(2015) Dialect concentration and dissipation: Challenges to Judeo-Spanish revitalization efforts

DIALECT CONCENTRATION AND DISSIPATION:

CHALLENGES TO JUDEO-SP ANISH

REVITALIZATION EFFORTS

REYROMERO 1JNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON-DOWNTOWN

1. Introduction: Dissipation and concentration

Judeo-Spanish (JS) is currently undergoing several revitalization efforts that range from university courses in Israel, Europe, and the United States to the creation of new linguistic domains and media in cyberspace where Sephardim can communicate and learn their cultural language. The revitalization movement has helped strengthen and expand the current domains in which JS has managed to survive, but it has also placed JS in new contexts and situations, with new functions that require its adaptation to the innovative communications of the 21st century. As the language expands to these new linguistic domains, JS speakers become aware of the distinctiveness of their dialect in comparison to Peninsular and Latin American (PLA) varieties. On the other hand, native speakers of PLA Spanish who wish to learn JS and participate in these new contexts must also become cognizant of dialectal features unique or characteristic of JS.

Among the several publications and communications in contemporary JS, 1 especially those produced online, these dialect distinctions are sometimes altered, thereby rendering a modified version of the language. According to Schilling-Estes and Wolfram (1999), speakers may choose to accommodate those dialect features which they perceive as being most divergent or salient from what they consider to be the standard or prestige

1 Although conremporary JS varieties include those dialects still used in traditional community domains such as home, humor, and the older generation, in this context I also incl'ude the written and cyber varieties of JS used by organizations to preserve and revitalize the language. The use of JS for non-traditional domains gained momentum in the early 1990s, after the quincentennial commemorations of the Edict of Expulsion from Spain.

Rey Romero 51

variety? That is, the JS distinct dialectal features, whether phonological, morphological, or lexical, will be avoided or changed to fit a more "mainstream' PLA version of Spanish. This is called a dissipation model because dialectal features are lessened or dissipated in favor of PLA Spanish. On the other hand, JS speakers may also choose to emphasize those cli_alect characteristics that most diverge or differ from PLA Spanish! In this strategy, speakers consciously select dialectal features that may set apart the language and mininrize its mutual intelligibility with other varieties of Spanish. This is called the concentration model because particular dialectal features are strengthened and may even spread throughout the population and to new phonological, morphological, and lexical patterns not attested in healthier varieties of the language. In this paper, I will discuss the dissipation and concentration models in modern JS, especially in those domains where the language is used as part of revitalization efforts. I will discuss the motivations for these models, and their effect on language maintenance and transmission.

2. Distinct dialectal features

Awareness of dialect features is the first step for dissipation and concentration. Some of these characteristics considered "divergent" are actually present in Old Spanish, and therefore the PLA dialects present innovative processes. Moreover, innovative phonological processes and lexical borrowings from Hebrew, Turkish, French, and other Mediterranean and coterritorial languages have also resulted in divergent phonological and lexical differences.

Dialectal phonological features inherited from Old Spanish include etymological Latin [f], which has disappeared in PLA dialects, but it has been preserved in some JS dialects (Salonika and Monastir, among others), as infermozo 'beautiful,' fazer 'to do,' andfigado, 'liver.' Another feature is the voiced sibilant [z], devoiced as [s] or produced as the interdental [6] in Peninsular varieties of Spanish, but preserved in JS as in kaza 'house,' roza 'rose,' and dezir, 'to say.' JS also maintained the Old Spanish palatal system of m and [3], plus the phonemicization of [d3], as illustrated by disho 's/he said,' mujer 'woman,' · and djusto 'fair, correct' respectively. These Old Spanish palatals, for the most part, changed into the velar fricative [x] (or the lowland [h]) in PLA Spanish. In addition to the

2 Natalie Schilling-Estes and Walt Wolfram. Alternative models of dialect death: Dissipation vs. concentration. Language 75-3, 1999, 487. 3 Ibid. 488.

52 Dialect Concentration and Dissipation

preservation of Old Spanish phonology, JS features also include a series of phonological innovations. One of them is the labialization of [n] to [m] before the diphthong [we], as in muez 'nut,' muestro, 'our,' and ermuera 'daughter-in-law.' Another innovation is the palatalization of [s] to U1 in coda position before [k], as in kashkara 'peel,' eshkola 'school,' and bushkar 'to seek.' Although some linguists have claimed this type of palatalization was a phonological process conditioned by [k] in the onset4,

it seems to be a more sporadic mechanism, since forms such as eskuro 'dark' and eskapar 'to finish,' do not present palatalization, and eshpital 'hospital,' pas a [p] in the onset. A third phonological innovation is vowel raising, especially in Balkan JS, in the dialects of Bucharest, Sarajevo, and Monastir. For instance, the Bucharest dialect consists of raising [ e] to [i] and [ o] to [ u] in unstressed position, as in madre > madri 'mother,' and tom6 > tum6 'he took. ' 5 The Monastir dialect also includes the raising of [a] to [e), as in kaza > kaze 'house.'6

Likewise, dialectal differences between JS and PLA Spanish are heightened by the lexicon. For instance, JS inherited a vast number of patrimonial lexical items from Old Spanish that have fallen into disuse or are considered archaic or rural in the PLA varieties. Examples of these include mansevo 'young man' (compare to PLAjoven), trokar 'to change' (PLA cambiar), merkar 'to buy' (PLA comprar), andfraguar 'to build' (PLA construir). Further, like most Jewish languages, JS also contains a myriad of lexical items from the hagiolanguages (liturgical languages) Hebrew and Aramaic to denote religious, cultural, and judicial conceptS? Examples of these include darush 'sermon,' get 'divorce,' haham 'rabbi,' aynara 'evil eye,' and mazal 'luck.' Perhaps speakers and neophytes view this Hebrew/ Aramaic element as the "Judea" in JS, and it becomes a target for dissipation or concentration mechanisms depending on the speaker's intention. Additionally, JS also borrowed hundreds of lexical items from

4 Max Leopold Wagner. Beitriige zur Kenntnis des Judenspanischen von Konstantinopel. Vienna: Alfred Holder, 1914, 1 06; see also Penny, Ralph. Variation and change in Spanish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000, 180. 5 Cynthia M. Crews. Recherches sur le judeo-espagnol dans les pays balkaniques. Paris: E. Droz, 1935, 30. 6 Max A. Luria. A study of the Monastir dialect of Judea-Spanish based on oral material collected in Monastir, Yugo-Slavia. New York: Instituto de las Espafias, 1930, 100. It seems that in Monastir other factors in addition to stress are causing vocalic raising. 7 Paul Wexler. Jewish interlinguistics: Facts and conceptual framework. Language 57:1,99-149, 1981.

