User talk:Drork

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Minor Edits

Just be a little bit careful when you tick the "minor edit" box on your edits. Normally, that's reserved for fixing up typos or reformatting line breaks and things, rather than adding new info - as you did with A-Ba-Ni-Bi. In the event, there was no harm done anyway, but there are some editors out there who do take umbrage because they'll see it as a sneaky way to insert info. I'm not one of them - at least, not when you're only adding composer details to a song. BigHaz 23:33, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. I think I have wrongly defined my preferences, which I am going to correct, so that my edits won't be marked as minor by default. Drork 08:00, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] reg & scholarships

did you see our email? phoebe 22:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, thank you very much :-) Drork 00:18, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Hi!

Yes, I went to New York and saw quite a lot of the city. Manhattan was very similar to South Mumbai. Thanks for the gallery link. Shall post my photos when I get the time. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:17, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Holocaust

Dror, thanks for your comment. I suppose a discussion of other uses of the word "holocaust" is not unreasonable provided it is not being used to minimise the Holocaust - although I have never seen the word used to describe the actions of the Japanese, who did not try to exterminate any racial groups however badly they behaved. Adam 15:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adam Keller court martial

Hi Dror, I am approaching you as you seem to be a knowledgeable and fair Israeli. Do you recall the courtmatial of Adam Kellner in 1988 (he sprayed slogans on IDF tanks)? Do you have any infomation on the notability of the subject? If so you may want to comment on Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 January 26#Adam Keller court martial. I think that the article is important as it shows that Israeli's are not all gun-totting setters, and that the origingal deletion was initiated by a less progressive Israeli on political grounds. Thanks/Todah/Shukran Abu ali 11:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My sense of humor

Thanks for your comment on my web page. My great aunt Bateekha (actually I don't remember if that was her real name or just her pet-name) once told me that she would rather have a rectal enema than listen to my jokes. You can imagine what that did to my self esteem. Unfortunately for her, she ended up experiencing both the enema and my jokes. Your message does a lot to reverse the psychological trauma her comment caused me, so I'm glad somebody actually likes my sense of humor. Yihyeh tov, as they say in Riyadh. Ramallite (talk) 01:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sheqel sign

Do you have more knowledge of this fomor sign, like a picture? Epson291 13:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind I put what you wrote in the talk page into the page. Does it look like this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Epson291 (talk • contribs) 13:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC).
Not exactly. It should be upside down, the rounded line touching the "ground". The middle stick should not stick out of the rounded line. It sould be exactly in the same hight like the rounded line's edges, and have a straight top. The rounded line's edges should be thicker, while the curve itself should stay relatively thin. I'm describing that symbol out of my memory, because unfortunately I couldn't find any picture of it. This is not surprising as it was used for a short period of time. As far as I know, before the introduction of the the old Shekel in 1980, there was no special symbol to the Israeli currency. Instead a simple abbriviation of the Hebrew name Lira Yisraelit (Israeli Pound) was used: ל"י (the Hebrew letters Lamed and Yud, from right to left, with quotes between them). DrorK 18:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I looked for a picture and couldn't find one either. Epson291 00:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
I added your picture to Israeli sheqel (See Symbol in chart) Epson291 03:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks a lot :-) DrorK 07:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jim Holmes

Hi there!

Since Jim Holmes used to be a dear friend of mine, and since I wrote his biography in the Dutch Wikipedia (AND shot that picture you also used in the Hebrew version), I was just wondering: How did you become aware of him? Was your interest merely professional (you being a translator and all), or was there more... It's my experience with matters pertaining to Jim, that most often there's more indeed... |-)

