Modern Hebrew Conflict and Military Terminology
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Modern Hebrew Conflict and Military Terminology The Language of the Israel Defense Forces Cato Hemmingby Master’s thesis Department of Culture Studies and Oriental Languages University of Oslo Autumn 2011 II Modern Hebrew Conflict and Military Terminology The Language of the Israel Defense Forces Cato Hemmingby III © Cato Hemmingby 2011 Modern Hebrew Conflict and Military Terminology Cato Hemmingby http://www.duo.uio.no/ Print: Reprosentralen, University of Oslo IV Acknowledgements I would like to express gratitude to a number of persons and institutions, for their help and assistance during my work with this subject. First of all, I would like to extend the most sincere thanks to my supervisor at the University of Oslo, professor Lutz Eberhard Edzard, for his skillful, dedicated and motivating approach to this thesis. Many thanks also to Espen Arnesen, who is a patient and inspiring teacher of Hebrew. Additionally, Lars Haugom has been a helpful and motivating mentor, contributing with general guidance, as well as outstanding regional knowledge. Thanks also to Yair and Judit Moy in Avnei Eitan, and my teacher Dalit Eizenkraft at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. I am grateful for important assistance from different parts of the Norwegian defense community, and in particular Lt. Col. Palle Ydstebø at the Norwegian Defense Command and Staff College, and former Chief of Defense Sverre Diesen at SEFOSS. I have on several occasions visited The Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv, and special thanks to the Information Center manager Yoel Kozak and the experts Yehuda Ben-Meir and Shlomo Gazit. Likewise, I am very grateful to Professor Stuart A. Cohen at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at the Bar-Ilan University, and Professor Ora R. Schwarzwald, who is a helpful and great capacity in the Hebrew language at the same place, as well as being an advisory member of The Academy of the Hebrew Language. The IDF Spokespersons unit has also contributed to my work and special thanks to Bjørn Herman at the Scandinavian desk, and spokesperson Lt. Col. Avital Leibowitz, who against all normal procedures made time for a couple of Norwegian students in her own, limited free-time. Finally, I am in deep gratitude to my wife Monicha for her well-balanced reflections and comments, based on her experiences from the armed forces and studies of the Middle East. Thanks also to Eskil and Michael, who have been patient with a busy dad, and my mother who has also noted my busy schedule. Any errors, mistakes and shortcomings remain the sole responsibility of the author. Cato Hemmingby Oslo, 11 May, 2011 V Summary This thesis is examining Modern Hebrew conflict and military terminology – the language of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). Described by many Israelis as “a language within the language”, it must necessarily possess an identity of its own through special characteristics. On this basis, the major ambition of this thesis has been to identify the special “fingerprint” of the army speak in Israel – both in regard to technical or grammatical aspects, as well as the practical use of the language. The reader also gets an insight in other various aspects of the language within the military establishment and the security and intelligence community. This includes the current status of the professional language in the armed forces, in regard to efforts made to establish a common strategic, operational and tactical language. The language of the IDF and its predecessors has developed under almost continuous armed conflicts, starting during the first waves of Jewish immigrants over a century ago. The focus on Hebrew education has been strong due to operational factors, but it has also been a central pillar in the civil-military relations for decades. With limited influence from other languages, the language of the IDF has developed characteristics of its own, compared to the daily Hebrew used in the civil society. The major characteristics found are the extensive use of acronyms, a generous use of slang and, to a less degree, the integration of loanwords. Additionally, there are minor factors, like IDF‟s traditional use of numbers and naming of military material. This thesis claims that the IDF experienced problems with the implementation of a common professional language in the post-modern period of RMA, EBO and network-centric warfare. A part of the reason is the IDF officer education, their non-academic approach in general and dislike of learning material not found in Hebrew. An imprecise and unclear language has led to poor performance in the field, as in the Second Lebanon war in 2006. Today, the IDF have initiated efforts to meet the problems identified. In some areas, like the use of a clear language when issuing orders and coordination between different arms, there are indicators of improvement. In other areas, like the establishment of a common professional language within the IDF, it is far too early to make conclusions, as it is likely to require continuous efforts over a long period of time. VI Table of contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Transcription ................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Definition of terms....................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Studying “a language within the language” ................................................................ 3 1.4 The basic structure of this thesis.................................................................................. 4 1.5 A variety of sources ..................................................................................................... 6 2 The History of the IDF ....................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Pre-1948: The forerunners of the IDF ......................................................................... 7 2.1.1 The development of Hashomer ............................................................................ 8 2.1.2 Haganah becoming the major defense establishment .......................................... 8 2.2 Post 1948: The Israel Defense Forces ......................................................................... 9 2.2.1 A pro-active attack against Egypt, 1967 ............................................................ 10 2.2.2 The Palestinian uprisings ................................................................................... 12 2.2.3 The war leading to a renewed IDF ..................................................................... 13 3 Modern Hebrew in the armed forces ................................................................................ 15 3.1 Influence during the British Mandate period ............................................................. 15 3.1.1 The Jewish underground with impact ................................................................ 17 3.2 The IDF teaching Hebrew from the start ................................................................... 18 3.2.1 Hebrew classes, military magazines and army radio ......................................... 19 3.2.2 Lack of knowledge of Hebrew as an operational risk in combat ....................... 20 3.2.3 Hebrew knowledge as a potential nation divider ............................................... 21 3.2.4 The 1960s became years of consolidation .......................................................... 22 3.2.5 Hebrew teaching is not a central pillar anymore ................................................ 24 4 Characteristics of Hebrew military terminology .............................................................. 27 4.1 Acronyms: Everywhere - all the time ........................................................................ 27 4.1.1 General comments on acronyms ........................................................................ 28 4.1.2 Acronyms and the variety of forms .................................................................... 29 4.1.3 The main categories of acronyms ....................................................................... 30 4.1.4 Acronyms essential in military terminology ...................................................... 32 4.1.5 Higher frequency of acronyms in specific areas ................................................ 34 4.2 Loanwords: An unwanted guest? .............................................................................. 37 VII 4.2.1 The making of new words .................................................................................. 37 4.2.2 Examples of loanwords in Modern Hebrew ....................................................... 38 4.2.3 A study of Mossad‟s _milon munaxim_ ............................................................. 39 4.2.4 Hebrew exported ................................................................................................ 47 4.2.5 New mix: English inserts into written Modern Hebrew .................................... 48 4.2.6 Imprecise interpretations and translations .......................................................... 49 4.3 Slang: Difficult to learn for outsiders ........................................................................ 50 4.3.1 Slang in various forms ........................................................................................ 51 4.3.2 Slang and taboo .................................................................................................