Rey Romero 53

coterritorial languages and languages necessary for trade across the Mediterranean. Some of these include pir6n 'fork' (from Greek), tanta 'au~t,' mersi '~ank you,' vuatur 'vehicle, car' (French), kolay 'easy,' kanshear 'to m1x,' boyadji painter, (Turkish). ln Modem JS, the French and T~!Ush l: xical ~lements predominate due to intense language contact and bilingualtsm with these languages. French was promoted as the language of civilization and culture by schools of the Amance Israelite Universelle, which opened schools for Jewish children throughout the Ottoman Empire, North Atrica, and the Middle East from the middle of the nineteenth century. In Turkey, these schools were eventually closed through national istic Language policies in the 1930s.8 French left a distinct lexical layer in JS language and culture, as it was associated with enlightenment, innovation, and science. It became the source for borrow~gs in these areas, and some JS pubtications even attempted to moderniZe the Language by replacing words from other Balkan and Mediterranean languages with French or modified French lexicon to fit Spanish morphology to create a Gallicized JS variety.9 Some researchers have claimed that as much as twenty percent of Modem JS lexicoo derives from Fr~~ch. 10 Since bilingualism with French still exists in -many commumtJes, the language continues to influence JS as a source of neologisms or as part of code-switching. Lexical borrowings from Turkish entered the language in two waves. First, as part of the pan-Ottoman lexical repertoire, Turkisms present in many Balkan languages such as Bulgarian, Macedonian, and Serbo-Croatian. These constitute concepts of every-day life such as uda 'room,' mupak 'kitchen,' or yemi 'boat.' Many of these Turkisms probably entered JS via other languages such as Greek. 11 The second wave of Turkish borrowings is the direct result of nationalistic language policies in the 1920s and 1930s that sought to

8 Howard Sachar. Farewell Espana: The world of the Sephardim remembered.

New York: Vintage, 1994, 98-99; see also Ester Benbassa and Aron Rodrigue. Sephardi Jewry: A History of the JS Community, 14th-20th Centuries. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2000, I 04. 9

Sarah Abrevaya Stein. Making Jews Modern: The Yiddish and Ladino Press in the Russian and Ottoman Empires. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2004, 69-70. 10

Nathan Weinstock and Halm-Vidal Sephiha. Yiddish and Judea-Spanish, a European heritage. Brussels: Vanden Broele, 1997, 29. 11

Marie-Christine Varol-Bornes. "Influencia del turco en el judeoespafiol de Turquia" in Winfried Busse and Marie-Christine Varol-Bornes (eds.) Sephardica: Hommage a Hai'm Vidal Sephiha. Berne: Peter Lang, 1996, 216; see also Crews 1935, 1127.


impose Turkish on all the minority populations.12 As Turkish took over the domains in which JS was used and as the Sephardim became proficient in Turkish, JS acquired more Turkisms, especially to designate modem concepts. Often, many of these lexical items were not accommodated to fit JS morphology or phonology, and they are present as nonce borrowings or as part of code-switching.

Code-switching with Turkish and other coterritorial languages is the last dialectal feature that I will address in this study. As Sephardim's bilingualism increased, the community utilized more than one language for daily life, eitper as language allocation (in which one language is assigned one particular domain) or as language shift (when one language takes over the domains of another). There are no more monolingual JS communities, and bilingualism or multilingualism appears to be the norm. These bilingual situations may trigger code-switching and additional lexical borrowings, thereby giving the impression that JS is just a random mixture of languages. For instance, when Wagner visited the Bucharest community in the beginning of the nineteenth century, he documented phrases such as: stuve unde el kroitor, me tom6 Ia mazura d'una roke, me la izo tan potrivita parke era turnat. This sentence mixes JS with Romanian (unde, kroitor, mazura, rake, potrivita, par, turnat), and Wagner considers it a jargonized version of the language.13 Code-switching with Turkish in the Istanbul community is also prevalent, as exemplified in this conversation: Ya est6 saviendo, ya savo ya, de chikez yaani kiir;ukten kalmz§, ogrenmi§im bu ~ekilde devam ediyor. 14 The communities in New York, Israel, and Greece also exhibit language mixing and code-switching with English, Hebrew, and Greek respectively. JS speakers and those PLA Spanish speakers who encounter the language readily notice that language mixing is the norm in these communities. In a previous study on the lstanbulite community, some participants even took pride in the multilingual nature of the Sephardim:

Saves una koza, kon los djudios es ke todos konosen sinko, sesh linguas i kuando avlamos mesklamos porke savemos ke ya vas entender. I una vez estava en kaza de mis parientes i unos amigos mios de kuarenta anyos ke estim en la Amerika vinieron, i mis ijos estavan. Empesimos a avlar turko, franses, ingles, espanyol, todo endjuntos, muy normal en kuatro linguas. No me apersivi ke es una koza anormal porke ansina avlamos. Kuando

12 Benbassa and Rodrigue 2000, 102; Sachar 1994, 104. 13 Cited in Crews 1935, 29-30. 14 Rey Romero. Spanish in the Bosphorus: A sociolinguistic study on the JudeaSpanish dialect spoken in Istanbul. Istanbul: Libra, 2012, I 09.

