Doing justice to Hebrew tzedek

[King Solomon]

As I wrote last week, basic concepts may be universal to human societies and have a word to express them but the scope of the term may vary in terms of meaning and impact. All languages, including Hebrew, have a lexical item for justice since human societies sometimes experience internal conflict that must be resolved.  What makes the Hebrew word tzedek unique are the scope of its implications and their impact on Jewish society.

Formally, the dictionary definitions are similar on most languages. The Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary, an impressive volume in terms of physical weight alone, defines justice as being right, righteous, equitable, morally consistent, conforming to a principle, punished and compliant with the law. Le Petit Robert, Little Bob, emphasizes, appreciation, recognition and respect of the rights and merits of each person and the moral principles of positive law. The Even Shoshan Hebrew dictionary, the bedrock of the modern language, begins with “straight, honest, the way of truth” followed by mentions of salvation and rescue. The Hebrew meaning is more ambiguous since it does even hint at conformity to some formal standards but merely refers to an amorphous concept.

In practice, the word is used differently by each society. Some societies, notably the United States, emphasize the punishment aspect of justice. When people call for justice against a killer or rapist, they mean they want conviction and the death penalty. For example, Afro-Americans rightly demand justice against police officers guilty of superfluous deadly violence against members of their community. By contrast, those same minorities, who have been without access to proper hospitals during the Corona crisis, have not marched for rectification of this injustice, maybe since American society has the ethos of individual responsibility, i.e. we each create our own justice, positive or negative. Other societies, identifying the difficulty of substantiating justice and attempting to avoid the problem, have joined the terms law and order and justice. In other words, any action in line with current laws and regulations is just, regardless of its moral implications.  The results of such a merging have been absurd, such as some of the policies of the Great Leap Forward in China, or tragic, as in Nazi Germany. In any case, justice is defined against some established standard.

Tzedek in Jewish thought is ancient, developed and mainly a positive commandment. The Jews began as a tribal society where community values and mutual support were vital for survival. The weak, hungry and sick had to be supported in every way possible not only for reasons of societal tranquility in the present but for the future of the tribe. With the Torah and mitzvot, the positive commandments, these customs became scripturely rooted. Sharing, caring and helping, to name just a few, became a part of societal justice. Interestingly, the Hebrew word for charity, tzdaka, is derived the same root. The issue of punishment for deviations was discussed but was relatively minor. This recommendations for proper behavior were never completely specific as the form and scope depend on so many factors as to make “regulation” quite difficult, if not impossible. This ethos of group justice was reinforced in modern Israel by the kibbutz way of life, which was based on the socialist principles of “each according to his ability, each according to his needs” (Karl Marx). This meant that that a kibbutz was obliged to help each member regardless of that person’s actual contribution. Thus, the Hebrew use of the word tzedek is much more demanding on both people and governments as it requires positive action.

The problem with a “universal” justice is that it is in fact extremely subjective. On the personal level, each party in any dispute feels righteous, i.e., its point of view is correct. On a larger scale, in an almost zero-sum world, any change creates both winners and losers whether in terms of money and/or status. It is impossible to please everybody. Finally, even when governments try to be just, as in the current attempts to help businesses that suffered during the Corona crisis, there is a never-ending dispute on who is more miserable than the other, to twist George Orwell’s words in Animal Farm. It is extremely difficult to determine whose justice is more just.

As a result, Israeli society often sounds like the sea gulls in Finding Nemo when Martin the clown fish goes down the wharf: mine, mine, … Israelis exhibit no reluctance in expressing their feelings regarding injustice. The Israeli Supreme Court even directly hears request from citizens demanding justice. This cacophony expresses to a certain degree the lack of consensus in Israeli society about the meaning of justice but, at the same time, the consensus that justice should rule the actions of people and government not only in punishing criminal actions but in promoting an equitable and humane society. There is an old joke in the 1950’s about Ben Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel, asking Stalin about the number of people that have opposed his plans. Stalin answers “about three million”, the population of Israel then. Ben Gen Gurion responds that he has the same problem. It is not an accident that Shlomo (Solomon) is considered the greatest king in the history of Israel not due the size of his empire or strength of his military power but for his wisdom in administering justice.

