemenite etc. liturgical pronunciations are utterly distinct. They were never bundled under the umbrella term "Mizrahi". A quick survey in Google Books will reveal that (Raciolinguistics: How Language Shapes Our Ideas About Race, p. 187; The Israelis: Ordinary People in an Extraordinary Land, p. 122) the term "Mizrahi Hebrew" is very rarely mentioned, and only in the Israeli context: it is denoted as the vulgar lower-class manner of speech. As such, it falls under the definitions that IceWhiz brought above, that clearly assert that Modern Hebrew lacks dialects. Editors here should not display their own supposed knowledge (or conjectures) about Hebrew linguistics, but determine whether the concept is extant and well-defined in academic sources. It is not. AddMore-III (talk) 07:18, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  You can try rebranding the Mizrahi Jews article, and put quotations around Mizrahim everytime, it won't change that Mizrahim exist as a real identity today according to the sources you provide. As I have asked multiple times, please refrain from citing sources unrelated to anything we are discussing. This article is about various pronunciation systems for Biblical Hebrew, not claiming to be a dialect of Modern Hebrew. --Gruzinim (talk) 07:55, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The idea of deleting this is built off the premise that this article is claiming to be a dialect of Modern Hebrew. It very plainly states that this is referring to various pronunciation systems of Biblical Hebrew by Jews from the Middle East. These pronunciations are distinct enough to deserve not to be stuffed in the same category as the pronunciation system which developed among Jews from Spain. Also, it is false that Mizrahi means non-European as is claimed in the "word of explanation." There are groups like Beta Israel and the Cochin Jews who aren't European but are also not Mizrahi. --Gruzinim (talk) 08:06, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  If this is pre-Israel liturgical Hebrew, then most Mizrahim (a concept that did not exist prior to 1948 or thereabouts) spoke Sephardi Hebrew variations in prayers - which has close to nothing to do with Spain (fall of Muslim Spain, final Jewish expulsion in 1492) - just as Ashkenazi Hebrew has close to nothing to do with France (Loire to Rhine - which is the source of the name) from which Jews were mostly expelled some 100 years prior (History of the Jews in France#Expulsions and Returns) - the community moving/living through Germany and ending up mostly in Poland. Sephardi Hebrew was spoken, as a prayer language, through north Africa, the levant, and the Ottoman empire (Yemenites being the notable exception).Icewhiz (talk) 12:20, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Multiple false assertions, you have already acknowledged in our discussions on Talk:Mizrahi Jews that the concept of Mizrahi existed prior to 1948 according to documents and censuses done in Mandatory Palestine. Jews from Iraq and Syria have distinct pronunciations from those who trace their roots to the Iberian Peninsula. Lumping them all together is inaccurate whether or not Sephardi Jews spoke Sephardi Hebrew in North Africa. That doesn't change that there are traditions from Jews who were there before the arrival of Sephardim. This Mizrahi erasure is alarming. --Gruzinim (talk) 17:21, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  You are making a hash. Mizrahi is a very modern term. You are talking about Musta'arabi Jews - not Mizrahim (which include Sephardi Jews usually). In most communities the Musta'arabi Jews merged with the Sephardi Jews into one community centuries ago. One can describe Syrian Hebrew, or Babylonian Hebrew, and even Persian-Bukharic Hebrew - but not the present mess in the article which is completely non-localized and combines communities that had little in common.Icewhiz (talk) 21:13, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Mizrahi is not synonymous with Sephardi, that is just wrong. Much of the reason the term Mizrahi became popularized was because non-Sephardim (Musta'arabi Jews remained distinct from Sephardim in some countries) were tired of being called Sephardi when they had no connection to Spain outside of religious influence. As far as "Syrian Hebrew," "Babylonian Hebrew," and "Persian-Bukharic Hebrew," I don't see the point. These groups make up Mizrahi Jews, and the differences are minor compared to the differences between these pronunciations and Sephardi Hebrew or Ashkenazi Hebrew. The article currently describes the topic accurately, it is not claiming to be to one distinct pronunciation system, but rather the various pronunciation systems spoken historically by Mizrahi Jews. --Gruzinim (talk) 21:47, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Icewhiz: I agree with Gruzinim. This AfD's premise is WP:FRINGE. - Gilgamesh (talk) 04:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  The premise is that no such Mizrahi (or Musta'arabi) Hebrew is described in sources (probably since you are connecting communities quite distant from one another). You have one source talking about Saadia Gaon and Jacob Qirqisani in the 11th century (and not using "Mizrahi Hebrew"). You have another source - Haaretz - talking about a Mizrahi or Arab accent (in this case in the common Israeli sense - including Sephardim) of modern Hebrew - pronunciation of Heit, Reish, and Ayin (one of many accents for learners of modern Hebrew as ansecond language - we