- . ·.- . : '" -~. ' ' ' .r.,

Rey Romero

.fuimosa kaza, mis ijos disheron al papa, "estuvieron avlando por dos oras kuatro linguas, " i les paresi6 muy komik esto. IJ

You know something, the thing about Jews is that they all know five or six languages and when we speak, we mix them because we know that it's u~derstandable. And one timeT was at my relatives' home and some of my frten ds who had been living in America for forty years were vis itino and my children were there [too]. We started talking in Turkish, F;~nch English, Spanish, all mixed, in four languages, very normal. I didn't notice that it was strange because that' s how we talk. When we returned home my children said to their father, "they were talking in four languages fo; two hours," and they thought this was very funny.

55

To summarize, among the main distinctive dialectal features of JS we ~n~ phonological differences in the distribution of initial [f], voiced stbt~ants,. palat~ls, vowel raising, lexical differences in Old Spanish patnn:om.al lextcon, as well as borrowings and code-switching with cotemtonal languages. These features are relevant to this study as JS speakers and writers choose to either overgeneralize them in the concentration model or omit or accommodate them to the PLA varieties in the dissipation model.

3. Concentration of dialectal features

There are several mechanisms through which dialect concentration is achieved. First, speakers or writers become aware of certain features not present in other dialects. These features are then maximized or emphasized throughout the population, creating new contexts for their distribution, or simply creating new items selecting distinct features as models. Concentration may be present at any linguistic component. For instance, two often cited examples of the "mixing" ofJS with Hebrew are ladronim, where Spanish ladr6n 'thief is combined with the Hebrew masculine plural -im, and haraganut, with Spanish haragan 'idle, lazy,' combined with the Hebrew nominalizer -ut 'idleness. ' 16 Although these and other forms such as refranin (Spanish refran 'proverb' + the adaptation to Spanish phonology of -im >-in) and meanot (Turkish meyhane > meana 'tavern' + Hebrew feminine plural -ot) are attested in literary JS in the

15 Ibid. 82-83. 16

Tracy K. Harris. Death of a Language: The History of Judea-Spanish. Newark: University ofDelaware, 1994, 18.


eighteenth century, 17 these examples are by far rare and do not represent a general pattern throughout the language. However, because these forms represent the morphological amalgamation of Spanish, Turkish, and Hebrew elements, they may serve as models for the concentration model. In fact, the form ladronim is often cited in Spanish linguistics textbooks that aim to introduce students to the JS dialect. This provides the misrepresentation of the language, as extrapolation from one example may lead to think that Hebrew -im is a productive plural marker in the language.

In addition to the expansion of dialectal features, speakers may establish an 'indelible link between feature and speech. That is, if you speak X language, then you must produce Y feature in your speech, otherwise it is not X. Furthermore, this may also involve identity, and the association between ethnic group Z and feature Y. That is, if you are Z, then you must produce Y, otherwise you are not Z. These assumptions create linguistic myths and stereotypes, such as that all Spaniards "lisp" (interdental fricative [8]) or that all Jews have a strong "ch" (velar fricative [ x]) in their speech. Therefore, concentration of dialectal features may serve the metalinguistic purpose of asserting group membership or inclusion. Concentration may be a bottom-up process, in which some dialectal features are noticed by native speakers or language learners and thereby overuse them as a way to consciously distinguish JS from PLA varieties. Concentration may also be a top-down process, in which organizations seeking to provide instruction and linguistic materials consciously select those dialects that have more divergent features from mainstream dialects or promote the acquisition and intergenerational transmission of certain features. For instance, a JS textbook that solely focuses on Balkan dialects (with initial [f] and vocalic raising) and that has a lesson on Hebrew plurals may contribute to dialect concentration among its students. Not surprisingly, revitalization movements that seek to stress the unique character of the language may also choose and promote nomenclatures that set the dialect apart from its macrolect. The names Ladino and Judezmo do not convey a clear connection to Spanish as do Espanyol and Muestro Espanyol, which are also used by Sephardim. Keeping these mechanisms in mind, let us now examine several examples of dialect concentration in JS.

The first two examples come from JS communities on Facebook. The third example comes from Wikipedia. In example (1), the writer was

17 David M. Bunis A lexicon of the Hebrew and Aramaic elements in Modern Judezmo. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1993, 36-37.

Rey Romero 57

merely posting a clarification on spelling. In example (2), the wTiter posted a poem about Sephardic identity. Example (3) is meant to be more forma.! and informative, as an encyclopedic entry. -

(I) Avlo Ladino deshde chilro, antes del sefarad, y eshkribo en caracteres hebreos. No sey muy bien ishkibrir en karakteres Iatinos tal kual ustedes. No e el kostumbre de mishpacha shell. Mas me kiero ensinyar

I speak Ladino since I was little, before Spain, and I write it in Hebrew script. I don't know how to write very well in Latin script like you all. It's not my family's custom, but I want to learn.

(2) Entonse.s un dia ehad me senti tan trisre/Una tristeza ke no savio por ke.l Yo me mirava defronte al e.spejo I }' no recono_sia akeya fase I Si no era akel mi kuerpo, I Donde estava mi neshama? I Levad me par los caminos segurosl Salva de !a confuzion mi neshama I Faz ke !a aretz tohu vavohu I Se torne en !a aretz hatova.

Then one day I felt so sad/ I did not know the reason for this sadness. I I saw myself in front of the mirror I And I did not recognize that face I If that was not my body, I Where was my soul? I Take me on the safe roads I Save my soul from confusion I Make the chaotic land I Become the good land.

(3) Las linguas prinsipalas avladas en Yisrael inkluyen el ivrit i el arabo, linguas ofisiales de Yisrael.

The main languages spoken in Israel include Hebrew and Arabic, the official languages oflsrael.

