[Heb-NACO] בגלל

[Shinohara, Jasmin]

Yes, this was resolved back in February, with the critical text from HCM p. 21 (“In the rare cases where Even-Shoshan may show the same word under more than one entry element, the more 'analytical' option is chosen.”) re-added to HCMRDA, and we agreed that standard romanization of בגלל is bi-gelal (and בשביל is bi-shevil in all cases).

From: Heb-naco <heb-naco-bounces+jshino=pobox.upenn.edu at lists.osu.edu> On Behalf Of Joan Biella via Heb-naco
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2019 7:10 PM
To: Yossi Galron via Heb-naco <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] בגלל

Jasmine writes:

 בגלל has a direct entry, so I’d think it would be romanized biglal (NOT bigelal because as a whole word, the sheva would be considered merahef, ignored in romanization), but the entry also says “see גלל”. So which is it: Biglal or Bi-gelal?

Doesn't HCM say, more or less, "If Even-Shoshan gives both, use THE MORE ANALYTICAL FORM"--that is, the form with the hyphen?  This is done, in the same way as we write "Yerushalayim," so the 2nd part of the word will be searchable.  Not that I expect people who want to search "biglal" will search "gelal" and expect to find it, but people wanting "Yerushalayim" will find "bi-Yerushalayim" also.  And so that all catalogers will romanize these things the same way, after having once looked them up in the dictionary.

Joan


On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 1:29 PM Yossi Galron via Heb-naco <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>> wrote:
Bi-melot ...

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 22:28 Marlene Schiffman via Heb-naco <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>> wrote:
We have a title that uses this word: Zeʼev Z'aboṭinsḳi, ha-ish u-mishnato : \b (bi-melot meʼah shanah le-huladto)

Marlene Schiffman
Gottesman Library Technical Services
Yeshiva University
500 West 185th Street
New York, NY 10033

646 592-4276 (direct)
646 592-4100 (general office)

From: Heb-naco <heb-naco-bounces+schiffma=yu.edu at lists.osu.edu<mailto:yu.edu at lists.osu.edu>> On Behalf Of Abend-David,Ilana via Heb-naco
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2019 1:07 PM
To: Galron, Joseph <galron.1 at osu.edu<mailto:galron.1 at osu.edu>>; Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>>
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] בגלל

If so how would you transliterate במלאות 25 שנה  ? Would this be correct bi-melo'ut ?

From: Heb-naco <heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu>> On Behalf Of Galron, Joseph via Heb-naco
Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2019 12:52 PM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>>
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] בגלל

It is “dangerous” going to Biglal or Bishvil – tomorrow we will say: If it is Bishvil so why not change it to Shvil
We also Romanize בירושלים  to “Bi-Yerushalayim” and not to “Birushalayim”

Yossi



From: Heb-naco <heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu>> On Behalf Of Shinohara, Jasmin via Heb-naco
Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2019 12:31 PM
To: Gottschalk, Haim <hgot at loc.gov<mailto:hgot at loc.gov>>; 'Hebrew Name Authority Funnel' <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>>
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] בגלל

Hi, Haim, bi-gelal would be correct if the ב is considered a prefix to the word גלל. But since there is a direct entry for the word as a whole, I’m asking if we should romanize it as a whole word instead of as a compound word.

Thanks, Jasmin

From: Gottschalk, Haim [mailto:hgot at loc.gov]
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2019 12:24 PM
To: Shinohara, Jasmin; 'Hebrew Name Authority Funnel'
Subject: RE: בגלל

I think it should be “biglal” and not “bi-gelal” because of the sheva being treat as a sheva nach (which is how it is in the Alcalay).  This is in my humble opinion.

~Haim

From: Heb-naco <heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu>> On Behalf Of Shinohara, Jasmin via Heb-naco
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2019 11:00 AM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>>
Subject: [Heb-NACO] בגלל

Hello Collective Wisdom, please remind me: if there’s an entry in E-Sh., even if it ends with a “see also”, is that sufficient justification for romanizing the word as a word as opposed to a compound? E.g. בגלל has a direct entry, so I’d think it would be romanized biglal (NOT bigelal because as a whole word, the sheva would be considered merahef, ignored in romanization), but the entry also says “see גלל”. So which is it: Biglal or Bi-gelal?

Thanks, Jasmin


---
Jasmin Shinohara
Hebraica Cataloging Librarian
University of Pennsylvania
Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center
3420 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6206
T. 215-746-6397
jshino at upenn.edu<mailto:jshino at upenn.edu>

_______________________________________________
Heb-naco mailing list
Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>
https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco
_______________________________________________
Heb-naco mailing list
Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>
https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/heb-naco/attachments/20190919/93f734c4/attachment-0001.html>