Talk:Parashah

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Books      (Rated Start-Class) Books Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) WikiProject Judaism (Rated Start-Class) Judaism Portal Parashah is part of WikiProject Judaism, a project to improve all articles related to Judaism. If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Judaism articles. Project Judaism To-do: edit purge watch Here are some tasks you can do: Requests: Jewish and Biblical Units of Measurement or some such name, to include material of Ancient Hebrew units of measurement but also Talmudic units and use in Halacha (a la the Hebrew Wikipedia article he:מידות ומשקלות תורניים) Collaboration of the week { Cleanup: Jewish mythology - needs to be rewritten to be inline with our other mythology articles. Expand: Yom Ha'atzmaut - quite short for an article of such importance Wikiversity: School of Jewish Studies. Part of the new open content university, Wikiversity. Stubs: Category:Judaism stubs, Category:Tanakh stubs, Category:Synagogue stubs Update: Portal:Judaism is WikiProject Judaism's frequently updated portal. You can help make this the best portal on Wikipedia. Look at the talk page to see how you can help. Template loop detected: Template:WikiProject Judaism Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. WikiProject Bible (Rated Start-Class) This article is supported by WikiProject Bible, an attempt to promote the creation, maintainance, and improvement of articles dealing with the Bible. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Manual of Style - Naming conventions Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents 1 Plural form of the word 2 Adding External Links Section 3 Adding Link 4 WikiProject class rating

[edit] Plural form of the word

Parashah the proper vocalization, not the colloquial parsha. I very much understand if someone wants to note or even use parsha for the Weekly Torah portion, because that is an extremely widespread usage. But for the technical halakhic meaning it is not widespread, and the proper transliteration should be used in the article.

The plural is either parashot or parashiyyot (never parshiyyot), and it was correctly noted that Maimonides uses the latter (it appears that way even in the manuscripts of Mishneh Torah). But there is a whole area of halakhic literature on this, which employs both forms, but parashot probably more often. In modern Hebrew the same is true.

This is an "article in progress" which I still plan to add huge amounts to in the coming months. (Does the English Wikipedia have an "aticle in progress" template?") So I respectfully request that spelling changes be discussed here at the talk page. The true danger to the quality of the article is not which form we choose, but that unilateral changes will lead to inconsistency within it.Dovi 17:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

The Hebrew version of the article has parshiyot not parashot. You haven't provided a reference for parashot, so why change the version which has a proper source. Please do not revert sourced edits wihout producing evidence.--Redaktor 17:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the Hebrew article mostly uses parashot. (Where were you looking? Both are used in modern Hebrew.) Regardless, a Wikipedia article is not a source. If you want serious sources, the articles by Penkower and Ofer use both, and cite halakhic sources that use both. Rabbi Breuer in the introductions to his Tanakh versions (see the list in the Aleppo Codex article) prefers parashot, and in general it is used slightly more in halakhic contexts and in modern Hebrew writing. The whole issue, however, is a totally trivial one, and the main thing is for us to be consistent.Dovi 19:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Please do not revert spellings without agreement on a consistent method. Dovi 06:17, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

That's odd. I edited the spelling to parshiyot and quoted a source. You have reverted my edits without agreement.--Redaktor 10:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Please address the points already made above (which you seem not to have read), and then maybe we can have a meaningful discussion. Here is a list:

• Both parashot and parashiyyot are used in halakhic literature.
• Both parashot and parashiyyot are used in modern Hebrew.
• Parshiyot (the edit you have made several times) is incorrect and should not be used at all. (As a Yiddishism, parshiyos can be noted in a footnote.)
• In both types of literature (halakhic and modern), parashot is used more often.
• Sources for the above:
  • Even-Shoshan dictionary: Plural of "parashah" = parashot and also parashiyyot. ES lists the less common form last.
  • The articles noted in the "literature cited" section of this article, as well as articles by Mordechai Breuer and all of his introductions to his editions of the Tanakh. Online you might also be able to find usages of the plural in the websites on the Aleppo Codex and the "Jerusalem Crown" Tanakh. Hebrew usages are obviously preferable, in rabbinic and academic writing.
• The Hebrew version of this article uses the plural parashot (once again the majority usage in modern Hebrew).