These examples demonstrate the expansion of several phonological and lexical features. For instance, in (l) we see the palatalization of [ s] to [D in deshde 'since,' eshkribo 'I write,' and ishkribir 'to write,' which does not occur in any variety of JS (the forms are desde and eskrivir, iskrivir, or skrivir). The invention of these forms occurs when neophytes or people who are new to the language make the wrong analogies based on PLA Spanish varieties or other languages. For instance, if PLA buscar is JS bushkar, then PLA desde must be *deshde. Other examples of concentration through erroneous phonological analogies (denoted with ::) from these samples include: ensinyar (based on PLA ensenar :: PLA senor : JS sinyor), defronte (PLA de frente :: PLA despues : JS dospues), and levad (PLA llevad :: PLA lluvia : JS luvia). The form sey with the extraneous -y in (l) is not clear. Another strategy is the inclusion of Hebrew words in the three texts: Sefarad 'Spain,' mishpacha shelf 'my


family,' ehad 'one,' neshama 'soul,' aretz tohu vavohu18 'a wild and wasted land,' aretz hatova 'the good land,' and ivrit 'Hebrew.' The Hebrew element might be emphasized as a way to assert that JS is a Jewish language, and therefore, as all Jewish languages, it must use Hebrew words. This might also be symptomatic of an underlying linguistic stereotype that all Jews speak Jewish languages. Therefore, the Hebrew elements, from which only Sefarad, ivrit, and neshama appear regularly in non-Rabbinical literary works, decrease mutual intelligibility with PLA Spanish varieties and with the Spanish of non-Jews. A third element that all three texts present is the random mixing of languages. Although linguists hav~ identified inter-sentential and intra-sentential patterns for code-switching, the texts above do not follow such models since they were not produced by native JS speakers in a bilingual community. Instead, the random mixing of Hebrew and Portuguese (e 'is' andfase 'face') echoes the initial impression of language amalgamation without rules, as explained by Halio Torres:

Every Spanish-Jew who speaks the language of his ancestors knows that his dialect is not tightly governed by rules. Almost every one of them speaks differently, having come from a different somewhat isolated community under different influences. 19

The perception of a language without tightly governed rules shapes language attitudes negatively, as speakers question whether or not such language is valuable or useful. It also encourages those who seek to learn JS to mix Spanish with Hebrew and Portuguese (and other languages) ad hoc and present it as an authentic representation of the language. In addition, the writers of (1) and (3) also failed to notice some of the lexical features of JS and produced PLA forms. In (1 ), the PLA pronoun ustedes is used, instead of the Judeo-Spanish vozotros, and ensinyar should be ambezar. In (3), the author uses the JS feminine plural prinsipalas, but fails to do so with the next adjective, writing PLA ojisiales instead of ojisialas. Thus, the resulting version of JS may include extremely divergent elements mixed with PLA items.

18 Tohu vavohu is a phrase from Biblical Hebrew, found in Parshat Bereishit (Genesis). It refers to earth being "formless and void." Biblical Hebrew might be a source from which this author draws the Hebrew elements of his JS writings. 19 J. Halio-Torres. "Writing the Spanish-Jewish dialect" in Marc D. Angel (ed.) Studies in Sephardic Culture: The David N. Barocas Memorial Volume. New York: Sepher-Hermon, 1980,96.

Rey Romero 59

Although these examples come from non-native speakers of JS and do not represent the majority of participants in online communities such as forums and social networks, they present opportunities for native speakers to push a concentration model in language planning policies that deal with neologisms, such as new terms for computing and digital technologies. This occurred before, in the late nineteenth century, as newspapers such as El Tiempo created new terms for transportation and other technological advancements, and even everyday lexical items, basing the neologisms on French forms. This created unintelligibility even among native speakers of JS who were not bilingual in French. This is illustrated by a contemporary satirical dialogue between a Salonikan couple:

Ezra: "Un grande sinistro devast6 el mas grande edifisio sanitaria de muestra sivdad. " Benuta: Ke kiere decir esto, Ezra? Ezra: Kien save Benuta; no mashkarel nada. Ben me/dar, sen entender. El Dio ke los fieda a los djomales ke eskriven tanto enfrankeado para no pueder modrer ni una palavra20

Ezra: "A great fire destroyed the biggest medical building in our city." Benuta: What does that mean, Ezra? Ezra: Who knows, Benuta; I didn't grasp anything. I read, you understand. May God strike these newspapers that use so much French that I can't grasp a single word.

In the above dialogue, sinistro, devast6, edifisio, and sanitaria are all neologisms based on French forms. Ezra and Benuta complain that they cannot understand this kind of JS. Concentration can have a similar effect on modern revitalization efforts.

4. Dissipation of dialectal features.

Dissipation consists of minimizing those dialectal features that do not exist in the perceived standard variety of the language by accommodating or eliminating them. Unlike concentration, native speakers of JS seem to be guiding this model, as accommodation to PLA varieties has been attested in the Sephardic communities of Tetouan, New York, Los Angeles, Istanbul, the Prince Islands, and others. Dissipation seems to be the result of contact with PLA Spanish varieties which leads to the awareness of dialectal differences and the accommodation of these features to fit the

20 David M. Bunis. Kolot mi-Saloniki ha-Yehudit. Voices from Jewish Salonika. Jerusalem: Graphit, 1999,472.


PLA systems. Contact may occur through migration, as Sephardim moved to Spain, Latin American countries or the United States. For instance, Harris noticed that:

The Spanish used by Puerto Ricans in New York and the Chicanos in Los Angeles, as well as the Spanish speakers in .these areas, has had a great influence on the Judea-Spanish of both New York and Los Angeles. This is due mainly to the similarities of the two Languages and the everincreasing contact of the Sephardim with noo.-Sephardi Spanish speakers in certain work and school situations. [ .. . ) There is even some Standard Spanish interference in Israel in cases where the informants have either studied Modem Spanish, traveled e>.'tensively, lived in Spanish-speaking countries, or have used Spanish in their work?1

But accommodation and dissipation may also occur in situations without direct or extensive contact, as long as speakers become aware of dialectal differences. For instance, many participants from Istanbul and the Prince Islands were introduced to dialectal differences through family members who had migrated, through interacting with PLA speakers during business and travel. Thus, dissipation can be a bottom-up approach, as it can be based on speakers' perception of dialect differences and their knowledge on how to accommodate them or avoid them in the target variety. This can introduce great variation in the dissipation model, since its production will depend on speaker's individual experiences and level of awareness. On the other hand, dissipation may also occur in a top-down fashion, especially when JS speakers enter the PLA Spanish classroom or, as the lnstituto Cervantes has promoted, Spanish courses especially designed for Sephardim who speak JS.