could have Russian-Hebrew, Ukranian-Hebrew (different since they can say H -Hertzl and not Gertzel), American-Hebrew, French-Hebrew, etc.... All of which have 1st generation accents).Icewhiz (talk) 06:17, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Quote by Gruzinim: Much of the reason the term Mizrahi became popularized was because non-Sephardim (Musta'arabi Jews remained distinct from Sephardim in some countries) were tired of being called Sephardi when they had no connection to Spain outside of religious influence. That's your conjecture, but it is baseless. By the 19th Century, all communities in which Sephardi influence prevailed were referred to and referred to themselves as Sephardi. Iraqi Rabbis who had no ethnic connection to Spanish exiles regarded themselves and their entire communities as such (Ariel Picard, Mishnato shel ha-Rav ʻOvadyah Yosef be-ʻidan shel temurot, pp. 40-42). The Musta'arab were amalgamated by that point. And certainly, no one ever referred to the disparate non-Sephardi communities from Bukhara to North Africa as "Mizrahim" before the Israeli context. Remember WP:NOTAFORUM. Would anyone provide actual sources in support of the article, not their personal opinions? AddMore-III (talk) 06:41, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  In the religious sense you are absolutely correct, but in the secular Israeli context it was seen as disparaging. The sources you provided speak on this, I don't want to delve the discussion too much away from Mizrahi Hebrew. I was just disagreeing with the characterization of Mizrahi and Sephardi as synonymous with each other. They most certainly aren't. --Gruzinim (talk) 07:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment This article needs way better sourcing. The one source I checked did not match the content at all.Jonney2000 (talk) 21:07, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I concur. Pity I didn't write this before, it's important. There are two directly-referenced sources. The first, and most important for the matter, is an Encyclopedia Judaica article by uber-specialist Shlomo Morag. It does not mention the word "Mizrahi" at all. Actually, it categorizes the Arabic-speaking communities, Aramaic-speaking communities, Persian-speaking communities, and Georgian-speaking communities all together as Sephardim (and separating the Yemenite). There's also a Haaretz article, not an academic source, but it mentions "Mizrahi Hebrew" once in a completely Israeli context. The unquoted bibliography contains books which deal not with "Mizrahi Hebrew" but with the liturgical pronunciation of various communities, each dealt with separately: Yemenite, Persian and Syrian; Aleppo; Djerba; Baghdadi, and Babylonian. AddMore-III (talk) 07:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Here's another important source, Israeli, Jewish, Mizraḥi or Traditional? On the nature of the Hebrew of Israel’s periphery. It emphasizes that what the author hesitates to call (cf. the title; in p. 7/143, she concludes that "language of the periphery" is the best term) "Mizrahi Hebrew" is a sociolect of native Israelis, derived from an Israeli context. AddMore-III (talk) 10:55, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  So - an alternative name for a WP:NEOlogism with a completely different meaning from the (un-sourced) premise of this article that Musta'arabi Jews had a separate (yet with common traits between far-flung Musta'arabi communities) liturgical Hebrew (spoken mainly in Synagogue) that was separate from Sephardi Hebrew (which itself has variations). Icewhiz (talk) 12:40, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

•  Administrator note When commenting please stay on topic, cite WP:PAG when possible and above all... be brief! -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:59, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Summary:
  1. Everyone here agrees "Mizrahim" exist as a defined group (there is a disagreement over whether this is just a modern 20th century term coined in Israel - or a more ancient term).
  2. The disagreement is whether "Mizrahi Hebrew" exists -
     1. either as a unified liturgical Hebrew by Musta'arabi Jews (Jews did not speak Hebrew day-to-day - this would've been a synagogue / religious studies language separate from the liturgical Sephardi Hebrew which everyone agrees exists and is notable) pre-dating the Musta'arabi/Sephardi merge (a few hundred years ago). Note we do have articles on the extinct Tiberian Hebrew, Palestinian vocalization, Babylonian vocalization (as well as Samaritan Hebrew - a cousin in the area).
     2. or as a modern Hebrew dialect (or to be more precise - whether the accent of first-generation Jews from Arabic speaking countries constitutes a stand alone topic - and whether it should even be called Mizrahi (e.g. Israeli, Jewish, Mizraḥi or Traditional? On the nature of the Hebrew of Israel’s periphery prefers "language of the periphery"))
  3. Those arguing for deletion are arguing that:
     1. many sources contradict the existence of a Mizrahi Hebrew (both in the modern sense, and in the ancient liturgical sense that Musta'arabi communities, prior to the Sephardi migration, had widely differing local customs and little commonality/unification as a group - the name itself is coined by the Sephardic migrants as a label for non-Sephardic locals),
     2. that almost all of the present article is un-sourced OR,
     3. and that strong sources supporting this article have not been presented.

