This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Languages C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles C This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Judaism C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles C This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Israel This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Project Israel To Do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Assess : Rate the Unassessed Israel-related articles and Unknown-importance Israel-related articles. Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category and the tool's wiki page. Collaborate : Participate in WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration. Copyedit : Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2005 Deletion sorting : Participate in discussions at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel. Expand : Ayala Procaccia, Diamond industry in Israel, Edna Arbel, Levin Kipnis, Rami Kleinstein, Sephardic Haredim, Zman Tel Aviv, Nachum Heiman, Public Defence (Israel), Prisoner of Zion, Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, Day to Mark the Departure and Expulsion of Jews from the Arab Countries and Iran, Pre-Modern Aliyah See also Articles needing translation from Hebrew Wikipedia. Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to Israel articles missing geocoordinate data. Infobox : Add infoboxes to Israel articles needing infoboxes. Maintain : See Israel articles needing attention. Map : See discussion at Module:Location map/data/Israel. Add maps to articles in Wikipedia requested maps in Israel. NPOV : Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries Photo : Add pictures to articles in Wikipedia requested photographs in Israel. Stubs : See Israel stubs. Update : Basic Law proposal: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People Other : Translate to Hebrew : David Bar-Hayim, Guy Bavli, and Guy Oseary.

@Debresser: shalom. One of the reasons for my posting examples of Eliezer Ben-Yehuda's Modern Hebrew vocabulary is to show that not all words are accepted by Hebrew linguists as being accurate. For example, Ben-Yehuda is accredited with introducing the new Hebrew word "ribah" (Hebrew: רבה) for "confiture; fruit conserves; marmalade," believing it to be derived from the lexical root reḇaḇ, and related to the Arabic word murabba (jam; marmalade). (Source:Ha-Zvi (9 March 1888)) Perhaps we should ask here if such an addition is relevant in this article. What I remember hearing in my yeshivah days was that the word "ribah" for marmalade is a misnomer, thought by Ben-Yehuda to be from the Talmudic passage that speaks about Joseph and the things he had given to his brother, Benjamin, and to his father, Jacob: מאי ריבה? מיני מרקחת, when the actual statement was "What did he give more [unto him]? A kind of [fruit] conserves." Anyway, the Modern Hebrew word "ribah" has stuck in the language, which was never used in Hebrew until Ben-Yehuda. Can we get some feedback from our fellow editors if we ought to mention the word "ribah" in this context?Davidbena (talk) 22:43, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You already added two examples (חציל, חשמל) of a revived word and one of a mistake (כביש). I think even that is more than enough. The place to go into details is Revival of the Hebrew language, where all of this could be in its own section. Debresser (talk) 04:26, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Even though the title of this article is “Modern Hebrew”? It seems to me that one more example would not hurt the article, especially when nearly all the rabbis agree that the word "ribah" is a misnomer.Davidbena (talk) 16:07, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How is the second part of your sentence (especially when...) even relevant to the question? Debresser (talk) 18:47, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Debresser: What I meant to say is that since Eliezer Ben Yehuda's innovation of this one word "ribah" was not accepted by the rabbis who know linguistics, and who have assured us that it is NOT a correct substitute for the word "fruit conserves" (marmalade), it is all the more right and proper to mention the word as reflecting only a "corrupt" Modern Hebrew, as envisioned by Ben Yehuda. Remember, biblical Hebrew and Mishnaic Hebrew are a far cry from Modern Hebrew. Many Arabic loanwords are also used in Modern Hebrew (e.g. na'anah for mint, zaatar for marjoram, etc.) when each of these words had a corresponding Hebrew word. This is what I was driving at.Davidbena (talk) 19:14, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that our fellow co-editor, User:AntonSamuel is confused with the origin of the Hebrew language, even though the language has adopted elements of other languages within it. He claims, contrary to a consensus already reached by us (see section "Classification"), that the Hebrew language is a Canaanite language, of Hamitic origin, when the vast majority of scholars claim that it is mainly of Semitic origin, and is cognate with Arabic, Aramaic and Sabaean. Can we please get the input of editors User:Zero0000 and User:Debresser? If Wikipedia articles are to be based on consensus, Anton Samuel's reverts are clearly