On Shabbos, I learn maseches Megilla with a chabura, and so I’ve once again encountered this gemara, so that is a good enough reason to write this, about the halachic legitimacy of the Ashkenazic pronunciation for tefillah and krias haTorah. There are folks out there, people or movements, who criticize Ashkenazic pronunciation, legitimately pointing out sources in Talmud, Rishonim, and Acharonim about problems stemming from mispronouncing ayins as alefs, and that such pronouncers are unwitting blasphemers.
Meanwhile, my approach hete is my approach in many other sugyot, which is to look at statements based on context of who said it (thus, the PERSON and the page) in terms of who they were, where and when they lived, and the genre of the statement.
This has led to many different readings of gemaras, often against the traditional understanding, posted on my various blogs and articles. It isn't an ex post facto attempt to justify myself, but I am lying to myself and secretly disagree with Chazal. That is frankly insulting.
No, I won't. This doesn't seem like a productive conversation.
(I am not expressing lack of knowledge, that i should look things up. e.g. Shadal argues that the nikkud orthography was post talmudic. If yerushalmi was redacted around 400 CE and masoretes began around 500 CE, that is 100 years. )
My point is that there may well be rejoinder, so don't be so smugly sure of yourself.
Again, you summary of what I am saying prior to your attack is woefully inaccurate. For instance, rhetoric is rhetoric (look at the genre). I didn't say inconsistent statements are rhetoric.
If you can't understand what I am saying, what's the point in continuing?
"Indeed, Talmud Yerushalmi is written in Galilean Aramaic. And, as I learned through regular study of Yerushalmi, and from Dr. Steiner in Revel in a Galilean Aramaic course, a regular feature of Galilean Aramaic is the relaxing of the guttural letters, ayins into alephs, sometimes letters entirely disappearing. This not just in the pronunciation but in the writing. (See here about relaxation of gutturals in Galilean Aramaic.) The Amoraim appearing in Talmud Yerushalmi, and its redactors, were all knowledgeable and religious, yet they weren’t careful in their pronunciation."
And yet, the Yerushalmi quotes the issur of allowing people from Haifa, Bet Shean, and Tivon from being the Shatz, with no indication that it has anything to do with being distracting or accidental blasphemy or anything like that. And, of course, Teveyra became the centre of the Ba'alei Mesorah who were closely tied to the Yeshiva of Teverya (though things got ropey when the Karaites turned up) and went to very great lengths to stop erosion of guttural letters.
You are very sensitive to rhetoric, so you should appreciate that, rhetoric aside, no-one actually thinks Ashkenazim can't duchan or be the Shatz or are blasphemers or anything like that. What (some) people think is that we shouldn't just not pronounce one third of the Hebrew letters in the alphabet, and they can point to a consistent pattern of evidence from the 2nd temple, Hazal, and Rishonim that this was considered important. What is more, the entire Tiberian vocalisation system that we all profess to use simply makes no sense if you don't pronounce the gutturals. So people should try their best and educate their children accordingly, and, realistically, this won't happen unless you stigmatise people who aren't pronouncing properly.
"You want to say that it's fine to misinterpret gemaras because you have a new theory of selective language prescriptiveness"
This is the umpteenth time you have put words in my mouth that I explicitly did NOT say and then attacked that misunderstanding.
This is silly.
I said something very different.
https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-att-us-rvc3&sxsrf=APwXEdezGFe9xUZWvlTNPKaHjArwi_rE7Q:1680016620600&q=meme+so+what+you%27re+saying+is+jordan&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjWyIzP9f79AhUBLFkFHSvEBqwQ0pQJegQIGxAB&biw=412&bih=709&dpr=2.63#imgrc=izVEc4B7RowIsM
Meanwhile, my approach hete is my approach in many other sugyot, which is to look at statements based on context of who said it (thus, the PERSON and the page) in terms of who they were, where and when they lived, and the genre of the statement.
This has led to many different readings of gemaras, often against the traditional understanding, posted on my various blogs and articles. It isn't an ex post facto attempt to justify myself, but I am lying to myself and secretly disagree with Chazal. That is frankly insulting.
No, I won't. This doesn't seem like a productive conversation.
(I am not expressing lack of knowledge, that i should look things up. e.g. Shadal argues that the nikkud orthography was post talmudic. If yerushalmi was redacted around 400 CE and masoretes began around 500 CE, that is 100 years. )
My point is that there may well be rejoinder, so don't be so smugly sure of yourself.
Again, you summary of what I am saying prior to your attack is woefully inaccurate. For instance, rhetoric is rhetoric (look at the genre). I didn't say inconsistent statements are rhetoric.
If you can't understand what I am saying, what's the point in continuing?
"Indeed, Talmud Yerushalmi is written in Galilean Aramaic. And, as I learned through regular study of Yerushalmi, and from Dr. Steiner in Revel in a Galilean Aramaic course, a regular feature of Galilean Aramaic is the relaxing of the guttural letters, ayins into alephs, sometimes letters entirely disappearing. This not just in the pronunciation but in the writing. (See here about relaxation of gutturals in Galilean Aramaic.) The Amoraim appearing in Talmud Yerushalmi, and its redactors, were all knowledgeable and religious, yet they weren’t careful in their pronunciation."
And yet, the Yerushalmi quotes the issur of allowing people from Haifa, Bet Shean, and Tivon from being the Shatz, with no indication that it has anything to do with being distracting or accidental blasphemy or anything like that. And, of course, Teveyra became the centre of the Ba'alei Mesorah who were closely tied to the Yeshiva of Teverya (though things got ropey when the Karaites turned up) and went to very great lengths to stop erosion of guttural letters.
You are very sensitive to rhetoric, so you should appreciate that, rhetoric aside, no-one actually thinks Ashkenazim can't duchan or be the Shatz or are blasphemers or anything like that. What (some) people think is that we shouldn't just not pronounce one third of the Hebrew letters in the alphabet, and they can point to a consistent pattern of evidence from the 2nd temple, Hazal, and Rishonim that this was considered important. What is more, the entire Tiberian vocalisation system that we all profess to use simply makes no sense if you don't pronounce the gutturals. So people should try their best and educate their children accordingly, and, realistically, this won't happen unless you stigmatise people who aren't pronouncing properly.