I hope this closes the issue once and for all. I find it disheartening that so much effort is being wasted on something so trivial, when it has been evident since the start that we really need here is a something constant and usable. Shabbat Shalom, Dovi 14:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

If you think it is trivial, why make an issue of it?

1. You say parshiyot is incorrect, but Google has more than 11000 hits for it.
2. Even-Shoshan is Hebrew, and not a source for how the word should be rendered in the English Wikipedia.
3. The usage in Modern Hebrew is totlly irrelevant to an article which predates Modern Hebrew by many centuries.
4. Please supply a direct quote from Breuer to support your contention.

--Redaktor 08:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

The choice between parashot and parashiyyot is trivial because both are correct forms. (The former, however, is much simpler for a word that will probably appear hundreds of times when this article is finished.) Your constant changes to parshiyot are a bit less trivial, because they are wrong. And your lack of constancy (change a few and leave the rest without any agreement) is even less trivial. English Google hits are meaningless for determining Hebrew vowelization, try Hebrew Google. Only after the proper Hebrew vowelization is established can you talk about transliteration/spelling in English. As I said, I have no problem noting the Yiddishism (parshiyos) in a footnote, but this article is not about the Yiddishism.

I didn't bring up the Hebrew Wikipedia article, you did and then I answered you, so please refrain from telling me that it is irrelevant.

Modern Hebrew is not irrelevant, especially when the modern Hebrew usage is identical to the forms in classical Hebrew for this case, as I already pointed out several times: Parashot is the more common plural in both Modern and classical rabbinic Hebrew.

Tanakh Horev, 1998, "On the Edition" (Al ha-Mahdurah) by Rabbi Mordechai Breuer uses Parashot consistently dozens of times throughout, including the headings of subsections (נוסח נביאים וכתובים: הפרשות), (הפרשות הפתוחות והסתומות הועתקו מכתר ארם צובה). Same for everything else I've seen published by Rav Breuer and by most people who write on the topic. Give it a rest, enough is enough. If you do insist on continuuing this discussion, then you will probably force a vote, but please stop making unilateral changes regardless. Dovi 17:17, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with you. Modern Hebrew usage is most certainly irrelevant to this article. And I do not accept your contention that parashot is common in rabbinical sources. Furthermore English usage must be taken into account for an article in the English Wikipedia; you cannot dismiss it.

I don't know what you mean by unilateral. you are the only person who disagrees with me, and I don't see why you should force your opinion on me.--Redaktor 11:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Disagree completely about English usage. WP is an encyclopedia, and as such there is a place for it to note a popular vocalization that is technically incorrect, but not to base an entire article on it. For that, yes, popular English usage can and should be dismissed. Unilateral means that the article was written one correct way (no one disputes this), and while you contribute nothing of value to the actual content of the article, you make inconsistent changes to the spelling of a single term in a few of the places it appears, and without agreement.Dovi 14:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

You say it is correct, but I disagree with you. The fact that you wrote the article does not give you ownership.--Redaktor 13:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Even-Shoshan, a reputable dictionary respected by scholars, says that it is a correct usage. (The grammatical model is obviously parashah >> parashot as in halakhah >> halakhot.) You didn't question this earlier, just its relevance (!), but now you actually "disagree" that it is "correct"? Nobody owns the article, but there is certainly more weight to someone making serious contributions than to someone who has done nothing more than make several arbitrary spelling changes with no rhyme or reason (i.e. change spellings in a few places but not others and leave the article haphazard). The haphazard aspect of it (not the legitimate spelling discussion) is close to vandalism.

This debate has been pointless for a while and I don't plan to continue it. So if you still insist on changing the spellings we will simply have to open a vote. With a vote, whatever the result is, at least there won't be any more haphazard changes. Dovi 14:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adding External Links Section

I want to add an External Links section with external links to this article Parsha Classes: http://www.yutorah.org/parshat_hashavua.cfm http://www.613.org/parasha.html http://www.torahsearch.com/page.cfm/50 http://www.torahforme.com/files/Parsha/

Shadchan 15:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adding Link

No response all week so I am adding a section with external links. Shadchan 17:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 13:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)