Shalom,

Tom Ordelman --Image:Thorpic.jpgThor NLAMAZE ME 19:10, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I took one course of Translation Studies at the Tel Aviv University. The lecturer was Prof. Gideon Toury, and he introduced Jim Holmes as one of the pioneers (or even the pioneer) of descriptive translation studies. I was a bit surprised to see his image, since I imagined him as having the old proferssor look. He is in fact much more interesting than I first imagined. Apparently there is a debate among the Israeli translation researchers as to whether he was the leading pioneer of the field, but that doesn't matter much to me. I'm just happy I had the opportunity to learn more about him. DrorK 22:42, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Incredible! Jim would have been very pleased with such a story. And that picture...yes... you can imagine how glad I was about my apparent foresight in taking that when I did (some 26 years ago now...), because by the time I got around to writing his biography for Wikipedia, it turned out to be the only one that I could use, since all the others in existence were subject to copyright rules and regulations.
And in case you were wondering: Jim indeed looked exactly like this practically 24/7, so the picture is nothing if not representative. Not a bearded professor, that's true...but a tremendously wise guy nonetheless...make no mistake about that! Even today, 20 plus years after his death, he's still sadly missed by many people, including but not limited to yours truly.
Thanks for your fast return on my original message for, as you undoubtedly know, curiosity kills the cat... |-) Cheers, Tom. --Image:Thorpic.jpgThor NLAMAZE ME 02:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Re: are you acquainted with the field of translation studies?
Anything in particular you're looking for? --Image:Thorpic.jpgThor NLAMAZE ME 21:57, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tiamut's talk page

Dror, is there any reason for this useless argument with user:Tiamut? It looks nonconstructive and unlikely to benefit article writing. nadav (talk) 04:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, it is a personal anger over things he wrote in his userpage. Regardless of the common belief, Israelis have feelings too, especially when many Israelis, including me, back rightful claims about discrimination in Israel. I don't think I'll post any more comments on Tiamut's talk page, as this discussion becomes indeed useless. DrorK 06:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
You might have been more successful if you had politely asked for the template to be removed, since it was deleted from the mainspace for being POV-pushing, and since user pages aren't supposed to be used for blatant political statements. If you still feel strongly about this, you could post your request on WP:ANI. nadav (talk) 02:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Toda

Shalom Dror! We manage to write a quite fair article in Persian Wikipedia about the Second Lebenon War in Persian Wikipedia [1]. Part of it is because of your great help, providing me with those useful links about Hizbollah use of human shields! I also would like to invite you to open an account in Persian wikipedia. I hope one day the tension between government of Iran and Israel changes to a friendly relationship between the two great countries, in a region sorrounded by mutual enemies! Best Regards --Kaaveh 02:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm at your service anytime :-) I'm afraid my Persian is very basic. My knowledge of Arabic enables me to recognize many words, and I can read simple phrases thanks to Jewish-Persian friends of mine who taught me the basic structure of the language. Nonetheless, I cannot write in Persian. DrorK 07:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DRV for "Truth in Numbers: The Wikipedia Story"

Dear Drork, this upcoming Wikidocmentary film article is currently under discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review on today, because a recent decision to retain it on Wikipedia has been appealed and it is in progress in reaching an ultimate consensus. You may wish to support for restoration by contributing it to the review. Since you had involved into it in regards to this upcoming Wikidocumentary film by Nic Hill, so please do help out and try not to hesitate to voice out your advocated opinion! Otherwise without you commenting about it, this article would never had existed. Pole Heinz Tower

[edit] Hebron

Dear Drork. You needn't have erased the evidence you put there. Eventually there will be a section on the Arab rescue, noting the from 19 to 25 Arab families and 300-450 Jews they saved from the mob, and your precise bibliographical indication is useful (I didn't check if that exact cite is already there, since I prefer to work slowly down a page after reading it a few times. But if, after your revert, it isn't, it would be nice if you could repost it there, as material for that upcoming section. Regards Nishidani 14:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

ps.(BY the way, did you study under Tanya Reinhart? No need to reply of course)Nishidani 14:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

