Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1993 19:10:32 -0500 From: ALICE FABER Subject: Re: ADS-L Digest - 1 Dec 1993 to 2 Dec 1993 >> Am I the only one here who's noticed that the New York Times isn't exactly >> accentless? It uses such words as "stringbeans" rather than "green >> beans". And it uses Yiddish words such as "chotchkes" without bothering >> to translate them. >> Dan Goodman dsg[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE] Of course the NY Times uses expressions that aren't stereotypical of current NY speech. The whole point of most of our objections to the Times article on NY dialects was that they erroneously treated loss of stereotypical NY features as equivalent to loss of a distinctly NY dialect. I suspect the dialect features most people are aware of are stereotypical. After years living into the south, I somehow acquired a lexical distinction between bags and sacks: the brown paper things in the grocery store are sacks, and the plastic things with handles are bags. I have maintained this distinction after moving back to the Northeast 6 years ago. It's very rare that a clerk comments on my use of sack in this context, although this is clearly a bag area. With regard to Yiddish, funny you should mention this. Today's NY Times has an article on the law page based on a paper in Yale Law Review about the use of Yiddish terms in legal decisions. The earliest citation they could find for chutzpa was from Georgia in the early 70's, applied to an individual who broke into a sheriff's office to steal guns! In the Times article, brief glosses are provided for chutzpa, tsoris 'trouble', etc. Alice Faber