Dissipation may happen at the phonological level. For instance, the aforementioned JS palatals [Jl, [3], and [d3] are often accommodated as PLA [x] in the dissipation model, although only in lexical items where there is a [x] in PLA Spanish. Speakers are aware of the palatal/velar distinction, as one participant from Istanbul remarked:

(4) ... in Ladino we are using [3)e, i[3]a, uh, when I said 'Tienes i[3]os' uh my friends from Mexico, when I was in Houston, I told, 'Do you have i[3]as, i[3]os?' She didn't understand: Sorry? Then I eh correct myself, 'Do you have i[x]os, i[x]as?' They understand. But in Ladino, we are spelling it

21 Harris 1994, 173-174.

Rey Romero

like 'i[3]a,' 'mu[3]er,' 'mu[x]er' for example, it's mu[x]er. It's i[x]o, i[x]a. But we are calling it 'mu[3]er,' i[3]a, i[3}0, vie[x]a, vie[3]a.22

61

Another participant from the Prince Islands, off the coast of Istanbul, agreed:

(5) Mozotros eh ... ti[x]eras es lo djusto. Mozotros aki dizemos ti[J]eras, anJeo[J]os. La [x]e se izo [:JlfiB.

We uh .. ti[x]eras is correct. Here we say ti[3]eras, anteo[3]os. Letter [x]e became [3]e.

These examples also illustrate language attitudes that lead to accommodation. In (4), the speaker equated accommodation to the velars as a "correction," and in (5) the participant claims that the forms with [x] are the right ones. Furthermore, in (5), the PLA forms with [x] are thought to be the original ones, and the JS [3] is a later development, when actually the opposite is true. The palatal to velar accommodation was also noticed by Harris in the communities of New York and Los Angeles:

Besides lexical borrowing there is also a great amount of phonological interference [ ... ]. Due to contact with Modern Spanish, the replacement of the [3] and [d3] as well as the U1 sounds by the voiceless velar fricative [x} is quite widespread today in the Judeo-Spanish of my New York and Los Angeles informants.24

The phonological dissipation in favor of PLA [x] has also been attested in Indianapolis25

, Mexico Cicy26, Izmir27

, and Tetouan28• In fact, Benichou s

1960 study (based on data from 1950) indicated that:

22 Rey Romero. Palatal east meets velar west: Dialect contact and phonological accommodation in Judea-Spanish. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 6:2, 2013,291. 23 Ibid, 2 91. 24 Harris 1994, 173-175. 25 Julie Nemer. Sound patterns and strategies: Loanwords in Judea-Spanish. Doctoral dissertation, 1odiana University at Bloomington, 1981, 214-216. 26 Karina Donath. Estudios sabre el judeo-espaiiol en Mexico. Mexico City: INAH, 1999, 72, 78-79. She calls this process recastellanizar or "make Spanish again." 27 Paul Gregory Gilmer. Judea-Spanish to Turkish: Linguistic correlates of language death. Doctoral dissertation, University ofTexas at Austin, 1986, 54-55 . 28 Paul Benichou. Notas sabre el judeo-espafiol de Marruecos en 1950. Nueva Revista de Filologia Hispanica 14, 307-312, 1960, 310.


En cuanto a los fonemas If/ y l3l del castellano antiguo, ya se sa be que han sido suplantados en Ia ultima generaci6n por Ia jota moderna, y que subsisten solo en casos y condiciones excepcionales ... En conclusion, el mmerial recientemente publicado confirma el triunfo casi general de !a jot a, ya observado anteriormente?9

In regards to the phonemes If! y /3/ from Old Spanish, we know that the last generation has replaced them with modern lxl, and these phonemes survive only in rare instances and circumstances .. .In conclusion, the recently-published material confirms the overall triumph of lxl, which had been observed previously.

' The presence of accommodation to [x] in most modem JS communities demonstrates that it is a common mechanism to achieve dissipation, and that in some cases, as in the Tetouani community, it has led to a complete phonological change in favor ofPLA Spanish (el triunfo casi general de Ia jota).

This pattern was studied in great detail in Romero (2013). The researcher included data of 19 participants from Istanbul and the Prince Islands, and the results indicated that from the three palatals, [3] is accommodated to [ x] the most (27% of all cases). 30 Most interestingly, the author also concluded that there was no token-age correlation, as all age groups (ages 30 to 85) exhibited [x] at roughly the same percentages. Furthermore, the same study also revealed that accommodation to [x] was not a phonological process, that is, it did not consist of merely replacing every UJ, [3], and [d3) with [x], but it only occurred in those lexical items with [x) attested in PLA Spanish. In fact, 84% of all accommodation instances occurred in just five lemes: ijolija, mujer, viejolvieja, djudi6/djudia, and djoven.31 Therefore, we must explore dissipation through lexical accommodation.

JS speakers from several communities have demonstrated awareness of lexical differences between JS and PLA Spanish. For instance, 79% of Christodouleas's informants from Salonika (Thessaloniki, Greece) perceived JS to be distinct from Peninsular Spanish and 55% believed that it was different from Latin American Spanish. According to her interviews, the main difference was in the JS lexicon inherited from Turkish, French, and other languages, as explained by one participant:

29 Ibid. 30 Romero 2013, 286-287. 31 Ibid, 288.

Rey Romero

(6) Ay diferensias bastantes parke Iron el tiempo emraran ei1 !a lingua espanyola ke mozotros javlamos palavras turkas, fransesas, ispanizadas um poko. Porke, [komo] dishe, entraron siertas palabras turkas i frankeadas ... debemos de fazer atension a ke ay las palavras tiukas ke otros no tienen.32

There are many differences because, as time went by Turkish ;md French words entered ~e Spanish language that we speak, Hispanicized a bit, because [as] 1 salCi, some Turkish and French words entered ... we must be aware that there are Turkish words that others don't have.

63

The infonnant above argues that JS speakers must be aware of these lexical differences with.interacting with speakers ofPLA Spanish. Specific examples were given by informants from Istanbul and the Prince Islands as illustrated in (7) and (8) correspondingly.

