How do you spell חֲנֻכָּה?
Chanukkah, Xanuka, Ḥanuke and the World of Transliteration
by Sarah Grabiner
How should Hebrew be spelled in the Latin alphabet? This is called transliteration, rendering part of a language using a different script, like Russian, Chinese, or Arabic written with Latin letters. This is common in situations where readers do not have proficiency in the language’s original alphabet, as is the case for Hebrew among many Diaspora Jews, and when many Hebrew- (or Yiddish- or Aramaic-) origin words become part of the regular lexicon of a language like Jewish English. This page begins with an introduction to transliteration, especially in Jewish languages, and then offers a guide to the many options for transliterating in Jewish English.
History
Transliteration has been a part of Jewish textual traditions for practically as long as Hebrew/Aramaic texts have been written down. This practice goes back to the switch from Paleo-Hebrew script to the imperial Aramaic alphabet in the sixth century BCE. When early Christian scholars translated the Hebrew Bible, they included aspects of transliteration in their work, providing us with evidence of early Hebrew pronunciation: Origen of Alexandria (2nd-3rd century CE) transcribed the text into ancient Greek characters in his Secunda, and Jerome (4th century CE) used many transcribed place names and personal names in his translation into Latin, known as the Vulgate. Similarly, the Christian Bible includes transliterations of Aramaic words and phrases, followed by translations, e.g.,“Abba, Father” (Romans 8:15) and “‘Rabboni!’ (which is to say, Teacher)” (John 20:16). Throughout the Medieval and premodern eras, when Hebrew/Aramaic was the familiar alphabet for most literate Jews, transliteration generally worked in the opposite direction. The sounds and words of vernacular languages like Arabic or German were transcribed into Hebrew-based writing systems, as in Judeo-Arabic and Yiddish. In another use of transliteration, the great eleventh-century rabbinic scholar Rashi included glosses, translations of difficult Hebrew terms using Old French words in Hebrew letters, in his commentaries on the Bible and Talmud. Today, most Jews are literate in their home country’s vernacular language, and most contemporary Jewish languages are written in the standard local alphabet. So the primary direction of transliteration is Hebrew words rendered in Latin letters.
Transliteration systems are a result of contact between multiple languages. Transliteration is sensitive to both or all languages in the multilingual environment, so transliteration in various Jewish languages might look different because of the unique phonologies (how sounds are pronounced) and orthographies (how sounds are spelled) of the coterritorial majority languages involved. Some idiosyncratic transliterated words in languages other than Jewish English include:
Jewish German:
בַּר מִצְוָה - Bar Mitzvah -> Bar Mizwa
יְשִׁיבָה - Yeshivah -> Jeschiwa
Jewish Latin American Spanish:
חֲרֹסֶת - Charoset/Haroset -> Jaroset
געלט - Gelt -> Guelt
Jewish Hungarian:
חֻצְפָּה - Chutzpah -> hücpe
מוּסָף - Musaf -> müszef
However, transliteration is not the same as transcription. Transliteration and transcription are both methods of representing linguistic material from one writing system in another, but they differ in the features of the language they prioritize. Transcription represents the sounds of spoken language, with the primary goal of showing pronunciation, perhaps even the idiosyncratic speech of a particular individual or group. Transliteration represents the written system, with a systematic mapping between symbols in each alphabet, so that you can reconstruct the exact spelling in the original script. However, in Jewish life, “transliteration” is often used to describe a variety of approaches to representing Hebrew in vernacular alphabets, including both phonetic (sound) and orthographical (script) considerations. This means that even between different varieties of Jewish English, transliteration choices might give away differences in pronunciation or accent. For example, the syllables used in a niggun (wordless melody) might be written “bim bom” in British English versus “bim bam” in American English, reflecting the way vowels are pronounced differently on either side of the Atlantic.
How to Choose the Right Transliteration System for You
For contemporary English/Jewish English-speakers engaging with Hebrew, there are many different ways to transliterate. So how do you decide which system to use?