not based on any consensus. While scholar, Joseph H. Greenberg, does purport to say that Hebrew is part of the Canaanite branch of languages, the matter is actually held in contention.Davidbena (talk) 22:55, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is what the classification section specifies: "Modern Hebrew is classified as an Afroasiatic language of the Semitic family and the Canaanite branch of the North-West semitic subgroup.", Canaanite is clearly listed as a subgroup of the Northwestern Semitic language group here, in the language family information in the infobox and as I mentioned the same Semitic-Canaanite classification is also given by Ethnologue: http://www.ethnologue.com/18/language/heb/, what do you take issue with here? AntonSamuel (talk) 23:08, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph H. Greenberg writes (p. 80, in "On the African Affiliation of Hebrew and the Semitic Languages"): "There is no dispute regarding the existence and exact membership of the Semitic family of languages. What controversy exists concerns some aspects of the relatively minor problem of the exact of the exact nature of the mutual relations with the Semitic group." Since Greenberg, himself, holds that both Canaanite and Hebrew are part of the larger Western Semitic language group, at least from the perspective of all scholars being in agreement on the primal origins of Hebrew, we should mention Hebrew as being a Semitic language.Davidbena (talk) 23:13, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Fellman, a PhD. of Bar-Ilan University, says explicitly that Hebrew is a Semitic language. See it here. On the other hand, Joseph H. Greenberg's opinions are not so conclusive, as you can see here, where he wrote (p. 83, in "On the African Affiliation of Hebrew and the Semitic Languages"): "The relationship of Semitic to Indo-European is to be rejected. Semitic is probably related to the Hamitic languages of Africa and is thus part of the Semito-Hamitic family. The membership in Hamitic is not clearly defined, but Egyptian, Berber and Cushitic must certainly be included."Davidbena (talk) 23:27, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Blau of the Hebrew University also calls Hebrew a "Semitic language," as you can see here (p. 18). I think that it should be obvious to all that having foreign loanwords in the Hebrew language, whether that be Greek, Canaanite, Yiddish, or whatever, doesn't make the Hebrew language another language as a whole, and that, my friend, is what we are dealing with here.Davidbena (talk) 23:35, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: As you can see in this Review written by Gary A. Rendsburg of Cornell University, he mentions in the forefront of his article that "the classification of the Semitic languages is still a disputed subject." He mentions, for example, the view of Lipinski (p. 420) who "brackets Canaanite, Aramaic and Arabic together as West Semitic." Nevertheless, the author of the Review, on p. 421, alludes to Hebrew as being a Semitic language. So why do you want to mention Hebrew as a Canaanite language when most scholars hold that it is chiefly a Semitic language?Davidbena (talk) 00:13, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)There are a few relevant discussions with a lot of sources in the archives, if you guys are interested. I'm not sure what the problem here is, though. Canaanite is a Semitic language, so saying a language is Canaanite is also saying it's Semitic. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 00:19, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with NMMNG. The modern classification is that the Canaanite language group belongs to the Semitic family and Hebrew is a member of the Canaanite group. This is a little outside my comfort zone but I checked Rubin, A Brief Introduction to the Semitic Languages (2010), Weninger, The Semitic Languages, An international Handboo (2011), and Lipinski, Semitic Languages (1997). The connection of Canaanite to Hamitic is no longer supported by scholars, though some support an older and more conjectural grouping Afro-Asiatic of which the Semitic languages are part. Zero^talk 01:32, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is perhaps best to steer clear from disputes. Since everyone agrees that Hebrew is still a Semitic language, whether it also belongs to the Canaanite branch or not, it's best to mention it as such. The current edit is fine with me.Davidbena (talk) 02:35, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The text "a Semitic language of the Canaanite branch" is ambiguous, which I assume you didn't intend. It could mean that Hebrew is included in Semitic which is included in Canaanite, but the correct statement is that Hebrew is included in Canaanite which is included in Semitic. I'm not aware of any current dispute over that. I'll try "a member of the Canaanite branch of the Semitic language family". Zero^talk 08:06, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Modern Hebrew. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20130107225344/http://morfix.mako.co.il/default.aspx?q=%D7%94%D7%AA%D7%97%D7%A4%D7%A3&source=milon to http://morfix.mako.co.il/default.aspx?q=%D7%94%D7%AA%D7%97%D7%A4%D7%A3&source=milon