(7~ 1 think it's like our Ottoman Turkish. The old people in Turkey are usmg a lot of Ottoman words; it's like this, I think. For example we use in Ttrrk:ish "success» b~an, but the old people are using muvaffaJ...iyet. It's like that.. . I was saying trokar instead of cambiar, because in Laclino J heard about ittrokar but in real Spanish we are using cambiar.33

(8) Trabajar es en espanyol, en ladino es lavorar. Yo si digo a uno en Espanya 'lavorar,' entiende? Puedeser. Dinero, aki e/ dinero se izo paras, moneda Komo esto ay mzmchcis palavras ke se trok6. 34

Trabajar is Spanish, in Ladino it's lavorar. If I say 'lavorar' to someone in Spain, will he understand? Maybe. Dinero, here di11ero became paras, moneda. Like these, there are many words that changed.

Harris lists several PLA Spanish lexical items in the speech of her New York and Los Angeles informants, including enfermo (JS hazino),f6sforos (JS kibrites), trabajar (JS lavorar), cambiar (JS trokar) and comprar (JS merkar).

. JS writers using new spaces for communication in cyberspace, rncluding online communities such as those in Yahoo! and Facebook also actively attempt to avoid Hebrew or Turkish words and replace them with Spanish. For instance, two Facebook participants wrote in (9) and ( 1 0)

32 Tina ChristodouJeas. Judea-Spanish and the Jewish Comn11mity of 21st Century

Ihessaloniki: Ethnic language shift in the maintenance of etlmo cultural identity. Ph.D. dissertation: The Pennsylvania State University, 2008, 96. 33 Romero 2012, 101. 34 Romero 2013, 292.


(9) Yo evito en lo maksimo usar biervos turkos, ebraikos i arabos dainda ke los nonos los ayan uzado, (ya se ke no es errado uzarlos ama no me es gustoso) komo "ajilu" "kolay" etc. ama es solo mi estilo. "

I avoid as much as possible using Turkish, Hebrew, and Arabic words even if the grandparents used them, (I know that it' s not wrong to use them but it's not pleasant) like "afilu" "kolay" etc. but it's just my style.

(I 0) De otra parte, ay tres byervos turkos uzados por los djudyos de Estambol: halbuki (ke tras/ado en franses par or), zaten ke traslado en franses por d'ailleurs, i andjak, ke traslado enfranses por a Ia rigueur, sin ser siguro a syen par syen por lo ke es de esta ultima traduksyon. Mi kuestyon es: komo se diriyan estos tres byervos en el espanyol muestro sin emplear byervos turkos? Yo nose.

On the other hand, there are three Turkish words used by Istanbulite Jews: halbuki (that I translated in French as or), zaten that I translated in French as d 'ailleurs, and andjak, that I translated in French as a Ia rigueur, without being one hundred percent sure about this last transl.ation. My question is: how wo.uld you say these three words in our Spanish without us ing Turkish words? I don't know.

In (9), the writer readily admits that he does not like to use Turkish and Hebrew words, and the writer in ( 1 0) is consulting the forum on how to replace JS lexical items from Turkish by real Spanish words. Therefore, it is interesting that even in language spaces specifically designed for the preservation of JS, participants employ dissipation model strategies.

Ultimately, the single cause that promotes dissipation in favor of PLA forms is the linguistic domain of professional activities. For instance, an informant from Istanbul explained:

(II) Actually, most of clients were from Spain, so we have to speak Spanish, so first of all I was really afraid of using my language because I couldn't think that, uh, they can understand me, but they could understood me, so it was really funny for me, so I began to go to meetings with them. I began to take them to the airport, to the hotel. ..

The speaker in (11) found that his acquisition of JS as a child could improve his professional activities by modifying it to fit a PLA variety. Other informants, such as the one in (12) from the Prince Islands, expressed that JS (which she calls Ladino) should be discarded in favor of other Spanish varieties that may create marketability elsewhere, such as the United States:

-· = .. .:-. ~~· '.

Rey Romero

(12) Castellano si; Ladino ... no lo veo tan importante. Es una lengua muerta o que no hay, entonces no /o veo tan importante. Pero castellano si, porque hay gente que quiere ir a Estados Unidos y en Estados Unidos solo con iiWles no vas a estar, tienen que saber un idioma mas. (Romero 20 11 , 176)'

Castilian yes; Ladino... I don' t think it's that important It' s a dead language or it is no more, so I don't think it's important But Castilian yes, because there are people who want to go to the United States and you will not make it in the United States with just English, you have to know one more language.

65

The risk of dissipation model strategies, such as phonological and lexical accommodation, is that eventually the dialect may die not through the lack of intergenerational transmission or the dearth of linguistic domains, but through enough linguistic change to lose its distinct features and become part of a mainstream variety.

5. Implications for Revitalization efforts: Agency, appropriation, audience

Important implications for revitalization efforts become apparent by investigating the elements of agency, appropriation, and audience behind concentration and dissipation. By agency, I mean the actors promoting concentration and dissipation. For concentration, we identified that most JS writers pushing this model in online communities are non-native speakers, neophytes wishing to participate in language revitalization. For dissipation, we identified that most actors are native JS speakers who seek to accommodate their speech to PLA forms. Relevant to agency are the methods by which these models are achieved. Both conce:gtration and dissipation utilize phonological and lexical features to achieve their goal. The goals for each model contradict each other. Whereas the concentration model aims to decrease mutual intelligibility with PLA varieties of Spanish, the dissipation model focuses on eliminating any distinct JS features and aid JS speakers acquire PLA Spanish. The aim of dissipation is best summarized by the Sephardic philologist Henry V. Besso:

35 Rey Romero. Issues of Spanish language maintenance in the Prince Islands. In Alejandro Cortazar and Rafael Orozco (eds.), Lenguaje, arte y revoluciones ayer y hoy: New approaches to Hispanic linguistic literary and cultural studies, 162-187. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011, 176.