  Icewhiz (talk) 06:21, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Since you are making a summary, we should also include points against deletion -

  1. The article acknowledges that it is not one singular pronunciation system, and makes that very clear from the intro.
  2. There are differences in the pronunciation of Biblical Hebrew among Mizrahi Jews which would fit better on one page rather than creating Babylonian Hebrew, Persian-Bukharic Hebrew and a separate page for the pronunciations of Syrian Jews.
  3. It's about the various pronunciation systems of Biblical Hebrew by Mizrahi Jews, not claiming to be a dialect of Modern Hebrew.

  Gruzinim (talk) 07:28, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  The article waffles a bit around the question of multiple pronunciations (and note that any attempt to group Sephardic/Palestinian/Tiberian/Babylonian(Yemenite) Hebrew together - varieties all spoken (and then some more!) in 11th-17th century communities - is a very wide net indeed) .... The lede states there are multiple varieties - but then Mizrahi Hebrew#Features goes on to say that the hypothetical Mizrahi Hebrew follows local Arabic pronunciation (with minor variations in non-Arab countries) - which certainly was not true in Persia, Afghanistan, Georgia, Bukhara, etc. - and probably was not true (and if true in some - then post 10-11th century) in many of the communities in the post-Arab conquest world as well (as liturgical Hebrew - everywhere - tended to preserve various archaic features). Icewhiz (talk) 07:47, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  You say "but then Mizrahi Hebrew#Features goes on to say that the hypothetical Mizrahi Hebrew follows local Arabic pronunciation" but it never actually says that. It says that those pronunciations listed were specific to Jews who come from Arab countries. Even then it points out that the variations followed the Arabic dialects in each individual country. The article in it's current state is very much centered around the pronunciations of Arab Jews specifically rather than all Mizrahim. Gruzinim (talk) 08:22, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Either merge or delete and redirect (haven't delved enough into what is salvable) into Sephardi Hebrew. Correct or not, Mizrahi pronunciation is mostly used as a synonym to the Sephardic pronunciation hence should direct there. gidonb (talk) 01:49, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sephardi Hebrew has a similar amount of sources as this article, and the few sources it has notes differences in the pronunciation of Mizrahi Jews. Look at the second and third reference, they both denote the differences. It makes little sense to delete or merge this article for that reason when the current sources for Sephardi Hebrew notes and speaks of them as separate. Gruzinim (talk) 02:20, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense. Morag in Encyclopedia Judaica classifies them all as Sephardi. There are the Sephardi pronunciations from Georgia to Morocco (with differences, but those belong in Sephardi Hebrew) and there is the Yemenite, which has sub-pronunciations as well. "Mizrahi Hebrew" is only used separately, and very rarely when so, for an Israeli sociolect (not to mention that "Mizrahim" is a term first applied no earlier than the 1920s, and mainly 1950s, so it cannot be anachronistically conferred on centuries-old liturgical pronunciations). Again, WP:NOTAFORUM, stick to the sources. AddMore-III (talk) 06:06, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Refrain from invoking WP:NOTAFORUM without reading what it states. You are bringing up unrelated topics (A so-called "Mizrahi dialect," when it is very clear this article has nothing to do with Modern Hebrew) and discussing other topics rather than how to improve this article. I am relating every sentence to improving Mizrahi Hebrew and when I pointed out that the few sources on Sephardi Hebrew differentiate between them that is me sticking to the sources. Gruzinim (talk) 06:50, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I have tried to read the article, and above, to participate but it is outside my comfort zone. I wonder if AfD is the right forum for this discussion as it seems complicated, contentious but also, material? Needs expert input to rule on points of fact? However, I don't know what other forum would be better. Sorry I can't be more helpful. Britishfinance (talk) 12:18, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @Britishfinance: I tried getting Hebrew-Wikipedia editors involved (where subject expertise might be better - but with little success unfortunately) - but yes - you are correct this is not a simple topic to assess looking in (as Mizrahi and Sephardi have multiple (some overlapping, some separate) meanings, Mizrahi Hebrew also has a modern meaning (as an accent of Hebrew), and modern references to historical liturgical Hebrew can conflate the two, add to this that at present the theory for inclusion is that this is an extinct language pre-dating the Separdi/Musta'arabi Jews (multiple different groups) merge 100-200-300 years ago - then yes.... this is not a simple topic). Icewhiz (talk) 12:42, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @Icewhiz: Thanks for that. I feel WP should (or already does) a more technical/specific forum for resolving this. Having read the comments above that this merits proper examination (I can see WP:HOAX being invoked), and goes to the integrity of WP. cheers Britishfinance (talk) 13:25, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @Britishfinance: I must say I don't think it's very complicated, the problem is mainly with the inflated comments' section. The article claims there is a liturgical pronunciation, or a family of such, called MH. The top source, Encyclopedia Judaica, clearly belies this statement. the term "MH" is only used very rarely (quite WP:NEO) in an utterly different context, for an Israeli sociolect. AddMore-III (talk) 15:23, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.