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120730024242/http://hebrew-academy.huji.ac.il/English/BirthOfaWord/Pages/Howawordisborn.aspx to http://www.hebrew-academy.huji.ac.il/english/birthofaword/pages/howawordisborn.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:47, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Modern Hebrew was placed in Category:Reconstructed languages. I removed Category:Reconstructed languages on the grounds that Hebrew is not a reconstructed language; it is a revived language. A reconstructed language is one that is unattested but reconstructed based on various evidence; for instance, Proto-Indo-European or Proto-Germanic. Hebrew, however, is a revived language; it died out, at least as a vernacular, but was revived (same is happening with two Celtic languages, Manx and Cornish). Therefore, i placed Category:Modern Hebrew in Category:Language revival instead. Okay?--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 15:50, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shalom! I have been told about Journal of Modern Jewish Studies Vol 5, No. 1 March 2006, pp. 57–71ISSN 1472-5886 print/ISSN 1472-5894 online © 2006 Taylor & Francishttp://www.tandf.co.uk/journals DOI: 10.1080/14725880500511175Ghil‘ad ZuckermannA NEW VISION FOR ISRAELI HEBREWTheoretical and practical implications of analyzing Israel’s main language as a semi-engineered Semito-European hybrid language. Best regards
no bias — קיין אומוויסנדיק פּרעפֿערענצן — keyn umvisndik preferentsn ^{talk contribs} 02:06, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What is the source for this name? The modern dialect of Hebrew is called in Hebrew "עברית מודרנית" (ivrit modernit, "modern hebrew"). It should be fixed. פעמי-עליון (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Who calls modern hebrew "israeli"?. I am a native hebrew speaker from Israel and no body calls hebrew that please remove it. 2A0D:6FC7:33B:5C5F:678:5634:1232:5476 (talk) 12:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To put a close on this, I see that while the article provided that in the lead as an alternate name at the time you wrote, somebody's removed it (except to mention one person's proposal to use that term). Largoplazo (talk) 20:42, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article describes Mishnaic Hebrew as "the language of the Mishnah and Talmud." However, the Talmud was written not in Hebrew, but in Aramaic. While it does occasionally quote mishnayos or baraisos, which were written in Hebrew, the main part of the text is Aramaic. I don't want to make the edit myself, because I might screw it up, but what is currently written there is inaccurate. Aaron Shalom Jonas (talk) 20:49, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Hebrew is not a Semitic language and definitely not related to Canaanite language. It’s mainly Yeddish so correct. So many other misinformation. 100.1.170.56 (talk) 03:38, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section heading you chose was suitable for your comment: What you wrote is a lot of misinformation. Largoplazo (talk) 03:53, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The map of the percentage of Modern Hebrew speakers is undeniably quite good. However, I would really hope for a new map that shows the areas where >60%, >70%, and so on, of the population speaks Modern Hebrew as L1, it's not just because it's satisfying, but also because it would be more informative. If you could, thank you. 114.122.20.79 (talk) 02:54, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nahseb, please explain why you reinserted the WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH that was added to the lede in February. إيان (talk) 05:33, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also don't see what's OR about this, could you elaborate? Andre🚐 05:52, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andrevan, what source about Modern Hebrew supports the WP:OR you just reintroduced to the lede? Please provide page numbers. إيان (talk) 06:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which part, or all of it? The first part, is: "Hebrew, ..... supplanted by Western Aramaic, a dialect of the Aramaic language, the local or dominant languages of the regions Jews migrated to, and later Judeo-Arabic, Judaeo-Spanish, Yiddish, and other Jewish languages". Do you think that is OR? That seems fairly common knowledge to me, is there a specific part you were trying to get a source for, or you need sources for all of that? Remember this is in the lead so may be summarizing the body? And the second part, Soon after, a large number of Yiddish and Judaeo-Spanish speakers were murdered in the Holocaust^[1] or fled to Israel, and many speakers of Judeo-Arabic emigrated to Israel in the Jewish exodus from the Muslim world, where many adapted to Modern Hebrew. That has a source. Are you saying you checked that and it didn't confirm the part it was cited to? And for the second part? You do not believe it's common knowledge that speakrs of Judeo-Arabic emigrated to Israel and adapted Modern Hebrew? Or which part are you objecting to?Andre🚐 06:04, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The bits of WP:UNSOURCED, WP:UNDUE WP:OR that should be removed are:

the local or dominant languages of the regions Jews migrated to, and later Judeo-Arabic, Judaeo-Spanish, Yiddish, and other Jewish languages.

and

Soon after, a large number of Yiddish and Judaeo-Spanish speakers were murdered in the Holocaust or fled to Israel, and many speakers of Judeo-Arabic emigrated to Israel in the Jewish exodus from the Muslim world, where many adapted to Modern Hebrew.

The only cited source, Grammatik der jiddischen Sprache, is a random cherrypicked source in German about the grammar of the Yiddish language, and it does not qualify the content attributed to it for presence in the lede. Material in the lede for this article, about Modern Hebrew, should appear prominently in high quality sources about Modern Hebrew. إيان (talk) 06:19, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't be surprised if we can't find all of it in ^[2]. Certainly talks about Judeo-Arabic, Yiddish, and Judeo-Spanish extensively. I assume the German source was there for the Holocaust thing. But, that's hardly cherrypicked if a source about Yiddish grammar also talks about Modern Hebrew. Andre🚐 06:25, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it's not a source specifically about Modern Hebrew, it's not relevant for this article. If the claims are not central, prominent, and covered thoroughly and extensively in reliable sources on Modern Hebrew, they're WP:UNDUE in the lede. It doesn't have to do with veracity or falsehood of the claims; it has to do with WP:DUEWEIGHT as reflected in WP:RELIABLESOURCES on the topic. إيان (talk) 06:34, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the source I just linked is specifically about Modern Hebrew, and ^[3] is as well, which talks extensively about the Holocaust aspect, so there's no problem here at all. Andre🚐 06:37, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What page? It's not a central part of the book, which doesn't seem to be a particularly strong source anyway. It seems you're attempting to WP:Cherrypick sources to try to support the POV OR in the lede. This is backwards. We should do the research first, and then we craft the content on Wikipedia so that it reflects what is in the reliable sources, with attention to WP:DUEWEIGHT and avoiding WP:SYNTH. إيان (talk) 06:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not cherrypicking sources at all. You removed content that was in the article since Feb, and another editor and myself both reverted your BOLD removals. You don't have a consensus to remove this content, and I just provided two sources, with page numbers, that are both academic books by subject matter experts about Modern Hebrew specifically. It is normal practice on Wikipedia to remove material or add a cn tag and then someone else provides a source to support the material. Now, maybe you want to edit the text slightly to improve text-source integrity but these sources should clearly support the centrality and importance of these ideas. Nor are they unusual ideas. I would assume most people familiar with the history of Modern Hebrew would know about the influence of Judeo-Arabic, Yiddish, Judeo-Spanish, and the importance of both the exodus from Arab Lands and the Holocaust, not to mention the Sephardic expulsions. Andre🚐 07:06, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So what page? إيان (talk) 07:09, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I included page numbers with both citations that were added to the article. The first part in Doron is on p.3 and p.7. The second one I added a whole array of pages that talk about the Holocaust starting on p.39 Andre🚐 07:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be logging off for a while so hopefully someone else can pick up the discussion if there is more discussion to be had. As I said, you may want to tweak the text in slight ways to reflect the framing used in those sources a little more closely, since I didn't edit the challenged text which was pretty long-standing (Feb is most of the year away from late October, after all), but I didn't write that text and I'm not in love with that exact phrasing, but as I said, those ideas really shouldn't be too controversial and I'm sure there are at least 2 or 3 similarly authoritative sources with the same material, but I can't look for them right now. However, I really don't think your statements above about POV, OR, SYNTH, UNDUE, etc etc are well-taken at all. Andre🚐 07:18, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the proper way to read and represent the sources. Please understand the policy, respect the sources, and avoid engaging in WP:ADVOCACY; make the claim on the sources, not the sources fit the claim.