Creo que Espaiia debe hacer facil y posible Ia refimdici6n del dialecto judeoespaiiol hasta Ia altura del moderno Castellano, con lo que los sefardies tendrian accesibles los tesoros de su /iteratura y de ~su Ciencia. Creo que los sefardies se pondrian con entusiasmo a aprender y practicar e/ espaiiol moderno -que ya es conocido par muchos de ellos- y que de W'l

salta casi inconcebible y gigantesco lograridn salvor la dis Iancia de esos pasados cinco siglos36

1 think that Spain should make it easy and feasible the recasting of the Judeo-Spanish d.ialect to the height of modem Castilian, thereby Sephardim can gain access to its literary and scientific treasures. I think the Sephardim will start learning and practicing modem Spanish with zeal, and many of them aJready know it, and thus in one unbelievable and gigantic leap shorten their five-hundred year old distance.

Besso's vision reveals several language attitudes in favor of Castilian, claiming it has "height" and modernity, as well as literary and scientific treasures. For Besso, dissipation would erase the past five hundred years of JS development in the Ottoman Empire, and it would incorporate JS speakers to all the linguistic resources and benefits PLA Spanish speakers have in the global arena. This, of course, would constitute the death of JS. Therefore, concentration and dissipation provide two distorted and exaggerated versions of JS, which coexist with other "authentic" forms and dialects of JS in the same linguistic spaces.

Another issue relevant to language revitalization is linguistic appropriation. In other words, why do non-Sephardim use JS? Although this is a complex and multifaceted question, it appears that JS in the concentration model is used to establish a clear link between the Jewishness of the language (Hebrew and language mixing present in other Jewish languages) and that ofthe writer. Linguistic appropriation may also determine the role of JS in the newly created spaces such as books, online communities, and music. What is the purpose of JS in these new spaces? How is JS used as a tool in these media? This is yet another complex answer. The use of JS in the concentration model (and also unaltered JS) is to emphasize its distinctiveness from PLA varieties, as a linguistic code that only an in-group member can understand or decipher. This is again closely linked with identity, how the author wants to portray him or herself or the language. Some modem publications in JS have produced JS in the

36 Henry V. Besso. Situaci6n actual del judeoespafiol. In Gregorio Marafi6n and Ramon Menendez Pidal (eds.), Presente y futuro de Ia lengua espanola, Aetas de Ia Asamblea de Filologia del I Congreso de Jnstitucione:s Hispimicas, 306-304. Madrid: Ediciones Cultura Hispan~ica, 1964, 323.

Rey Romero 67

concentration model for literary or poetic effect. Such is the case of Dibaxu, a collection of JS poems by the Argentinian Juan Gelman. One of stanzas of Poem III is reproduced below:

lembrara tu nagilita curilada/ tus fluris curiladas/ tus bezus curilados/ tu blanco curas6n. J7

He will remember your red skirt/ your red flowers/ your red kisses/ your white heart.

Several features of the concentration model in Gelman's poetry include the random mixture of Portuguese lexical items (lembrar, vs JS akodrarse) and hypercharacterization of vowel raising (jluris instead of JS floris; the author raises the [o] in bezus, but not in curilados or blanco, etc.). The author also fails to use the JS diminutive -ika instead of -ita in nag(iita. Gelman includes a translation into PLA Spanish right below the poem, thereby allowing the reader to compare the dialects and understand his JS. In the introductory notes, the poet clarifies that he is not Sephardic, but that he wanted to use JS in order to evoke sixteenth century Spanish:

Como si buscar el sustrato de ese castellano, sustrato a su vez del nuestro, hubiera sido mi obsesi6n. Como si la soledad extrema del exilio me empujara a buscar raices en la lenfra• las mas profundos y exiliadas de Ia lengua. Yo tampoco me lo explico.3

As if my obsession had been searching the substrate of that Spanish, a substrate that is at the same time ours. As if my extreme loneliness in the exile had pushed me to look for roots in that language, the deepest and most exiled roots in that language. I cannot explain it to myself.

For Gelman, the concentration model functions as a poetic effect, even if it is not an authentic representation of JS. Linguistic appropriation is also relevant to the dissipation model. For instance, who decides that JS should accommodate to PLA forms? Who designs courses and materials to facilitate dissipation among Sephardic communities? Does it matter if the agents are Sephardic, JS speakers, or not? The central question of linguistic appropriation in both models is how it affects the link between language, identity, and culture. Can Sephardim preserve their ~ultural and linguistic identity with a variety of JS closer to PLA ~pan1sh thro~gh dissipation? Can one acquire "Sephardicness" by promotmg a JS var1ety

37 Juan Gelman. Dibaxu. Buenos Aires: Espasa Calpe, 1994. 38 Ibid.


further from PLA Spanish through concentration? Again, these are complex issues of identity that may have more than one answer.

Finally, we must also consider how audience design drives the conc~ntration and dissipation models. How do "Sephardic spaces or spaces specifically created for the maintenance and revitalization of JS affect the concentration and ~issipation model? What kind of JS is expected from a member of an online forum where JS is the main focus and purpose of sue~ ~pace? The idea that a dialect must be different from closely-related vanetles sunply because it is given a new name might affect the performance of JS writers, contributing to distinctiveness through the overuse of Hebrew and dialect features. On the other hand, if the forum is· meant to communicate with Sepbardim and other Hispanic Jews throughout the world. some of whom may not understand JS, then such space would activate the dissipation model. This depends on audience awareness . and knowledge of linguistic systems. For instance, the concentratiOn model may still be an effective method of communication in a forum or space where the audience is multilingual in Turkish and Hebrew and able to J?iece together the message. The audience may also be aware of vocalic differences among JS dialects, and thus accept this form of concentra~ion b_y associating them with actual JS fornlS. JS speakers aware of lexical differences, like the previous participants from Istanbul the Prince Islands, New York City, and Los Angeles, may also be able t~ understand JS undergoing a dissipation model. We must also question ~hether clissipation and concentration represent actual language change or JUSt ~e development of a linguistic style shaped by audience and space. For mstance, JS speakers may accommodate to (x] wben they utilize Spanish while conducting business or traveling abroad, but they may revert back to the palatals for intra-group spaces like family or religious events. The concentration model may also represent just a dialect ac~uisition stage, and, as neophytes interact with more JS speakers, it can shift to match a more authentic representation of the language. After all, JS is an ~ndangered _ language, and the community would benefit greatly from teachmg authentic language outside its current population of native and heritage speakers.

