Newsgroups: sci.lang,rec,arts.sf.tv.babylon5
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!news.psc.edu!hudson.lm.com!news.math.psu.edu!news.cac.psu.edu!newsserver.jvnc.net!newsserver.hcc.com!news
From: kennedy@   (John W Kennedy)
Subject: Re: Yiddish orthography
Message-ID: <1995Aug16.164835.9404@hcc.com>
Sender: news@hcc.com (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: kennedy.bridgewater.ne.hcc.com
Reply-To: kennedy1@bwmail1.hcc.com (John W Kennedy)
Organization: Hoechst Celanese
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2
References: <1995Aug8.223303.15510@hcc.com> <Pine.OSF.3.91.950810173906.7363A-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk> <DD41Jy.Jno@midway.uchicago.edu> <Pine.OSF.3.91.950810225157.5642A-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk> <DD612L.6qo@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 16:48:35 GMT
Lines: 15

In <DD612L.6qo@midway.uchicago.edu>, wald@zarquon.uchicago.edu (Kevin Wald) writes:
>Yiddish has, from time to time, been written in the Roman alphabet,
>that does not mean that there was any *standardized* way of doing so.
>
>Indeed, I would be quite surprised if there had been. (Of course, I've
>been surprised before.) I am cross-posting to sci.lang, in the hopes
>that someone over there knows more about the history of standards
>for expressing Yiddish in the Roman alphabet.

Actually, our mid-60's Britannica came with a seven-language dictionary that
included a _proposed_ Romanization of Yiddish.  This would seem to mean that:
A) there was no standard until the mid-60's, and
B) given the way these things happen, there couldn't possibly be a genuine,
universally-accepted Romanization yet ("four Jews:  five opinions").