If a source is not specifically about Modern Hebrew, it's not relevant for this article and it is probably being used for WP:SYNTH. A random German book about Yiddish is still being to push a claim into the lede of an article about Modern Hebrew.

Similarly, if a claim is not central and prominent in the coverage in reliable sources, it's WP:UNDUE in the lede. Per WP:DUEWEIGHT, passing mention does not constitute prominent coverage and therefore does not justify forcing the claim into the lede. إيان (talk) 10:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have not engaged in advocacy, I engaged in WP:PRESERVE. The sources I added to the article are books exclusively and directly about Modern Hebrew. Andre🚐 10:17, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PRESERVE does not supersede WP:VERIFIABILITY and OR will be removed.

Additionally, per WP:LEDE, the the introduction summarizes the body. Not only are the OR claims not summaries of the body's content, but they are not even addressed in the body.

Please understand. إيان (talk) 10:26, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I provided sources for the statements. It's therefore verifiable and verified. It is not OR. As to the body vs lead, well, that's a fixable problem that doesn't involve removing the statements despite 2 other editors reverting, but copying them to the body. Andre🚐 10:27, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notified Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Jewish_history#2_discussions Andre🚐 10:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider joining the feedback request service. An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following lists: Language and linguistics History and geography When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the lists. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

Should the text in bold below be kept in the introduction?

Hebrew, a Northwest Semitic language within the Afroasiatic language family, was spoken since antiquity and the vernacular of the Jewish people until the 3rd century BCE, when it was supplanted by Western Aramaic, a dialect of the Aramaic language, the local or dominant languages of the regions Jews migrated to, and later Judeo-Arabic, Judaeo-Spanish, Yiddish, and other Jewish languages. Although Hebrew continued to be used for Jewish liturgy, poetry and literature, and written correspondence, it became extinct as a spoken language.

and

By the late 19th century, Russian-Jewish linguist Eliezer Ben-Yehuda had begun a popular movement to revive Hebrew as a living language, motivated by his desire to preserve Hebrew literature and a distinct Jewish nationality in the context of Zionism. Soon after, a large number of Yiddish and Judaeo-Spanish speakers were murdered in the Holocaust or fled to Israel, and many speakers of Judeo-Arabic emigrated to Israel in the Jewish exodus from the Muslim world, where many adapted to Modern Hebrew.

This has been discussed above at Talk:Modern Hebrew#WP:OR in lede. إيان (talk) 00:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes. This text is a reasonable paraphrase of the best sources on Modern Hebrew and important in the history of the language's development as explained by linguistic and historical experts on Modern Hebrew. Andre🚐 00:51, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  For the benefit of the discussion, please cite these best sources on Modern Hebrew with quotations or page numbers. إيان (talk) 00:55, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Language Contact and the Development of Modern Hebrew. BRILL. 2015-11-16. pp. 3, 7. ISBN 978-90-04-31089-6., Berdichevsky, Norman (2016-03-21). Modern Hebrew: The Past and Future of a Revitalized Language. McFarland. pp. 39, 65, 73, 77, 81, 101. ISBN 978-1-4766-2629-1. Andre🚐 01:27, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  For the cited pages in Language Contact and the Development of Modern Hebrew (2015), there is the following:

• While this is interesting material that I encourage you to incorporate into the article, it doesn't support the claim that Hebrew was supplanted by the local or dominant languages of the regions Jews migrated to, and later Judeo-Arabic, Judaeo-Spanish, Yiddish, and other Jewish languages in the 3rd century BCE as it currently states in the introduction, and the Holocaust is not at all mentioned.