6. Conclusion

Concentration and dissipation models constitute a challenge to current JS revitalization efforts. Not only do these distribute an unauthentic, highly modified, and artificial variety of the language, but they also occupy spaces designed for JS maintenance, preservation, practice, and transmission.

Rey Romero 69

If these types of JS predominate linguistic domains, resources, and language policy, we run the risk of excluding the population of native speakers who can benefit the most from participating in revitalization efforts. Native speakers should also be seen as the models to follow, and they can provide invaluable information to anyone seeking to learn JS.

Moreover, concentration and dissipation models obscure the real linguistic needs of the community. One of the most pressing is intergenerational transmission, as most native speakers are 60 or older. The language needs to be passed down to the next generation, but both dissipation and concentration distort the language of native speakers and thereby the transmission of JS. In addition, these models might also impede intelligibility with the older, more proficient generation. Another necessity is the maintenance and expansion into more linguistic domains. The advent of virtual communities and social groups can replace physical geographical space, and thereby unite JS speakers throughout the world, foment literacy, and create language spaces for the next generation. Dissipation and concentration in online communities hinders the creation of a viable, authentic linguistic community. JS revitalization efforts must also focus on the documentation of lexicon and other dialectal characteristics from as many Sephardic communities as possible. Concentration provides erroneous information on these characteristics, and dissipation omits them. The actual language mixing patterns from modern JS communities can provide for essential information for studies on bilingualism, structural change, heritage languages, and linguistic domains. Lastly, JS revitalization efforts must use authentic data from current JS communities to create functional didactic materials to promote its teaching, maintenance, and transmission. Materials · that promote concentration or dissipation will only provide a version disconnected from linguistic reality, that may result in either incomprehension or dialect death. These challenges, if addressed timely, can fqrtify current revitalization efforts and infuse JS with renewed energy. Vidas largas.

References

Benbassa, Ester and Aron Rodrigue. Sephardi Jewry: A History of the Judea-Spanish Community, 14th-20th Centuries. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2000.

Benichou, Paul. Notas sobre el judeo-espafiol de Marruecos en 1950. Nueva Revista de Filologia Hispcinica 14,307-312, 1960.

Besso, Henry V. Situaci6n actual del judeoespafiol. In Gregorio Marafi6n and Ramon Menendez Pidal (eds.), Presente y futuro de Ia /engua


espanola, Aetas de Ia Asamblea de Filologla del I Congreso de lnstituciones Hispcinicas, Madrid: Ediciones Cultura Hispanica, 307-324, 1964.

Bunis, David M. A lexicon of the Hebrew and Aramaic elements in Modern Judezmo. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1993.

-. Kolot mi-Sa/oniki ha-Yehudit. Voices from Jewish Sa/onika. Jerusalem: Graphit, 1999.

Christodouleas, Tina. Judea-Spanish and the Jewish Community of 21" Cemwy Thessaloniki: Ethnic language shift in the maintenance of ethno cultw·al identity. Doctoral dissertation: The Pennsylvania State University, 2008.

Crews, Cynthia M. Recherches sur le judeo-espagnol dans les pays balkaniques. Paris: E. Droz, 1935.

Donath, Karina. Estudios sabre el judeo-espanol en Mexico. Mexico City: INAH, 1999.

Gelman, Juan. Dibaxu. Buenos Aires: Espasa Calpe 1994. Gilmer, Paul Gregory. Judea-Spanish to Turkish.· Linguistic correlaJes of

language death. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin 1986. ,

Halio-Torres, J. "Writing the Spanish-Jewish dialect" in Marc D. Angel (ed.) Studies in Sephardic Culture: The David N. Barocas Memorial Volume. New York: Sepher-Hermon, 1980.

Harris, Tracy K. Death of a Language: The History of Judea- Spanish. Newark: University of Delaware, 1994.

Luria, Max A. A study of the Monastir dialect of Judea- Spanish based on oral material collected in Monastir, Yugo-Slavia. New York: Instituto de las Espafias, 1930.

Nemer, Julie. Sound patterns and strategies: Loanwords in JudeaSpanish. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University at Bloomington, 1981.

Penny, Ralph. Variation and change in Spanish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Romero Rey. Issues of Spanish language maintenance in the Prince Islands. In Alejandro Cortazar and Rafael Orozco (eds.), Lenguaje, arte y revoluciones ayer y hoy: New approaches to Hispanic linguistic literary and cultural studies, 162-187. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011.

-. Spanish in the Bosphorus: A sociolinguistic study on the JudeaSpanish dialect spoken in Istanbul. Istanbul: Libra, 2012.

Rey Romero 71

Palatal east meets velar west: Dialect contact and phonological accommodation in Judea-Spanish. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 6:2, 2013.

Sachar, Howard. Farewell Espana: The world of the Sephardim remembered. New York: Vintage, 1994.

Schilling-Estes, Natalie and Walt Wolfram. Alternative models of dialect death: Dissipation vs. concentration. Language 75-3, 1999.

Stein, Sarah Abrevaya. Making Jews Modern: The Yiddish and Ladino Press in the Russian and Ottoman Empires. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2004.

Varol-Bornes, Marie-Christine. "Influencia del turco en eljudeoespafiol de Turquia" in Winfried Busse and Marie- Christine Varol-Bornes (eds.) Sephardica: Hommage a Hai"m Vidal Sephiha. Berne: Peter Lang, 1996.

Wagner, Max Leopold. Beitriige zur Kenntnis des Judenspanischen von Konstantinopel. Vienna: Alfred Holder, 1914.

Weinstock, Nathan and HaYm-Vidal Sephiha. Yiddish and Judea- Spanish, a European heritage. Brussels: Vanden Broele, 1997.

Wexler, Paul. Jewish interlinguistics: Facts and conceptual framework. Language 57:1,99-149, 1981.

(2015) Dialect concentration and dissipation: Challenges to Judeo-Spanish revitalization efforts

Documents

Transcript of (2015) Dialect concentration and dissipation: Challenges to Judeo-Spanish revitalization efforts