After I added the information, I noticed it was already incorporated in one of the article's paragraph. I therefore earased my addition and moved the referance to where the information appeared in the first place. If you think the current location is improper, you could move the whole passage into another paragraph, but I think there is a policy of not mentioning a piece of information twice in the same article. About your ps question - yes, I studied linguistics in TAU and naturally one of my professors was the late Tania Reinhart. 14:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for not controlling what you did sufficiently. I did not note the finesse of the operation, since I only read the gap between the two pages, and not the section where you relocated. Absolutely, repetitiveness is to be avoided (it is mainly a result of futile edit war trade offs that work by paragraphs, and do not see the overall page) Regards, and apologies for the bother Nishidani 14:35, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] eth - from biblical hebrew

Hi Drork,

1 Sam 17 - the example of the lion and the bear, seems to work in the exact opposite of the sign of the accusative in that only one animal could have taken the lamb, and I think the verbs 'he came' and 'took' are singular, so it is necessary to specify which subject - instead of which object - took the lamb. Unless they both took a lamb, which is probably more likely - I can't see a bear and a lion collaborating or shearing meals. I think the verse refers to two separate examples, and the one with the bear was the most astounding - even a bear. And it probably happened on more than one occasion, which is why the definite article is used. If this is true, 'eth' meaning 'with' can't be true.

Steve

In the article 'New imperative and jussive forms in contemporary Hebrew' it says there is no special subjunctive form in contemporary hebrew, which I take to mean none in classical as well, so could 1 Samuel be translated 'There (customarily) would come the lion and the very bear ...'.

-Steve.

Let me first say that Bolozky who wrote the article "New imperative..." by no mean said that there wasn't a subjunctive form in Biblical Hebrew. Quite the contrary. An analysis of the Biblical Hebrew text show that there were subjunctive forms, but they went out of use gradually due to morpho-phonological changes in the language. Modern Hebrew is not a direct descent of Biblical Hebrew, and its structure is heavily influenced by European languages, Yiddish in particular (a Jewish European language). The new imperative Bolozky talks about shows how Modern Hebrew rejected Biblical morphological structure that aren't compatible with the Modern morpho-phonological structure, and hence developed its own structure.
The double meaning of "eth" is well established in Biblical Hebrew as well as Modern Hebrew. "eth" is actually two words: one is a particle, and inflect as "oti, otkha, otakh, etkhem/otkhem etc.", the other is a preposition meaning "with" and inflect as "itti, itkha, itakh, itkhem, itanu" etc. Actually, when inflected there is no ambiguation, the problem arises only when the base form occurs. This ambiguity is very significant in Genesis 37:2, where you can understand the phrase "ro`e eth-ekhav" as "shepherds his brothers" or as "shepherds with his brother". The latter is the right one, judging from the rest of the text ("...and he is a young boy with the sons of Bilha etc.").
The story in 1 Sam 17:34-35 is clearly an exaggeration. I think the author meant it to look as an exaggeration, hence the inconsistencies of the story. I would translate it as follows: "Then came a lion, and a bear [came] with [it], and [the lion] picked a lamb from the herd." in 17:36 the word eth is indeed a particle rather than preposition: "both the lion and the bear you servant defeated", the lion and the bear are the receiver of the action indicated by the verb "hikka" (to srike, hit, defeat), the "eth" occurs only before the first noun, as the two form one unit. DrorK 15:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Drork,

I am an Australian. I asked a professor in one of our universities about 1 Sam. I won't give his name because I didn't ask him permission but he says: "The verbs in question are weqatal i.e. perfect with waw consecutive. What they reflect (like a yiqtol/imperfect) is a habitual or repeated action. So 'the lion would come (on many separate occasions)'."

This is the kind of meaning I meant in implying it was subjunctive and implies that eth is there for emphasis of the ferocity of the bear - as suggested by the International Critical Commentary quoted earlier.

