Talk:Jacob Finkelman

Jew vs. Jewish person

AleatoryPonderings, re this edit, "Jewish person" is a circumlocution/pleonasm, so it's unclear why someone would prefer it to the perfectly good word "Jew". Also, according to The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, fourth edition (2000),

It is widely recognized that the attributive use of the noun Jew, in phrases such as Jew lawyer or Jew ethics, is both vulgar and highly offensive. In such contexts Jewish is the only acceptable possibility. Some people, however, have become so wary of this construction that they have extended the stigma to any use of Jew as a noun, a practice that carries risks of its own. In a sentence such as There are now several Jews on the council, which is unobjectionable, the substitution of a circumlocution like Jewish people or persons of Jewish background may in itself cause offense for seeming to imply that Jew has a negative connotation when used as a noun'.(emphasis mine).

Please let me know if you have any other concerns. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:07, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Jayjg, After a looking at some other resources, I agree that "Jew" is acceptable. But so is "Jewish person". Indeed, the presence of op-eds like this one from 2017 suggest that the term is still contested. Mark Oppenheimer writes, in part:

We Jews, too, recoil from calling ourselves Jews. In my experience as an editor at a publication focusing on Jewish news and culture, and hosting its podcast about Jewish life, I have noticed how many Jewish writers — me included — avoid calling anyone a “Jew.” I frequently edit articles that mention “Jewish politicians” or “Jewish artists” but not “Jews.”

The fact that this and other such arguments for the use of "Jew" have been appearing in recent years is as much evidence for the view that "Jew" is acceptable as it is evidence that the term is still contested. Thus changing "Jewish person" to "Jew" contravenes MOS:VAR. I agree that in general pleonasms are to be avoided, but "Jewish person" for "Jew" is not the same thing as "was the recipient of" for "received". So I suggest you start a discussion at WT:MOS if you want this to become standard, as opposed to changing articles en masse without broader discussion. The fact that the lede of Jews uses both – doubtless a hard-won and long consensus – is the best evidence I can see for the view that, at least on wp, both are permissible. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 21:33, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

AleatoryPonderings, that opinion piece is interesting, but I think the quote from the dictionary I provided above is conclusive. "Jewish person" is, without question, both a circumlocution and pleonasm. Even worse, it's an attempt to avoid using the simple noun "Jew"; such an attempt, as the American Heritage Dictionary points out, "may in itself cause offense for seeming to imply that Jew has a negative connotation when used as a noun". I can't see any plausible defense for its use. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:29, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

You may well be right, but I suggest you take this to a broader forum to resolve it. In my view, the quotations we have both cited indicate that the issue is contested; the American Heritage Dictionary itself uses the word "may", indicating that the issue is not settled. If there's a relevant provision of the MOS I'm unaware of, please direct me to it. Otherwise, I think WT:MOS is the best forum. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 22:18, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Jayjg, I've found an unambiguous point in your favour: Siegal, Allan M.; Connolly, William G. (2015). The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage: The Official Style Guide Used by the Writers and Editors of the World's Most Authoritative News Organization (5th ed.). Three Rivers Press. p. 166. ISBN 978-1-101-90544-9. OCLC 90851739.:

Jew(s). Use the word, unvarnished, in references to people of Jewish heritage or religion. Phrases like member of the Jewish faith strike some Jews as unwarranted euphemisms.

I would still suggest that, if you wish to make this change globally, you seek some consensus for it in a more widely viewed forum. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 18:51, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

AleatoryPonderings, that's a great find! Thanks for researching this. It might, at some point, be an idea to try to get a definitive ruling on this at the MOS:ID. My previous experiences with the MOS are that proposed changes such as this rarely end up with anything definitive; at this point, the MOS is getting pretty close to fixed. Perhaps when I have a great deal of time to spare. Jayjg ^(talk) 19:57, 3 November 2021 (UTC)