* To provide full access to the blind, add picture captions.

The King is dead - The French heritage of patrimoine

                                              [Bust of King Louis XIV, "the Sun King"*]

Human societies share a base core of concepts as reflected by words. Examples include house, meal, work and father. While all languages have words for these ideas, the details and connotations as well as relative importance vary from language to language and culture to culture. By going beyond translation, it is possible to use lexicon to understand the priorities and subtleties of any given society.

An interesting example is the French world patrimoine, derived from the Latin for the heritage of the father. Le Petit Robert, the classic French-French dictionary, affectionally known to some Francophiles as “Little Bob”, defines the word in terms of inherited assets, total assets of a person, treasures from the past and the collective inherited characteristics. The English translations include estate, property, holdings, inheritance and heritage. The power of the single word in French is spread into five different words in English, each with its own context. Thus, the concept of passing on gifts exists in both cultures but is lexically expressed differently.

Given the conceptionally wide coverage of the French word, it is no surprise that it appears quite frequently both in terms of quantity and range of subject matter in French. It is rare to find a newspaper or magazine where the word does not appear at least once, if not multiple times. The word can refer to a fancy chateau of Cardinal Richelieu, an asset subject to the incredible estate taxes of French tax law reaching 55-60% percent for non-sibling heirs, the incredible crème fraiche produced by multiple generations of a boutique dairy in some province and the books of Marcel Proust, which are longer than those of Herman Melville and contain much less action. For that matter, people whose direct ancestors survived the black plague are immune to AIDS and have a valuable patrimoine. The word packs quite an impact.

This power goes beyond verbl use and both fuels and is fueled by people. In France, there is a countless number of volunteer groups and government agencies trying to save some patrimoine or another. I have heard of organizations for the preservation of ancient forms of wheat, tomatoes and flour; the houses and recipes of Colette, Anatole France and Monet; old windmills and recipes of the various monarchs; the chansons of the 1920’s and 1930 as well as the street music of the 19^th century; church buildings and remnants (often merely “rems”) of some long forgotten castle or fortification;  and furniture and decorations from any century prior to the 21th. All this effort and time reflects the important of the past on the French.

Being half-French but also half-American, I cannot but help consider the psychological impact of such an obsession on French thinking. Assuming a zero-sum status on time for thought and action, i.e., each person has limited quantities of them, it is interesting to make conjectures on the benefits and price of this tendency. As I see it, France and French were once the leading stars of Western civilization, dominating Europe both politically and linguistically. Alas, the German unification by Bismarck, World War I and emergence of the United States and Soviet Union,  to name just a few causes, changed that reality. Still, as in Spain, the French are understandably quite nostalgic for the “good old days”. Relishing them makes the French and French government feel much better.  Furthermore, in themselves, these various heritages are impressive and worth preserving. Many of the chateaux and culinary delights are France are truly impressive.  However, I have always sensed that this conservation is at the expense of valuing the present and developing the future. Why aren’t modern French singers, scientists and industrialists equally esteemed in France or abroad? For the purpose of contrast, the Americans Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Michael Jordan are known worldwide. Even France’s most iconic modern symbol, the late Johnny Hallyday, is a conscious imitation of Elvis Presley (not the other way around as some French may think). In fact, modern France has produced some impressive buildings, scientific achievements, music and crafts. How many French people have the time or even care to sing their praise?

Thus, the pronounced use of the word patrimoine reflects not only its linguistic flexibility but also the attitude of the French to the past and present. It has been said that people who forget their past are doomed to repeat it but that does not mean that people who celebrate their past are destined to restore it.  Compare Italy of ancient and modern times. As a Francophile, I would say the King is dead, long live the President.