Steve. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.126.104.71 (talk) 18:03, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

First of all, the term subjunctive is irrelevant here. A subjunctive is a verb that indicate an action that hasn't come or yet to come into being, and in modern English it usually takes the base form, e.g. "I suggest you go there". The explanation of your professor is irrelevant to our specific case, as the story clearly refers to a single event in the past. David doesn't tell Saul that bears and lions used to attack his herd. He tells him about a single event, and it is very clear from the context. I dare to guess that your professor refered to the distinction between background actions and foreground actions. In Biblical Hebrew, past background actions are usually indicated by the qatal verb type, while past foreground actions are usually refered to by the wayyiqtol verb type. in Genesis 1 the prolog "In the beginning etc." is written with qatal verbs: "bərêšīt bārā...wə-haʔaresˠ hāytā...". The foreground actions are written with wayyiqtol verbs: "wayyômer...wayyəhī".
In this case the story about the lion and the bear is in the background, so the verbs related to this story are in qatal form. The verbs refering to David's talk with Saul and his preparation to the battle with Goliath are in the foregound, so they are indicated with wayyiqtol verbs. I don't think the word "eth" has any effect for this matter. DrorK 05:37, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


Drork - please check this. I hastily deleted the main article because of another article where I was warned by FisherQueen that it was POV. Since then someone put the information on the web with sponsorship and a copyright. I think it is more fair to everyone to have the article freely accessible to anyone.

Realiseyourdignity (talk) 09:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't quite understand the problem. Could you direct me to the passage that was deleted? DrorK 16:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

http://www.oneworldonecuponesite.com/index.php?q=Talk:Biblical_Hebrew_language#eth

I don't mind, so long as it's still available freely for others. Realiseyourdignity (talk) 19:19, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Anything we publish on Wikipedia, whether we write it in the articles or in the talk pages, is distributed according to GFDL. That site has used our material according to the GFDL license, so it's okay. Anyone can republish it anywhere, the rights are not transfered to them. DrorK 21:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

hiii mr drork hii mr drork pleas send me back at nahed87@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.178.224.164 (talk) 10:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is Heter meah rabbanim Hebrew?

Moved to: Talk:Heter meah rabbanim#Is Heter meah rabbanim Hebrew?

[edit] Gilad Shalit mediation: please indicate dis/agreement

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Gilad Shalit, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Anthøny 14:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Addendum: I'd strongly encourage you to agree; this dispute needs put to bed. The choice is, of course, yours. Anthøny 14:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Request for mediation accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party has been accepted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Gilad Shalit.
For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 17:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

[edit] hébreu, arabe, anglais, français, ...

Bonjour,
Félicitations ! Parler de nombreuses langues et toujours d'un grand intérêt ! :-)
To answer your remark, I think indeed when somebody reads 1948 Palestine War, he cannot guess with accuracy who wrote the book or the paper given the words are used by David Tal, Yoav Gelber, Efraim Karsh, Avi Shlaim and Ilan Pappé as well, ... and they are not on the same side at all. The only one I have in mind who doesn't use these words is Benny Morris in his last book. He titled this 1948 and prefer talking about the "1948 war, which is called War of Independence or War of Liberation by Israeli and al-nakba (The catastrophe) by Palestinians and Arabs." He criticizes "1948 Palestine War" but I don't remember why. I have to check.
Regards, Ceedjee (talk) 08:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation

I have agreed to mediate the discussion in the Gilad Shalit case, if accepted by the participants. I have experience mediating in the world outside Wikipedia and have completed the Dispute Resolution Program at the Justice Institute of British Columbia, Canada. I have been a Wikipedia contributor since 2003 and have informally mediated several cases, including one for MedCab (which was concluded successfully). I have applied to join the Mediation Committee. As a mediator, my role would be to facilitate discussion. My approach would include the following:

  • Listen to all participants
  • Help formulate an agenda
  • Identify common interests
  • Identify pertinent facts/policies/research that would assist participants in forming agreement
  • Facilitate an agreement and action plan.

As a non-member of Medcom, the convention is for participants to approve the mediator. Please indicate your response here. Sunray (talk) 22:14, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote of confidence in the process in the RfM for Gilad Shalit.
I suggest that we start with an opening statement from each of the participants on the RfM talk page. I've also suggested a few groundrules there. If at any time you wish to contact me privately via e-mail, please feel free to do so here. Best wishes. Sunray (talk) 22:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)