  For the cited pages in Norman Berdichevsky's Modern Hebrew: The Past and Future of a Revitalized Language, we have:

• You pretty clearly just ran a Ctrl+F for mentions of 'Holocaust' in this book. There is nothing substantial in support of the claims identified in bold in the RfC. Although passing mention does not establish WP:DUEWEIGHT for the inclusion of these claims in the introduction, I encourage you to add the information relevant to Modern Hebrew to the article body. إيان (talk) 02:24, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  collapsed response

• Andre🚐 04:21, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it should be kept in the lead. The information is an important aspect of the article topic's history and the sources are relevant and on topic. I don't see how original research, synthesis or has taken place here.

The sentences' structure should be improved, particularly the first as I initially had trouble understanding it. For example, it could be written as:

• "Hebrew, a Northwest Semitic language within the Afroasiatic language family, was spoken since antiquity and the vernacular of the Jewish people until the 3rd century BCE. It was supplanted by Western Aramaic (a dialect of the Aramaic language), local or dominant languages of the regions Jews migrated to, and later by Judeo-Arabic, Judaeo-Spanish, Yiddish, and other Jewish languages."

As to the information not currently being in the body:

• As the language's revival necessitated a great number of people's proximity, it is is therefore important to explain what motivated a large number of Jewish people to migrate to Israel.
• Any important information should be kept in the lede, and editors should agree that the information will be integrated into the article and they should also recognise that this dispute will only be delaying that.

As to a source on the 'claim' regarding the Holocaust; the source in German currently being used in the article should be replaced by one in English (which have been provided in this discussion).

FropFrop (talk) 03:51, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which source, with quotation, supports that Hebrew was supplanted by languages of the regions Jews migrated to, and later by Judeo-Arabic, Judaeo-Spanish, Yiddish, and other Jewish languages."? This is factually incorrect.

There is also no clear and direct support for the other claim in any tertiary sources on Modern Hebrew, nor is it present anywhere in the article, which the introduction is supposed to summarize per mos:lead. إيان (talk) 18:05, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How can you say that when we just gave extensive sources that pretty much say that except for some paraphrasing? native language was Aramaic, a language that greatly influenced the Rabbinic stage of Hebrew. Medieval Hebrew, starts around the 7th century with the Arab conquest, when Arabic replaced Aramaic as the native language in many Jewish communities....Aramaic gradually replaced Hebrew as the dominant vernacular, while Hebrew, as well as Aramaic mixed with Hebrew... heavily influenced the “hybrid languages” that arose in the Diaspora, such as Yiddish (Judeo-German), Ladino (also known as Judezmo, or Judeo-Español) Andre🚐 19:54, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above text clearly does not support that Hebrew was supplanted by languages of the regions Jews migrated to, and later by Judeo-Arabic, Judaeo-Spanish, Yiddish, and other Jewish languages.