*Insert picture captions to allow access to the blind.

Picture credit: Image by <a href="https://pixabay.com/users/ibudiallo-2645883/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=2811294">Ibrahim Diallo</a> from <a href="https://pixabay.com/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=2811294">Pixabay</a>

Ode to the Israeli shitat mazliach or nothing ventured, nothing gained

                                                                     [A davidka mortar*]

I will begin with two anecdotes. Scene 1:  Yanetz Levi, the writer of Uncle Leo’s Adventures ((הרפתקאות דוד אריה was invited to South Korea to launch the Korean version of one of his books and welcome by no less than a senior Korean government Minister, who asked him seriously if this book would help Korean children to be more creative and inventive. Scene 2: A middle aged person walks into the post office, sees a mass of people waiting for their turn, many of them of the third age, quietly approaches clerk and is then verbally assaulted by cries in at least three different languages of “there’s a line”. Seeing that the response “I just have a question” is not going to work, that person quickly retreats and sits down.

These two incidents illustrate, albeit in different ways, the Israeli technique of “Mazliach, imperfectly translated into English as nothing ventured, nothing gained. Its name is derived from the verb לחצליח [lahazliach], meaning to succeed.  The term came from a joke about a diner that asks the waiter why an unordered dish appearing on a restaurant bill is called “mazliach”. The answer of the waiter is “if the diner pays for it, it is successful.”  In practice, it means that any and all obstacles, written or understood, must be tested and should not be taken for granted. Its origins are deep as in the diaspora both the official and informal laws were stacked against Jews in almost all societies while its existence was reinforced with the founding of modern Israel because the country was materially poor and lacking basic material resources for some 25 years. Israelis were required to be inventive and think outside the box, whether it was in agriculture with drip immigration or the military with the Davidka, an improvised mortar in the War of Independence in 1948. Even today, overobedient children are ridiculed by their peers. Accepting the status quo has never been the key to success.

Of course, Israelis are both famous and infamous for using this technique. Israel is known as the leading startup company in the world and a leader in many technologies, including agriculture, desalination, IT and medicine. It is quite possible that many future breakthroughs in identifying and combatting the corona virus will come from this small country. On the other hand, people from more formal, rule-bound cultures frown upon the behavior of Israeli tourists and business people and view them as brazen. The ugly Israeli is as notorious as ugly American even if not all Israelis behave in this manner. However, to be fair, it should be noted that most Israelis do retreat and accept reality as occurs in the Post Office. For good or bad, the approach is often  if it succeeds, it succeeds; if it doesn’t, it doesn’t.

Back to the question posed by the South Korean Minister, the answer is positive but in a different way. The stories were made up by a desperate baby-sitting uncle trying to keep four children of different ages entertained. He then compiled his amusing tales and published six books in the series, which have been translated into numerous languages. The fact is that the unwitting writer improvised a solution, tested it and then created a worldwide success is a testament to the unbounded ambition of Israelis even if that does have a price. For foreigners, it is unsure how much this approach can be copied or reproduced but understanding it does help them to succeed in dealing with Israelis.

* To allow the blind to enjoy your posts, put captions below pictures.

What should be the price of translation?

                                                         [Two butterflies in a meadow*]

The singly most discussed issue with and between translators is how much to charge for a translation.  I suppose that is true for many other service providers. The obvious but irrelevant answer is as much or as little as possible, depending on whether the party is the provider or purchaser. The main problem is the exact manner of establishing that rate. Also, this approach often leads to short term business relations if the price is unrealistic in the long term.  On a more scientific basis, many theories exist but don’t actually apply to the setting of translation services. Therefore, I will suggest a simple but potentially emotionally unsatisfying way of establishing the value of translation.

                                                             [Supply and demand graph]

Learned economists would tell us that market price is determined by identifying the intersection point between the supply and demand lines on a graph, a visually pleasing solution.  To be fair, these same economists also mention in the small print that these graphs are relevant only when all parties have full knowledge of this supply and demand as well as the current state of sales. For example, if I want to buy a certain power drill, I can check the prices at all local stores selling that product and choose the least expensive option. If a store fails to move its inventory, its price is too high. Please note that all the prices are posted, the product is identical in all stores and the number of power saws available can be determined by checking inventory. None of these factors is true in translation. Translators have no idea nor does in many cases the law allow them to discover prices. No translation is identical in style or quality. As an Internet service, the number of competing translators is indeterminate. Even if it was possible to identify the magic rate, it would change in a short time, which is what actual rates do not even do when there are universally available changes in currency exchanges rate. Therefore, the graph is charming but useless.

                                                           [Cost + Profit = Selling Price]

A simpler manner of establishing prices is the “cost plus” method. In this, the supplier determines the total cost of providing the good or service and adds a profit factor. Back to our power drill, taking into account the cost of purchasing the drills and additional costs, which include rent, insurance, theft and payroll, the merchant establishes the minimum worthwhile price to sell the product, at least in theory. Again, this idea sound reasonable but is not usually practical. Even in regards to physical products, most merchants cannot really ascertain how much the additional factors should impact the price. As for services, no product needs to be purchased to provide a specific service nor is the quantity and volume predictable in the least. The best a service provider can do is to calculate minimum income to pay to keep a roof over their head and food in the fridge. Even with this information, it is impossible to establish the price for a translation or other service.

                                                                    [Crocheted orchid]

                                               (C) All rights reserved Tzviya Levin Rifkind

Just for intellectual exercise and purity, it is worth considering Marx and Engel’s approach. They stated that the value of a product and, by extension, a service, is the measure of the value inputted by the worker. As an example, a given translator with 20 years’ experience and specializing in financial translation provides a brilliant German version of a French annual report. The value of the worker’s contribution in terms of knowledge and effort is immense and should be fully rewarded, at least according to those fine gentlemen.  The purchasing company probably won’t be willing to pay that amount regardless of the translator’s background or effort. To illustrate, my wife crocheted an orchid for her daughter’s wedding. It took hundreds of hours of work and all her skill. If she were to sell it, according to Marxist theory, she should get a princely amount. Alas, regardless of how beautiful and special it is, the chances of her getting that price are very close to zero. Unfortunately, skill and effort are important but not determining.

                                                                           [Bell curve]

For those without extraordinary skill or knowledge, the bell curve seems to provide a relevant guide. These service providers should set the price based on the most common rate in the subject and physical area, rendering them competitive with most potential customers. Unfortunately, translation is not a physical good and is, consequently, not limited to a given physical area. Through the Internet, translators from all over the world as well as low-cost international agencies can and do compete for the same customers. The playing ground is not even as the cost of living can significantly differ from place to place, allowing some to lower their rates to below the living costs of others. Not only that, the customer may not be to ascertain nor care about the quality of the translation. The service purchsers themselves are based in a wide variety of countries, each with its own economic reality. The business environment in Egypt and Germany is extremely different. Therefore, rendering the Bell Curve irrelevant.

                                                               [Two hands - two worlds]

An analysis that is much easier to implement and subjective than those mentioned above is that the best price is that in which both the service provider and customer are satisfied. If the translator or other service provider earns enough money to feel properly rewarded, however much that is, while the customer receives value, however it defines it, both parties gain in terms of stability, energy efficiency and results.  The calculation of the relevant factors will naturally vary. The price is established by direct negotiation with each side considering its situation. There is no requirement for expensive and time-consuming market research nor is any amount set in stone as the rate can be renegotiated as circumstances require. For example, if the transaltor is not paying bills or the purchaser needs to cut costs, the rates eventually change.  In practice, this is how most rates are set.