If you read it, it says that Arabic replaced Aramaic and that "Aramaic and Hebrew heavily influenced the “hybrid languages” that arose in the Diaspora, such as Yiddish (Judeo-German), Ladino (also known as Judezmo, or Judeo-Español)" which is obviously not what the WP:OR claim states. ('Judeo-Español', for example, couldn't have supplanted Hebrew because there was no such thing as Spanish when Jews migrated to Iberia in the first place. إيان (talk) 20:37, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this dispute is getting a bit pedantic. The sources say that Hebrew was supplanted by Aramaic, and later by Arabic, and later by Judeo-Spanish and Yiddish, and then those languages influenced the development of Modern Hebrew. Hebrew was still a language with native speakers, and also elements of the written language from subsequent periods when it was no longer spoken.... Hebrew ceased to be the spoken language of the majority of the Jews in their original Judean homeland... Aramaic gradually replaced Hebrew as the dominant vernacular, while Hebrew, as well as Aramaic mixed with Hebrew, continued to serve as the language of writing and literature... With the Arabic conquest, Aramaic began to decline as well and over several centuries was gradually replaced by Arabic... The claim isn't that Judeo-Spanish supplanted Hebrew directly (though it did in some cases) but it continued along the chronology. It was supplanting Judeo-Arabic at that time. For Yiddish, see p.200 of The Story of Hebrew: majority of Jews... Europe, the Arab world, an the United States.... little remained of the Hebrew... most who stayed turned to Yiddish or a Gentile language For Judeo-Spanish see starting p.267 of Language Contact, Continuity and Change in the Genesis of Modern Hebrew: Judeo-Spanish is the linguistic form ... This is a book about Modern Hebrew which devotes considerable space to Judeo-Spanish and Judezmo, which counters your argument that this isn't a significant aspect of the history of Modern Hebrew. See also p. 20-24 summarizing papers in the volume Hebrew in Arabic-speaking countries.... Eastern Europe ... Yiddish... reflects lineal descent from 15th century Spanish... See also Norich, Anita; Miller, Joshua L. (2016-04-06). Languages of Modern Jewish Cultures: Comparative Perspectives. University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0-472-05301-8.... p.1-6 introduction: Jewish languages ... Hebrew, Yiddish, Ladino/Judzemo, and Judeo-Arabic... Modern Hebrew... largely indebted and derived from Yiddish and other contact languages... Eastern European Jews as an interlinguistic community, governed by a unique triptych of languages moving among Yiddish as vernacular, Hebrew as sacred tongue, and the languages of the lands in whcih they lived Here's a very readable popular summary source on Judeo-Spanish, "The Judeo-Spanish Language and a Brief History of the Sephardi Jewish Community". The Cambridge Language Collective. Retrieved 2024-11-02.: Whilst Sephardi Jews spoke Ladino, Ashkenazi Jews spoke Yiddish. Their common language was Hebrew, ... The linguistic situation for many Jews was one of diglossia, when more than one language is spoken within a community. They used Ladino or Yiddish for secular speech and writing, and Hebrew for liturgy....The Jewish population in Iberia peaked between 1000-1300 CE. During this time, many settled in Andalusia Andre🚐 20:56, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This paragraph and the supplanting in question, before the addition of the WP:OR claims in February, is about Hebrew as a spoken language. Aramaic supplanted Hebrew as a spoken language. That's it. The sources are very clear on this.

This constellation of sources (that are not specifically about Modern Hebrew) that you have presented in an attempt to support the WP:OR is WP:Synth. Please understand. إيان (talk) 21:08, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree at all. Every source I presented is specifically about Modern Hebrew or, with the last message, I added a few about Jewish languages, but clearly relevant. First of all, Modern Hebrew is a spoken and a written language. Secondly, nothing is SYNTH here, this is simple combining of facts. See WP:SYNTHNOT. No conclusion is being made that isn't in the sources and no OR was committed here. This is arguably Common knowledge for many. Aramaic supplanted Hebrew, that is true. Which is written. And the sources are very clear, and you can't just hand-wave away all the information about Judeo-Arabic, Yiddish, and Judeo-Spanish which belong in the lead and in the history of Modern Hebrew. I agreed to clarify to adjust the wording to explain more depth but you insist on removing this and that it's OR. We'll have to agree to disagree and see what happens with the rest of the RFC. Andre🚐 21:11, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Leaning no. The text is long and not entirely relevant to modern Hebrew. It can be included in a new background section. If the information is not expanded upon in the body, it may not be important enough for the introduction. Senorangel (talk) 04:33, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]