This approach requires a sometimes difficult  emotional acceptance that others may be attaining higher or lower rates, even significantly so. In a sense, it is “autistic” in that it filters external reality. On the other hand, this mutual agreement creates its own reality in that it is possible to reach a mutually acceptable situation with some partners but not with others. It is clear that those in the “the more, the better” school will not adopt this approach. To drag Voltaire into the discussion, I tend to stand with Candide, who said that il faut cultiver son jardin.

* Always include a caption below pictures to allow blind readers to also enjoy.

Foreign tolerance

                                                          
                                                            [Picture of Oliver Cromwell*]

For every native-speaker of English, there are around four non-native speakers. This means 80% of English users not only have imperfect knowledge of English grammar and spelling but how to express tone. In other words, of increasing importance due to social media, most are not familiar with the manner in which it is possible to express ideas without sounding rude or aggressive. In this regard, it is important to understand that each language has its own acceptable style of written expression, which may sound ridiculous or rude when translating literally.

Two extremes are French and Hebrew. French is a flowery language arising from a culture that highly values formal politeness.  Some beautiful phrases found common in French correspondence of all kinds include: nous avons l’honneuer de …  [we have the honor of], je suis dans l’obligation [I am in the obligation of], en vous addressant mes meilleurs voeux de succes [in sending my best wishes of success], and je me permits d’attirer votre attention [I allow myself to bring it to your attention], even when the the content does not reflect such thoughts. By contrast, Israeli society and the Hebrew language are quite direct, if not blunt, which is reflected in the written language. For example, Hebrew generally avoids use of such fillers as please in  sentences and how are you doing at the beginning of emails. Since, its syntax generally follows the subject-verb-object order and the language has often has few synonyms, the message is to the point. Its tendency to call a spade a spade is the polar opposite of the French indirect style.

English is a direct language in terms of sentence syntax but developed in a class society that valued politeness. In practical terms, the polish in English correspondence is added through doubt, understatement and vagueness, among others. To avoid putting people in uncomfortable corners, English has many phrases to allow for error, at least in form. These include to the best of my knowledge, as far as I can know, it appears that and I have received information that. These words avoid direct accusation. Another technique, typically British, is reducing the severity of the term, sometimes to the point of sarcasm. For instance, your services did not meet my satisfaction means that the contractor’s worker was awful while I find it regretful often expresses great anger. When it would be too confrontational to formally mention a painful matter, native English speakers prefer vague terms. Some examples include please advise, payment issues, contractual obligations and resolving the issue. Using these techniques, English correspondence loses its uncomfortable aggressiveness at least as far as native speakers are concerned.

However, most users of English are neither native speakers nor advanced students of English in terms of formal studies or living in an English-speaking country. At the same time, they increasingly are active in international writing, especially in social media and email. Their language is generally understandable in terms of content but sometimes creates misunderstanding in terms of tone. Specifically, the writer may have intended the greatest respect but the reader, especially a native English speaker, may forget that the writer does not share a common culture and interpret a comment as rude, even insulting, or bloated This communication gap can create avoidable communication barriers.

In terms of implications, it is clear that non-native English-speaking professionals that actively use email and social media should seek guidance on the matter to ensure that they transmit their true message. For example, my wife, an Israeli, occasionally consults me in regards to sensitive email to make sure that the underlying message is effectively expressed. On a greater scale, when reading and reacting to various comments in social media, especially Facebook, it is important to consider the background of the writers. If they are non-native English speakers writing in English, however correct that English may be, they may be entirely unaware of English writing conventions and, consequently, how insulting their comments sounded to a native English speaker. Accordingly, we native speakers must be patient with foreigners not only because they are the majority but also because the vast majority have limited knowledge of English. I hope for the same when I write in French or Hebrew. As Cromwell would say, tolerance is the basis for a civil society.

* For the sake of the blind, do not forget to caption your pictures. Picture taken from wikipedia site.