Academic/official systems
There are a number of technical, authorized systems of transliteration, which aim to represent the spelling of a Hebrew word in Latin characters. This means that they take each Hebrew consonant and vowel and assign them a Latin letter or symbol. Some use more diacritics, which make them look more technical, while others stick to common English letters and marks. Some of the most popular of these systems are:
The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) publishes standards and systems for many different areas, including language and writing systems. The introduction to this technical system distinguishes between “completely reversible stringent conversion,” in which you would be able to look at transliterated Hebrew and determine exactly how the original Hebrew was spelled, a “simplified” system, and “popular conversion,” which would vary by locality and culture. The aim of this system is the first, a stringent transliteration with tables used to convert Hebrew into Latin characters including diacritic marks and details which, with the right expertise, could be interpreted internationally and uniformly. The ISO 259 is scientific, requiring high-level knowledge of Hebrew and phonetics to both write and decode. The details of the system are not available freely online but can be purchased. It is included here to note that standardization is a significant trend in formal transliteration, and that big international bodies have a stake and a role in this aspect of Jewish language preservation.
The American Library Association (ALA) and Library of Congress (LC) together publish a set of standards for what they call “romanization,” transliteration using the Latin alphabet. Their system for Hebrew romanization is similar to the ISO in that it includes a transliteration table. However, it is substantially simpler, with far fewer diacritic markings, and would be quite easily interpreted by a standard English speaker without technical knowledge. There are some details that help to reconstruct the Hebrew spelling from the transliteration, for example the distinction between “ḥ” for the letter ח ḥet and “kh” for the letter כ khaf, which are not usually pronounced distinctly in modern Israeli speech. Note that the ALA-LC system is also intended to transliterate Yiddish, but the YIVO system is more widely accepted and used.
3. Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics
The Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics’ transcription conventions are similar to the ALA-LC system, with basic distinctions for all Hebrew consonants and vowels, and some simple diacritics. The editorial introduction summarizes many of the key issues raised when producing transliteration:
An attempt has been made to balance considerations of phonetic reality, language history, orthography and practicality. The transcription systems, therefore, are in many respects the result of compromise and inevitably are less than fully satisfactory from several points of view. No transcription system of Hebrew, however, can be fully satisfactory in all respects.
One distinct feature of the EHLL system, compared with the first two examples, is that it offers two sets of tables for different periods of Hebrew: biblical and modern. Transliteration for biblical Hebrew distinguishes between, for example, all the letters בגדכפת with and without dagesh (the dot that changes the sound of half of these in most contemporary pronunciation traditions but has grammatical significance in all its appearances in classical text). The system for modern Hebrew does not include specific markings for when the dagesh has no impact on most contemporary reading practices. The modern system includes conventions for sounds that do not exist in biblical Hebrew, like 'ז' ג and 'צ which they list as representing the English phonemes: ǧ (like the opening sound of “jam”), ž (like the middle consonant sound in “vision”), and č (like the opening sound of “cheese”).
4. Academy of the Hebrew Language
The Academy of the Hebrew Language is the authorizing body for matters concerning modern Israeli Hebrew, and it has published principles for transliterating Hebrew into Latin letters since the early years of the state, in the 1950s. Their system is used for official Israeli documentation that requires Latin writing, such as passports, certificates, forms, office notices, and signs. As in the ISO’s description, there is an awareness of the need for different kinds of transliteration, and the Academy provides frameworks for both simple and more stringent systems. The Academy is a bridge between formal, technical systems described above and the fluidity and inconsistency of transliteration in Jewish life. They acknowledge the established translations/transcriptions of place names and organizations, like “The Jerusalem Post” or “The State of Israel,” and do not expect their rules to be applied here. Also, they embrace the flexibility required depending on the function of a particular instance of transliteration. For example, there are options to use diacritic markings, but they are not strictly required if the Hebrew word would be read aloud the same way irregardless of the extra markings. In some cases the letters aleph, ayin, heh, vav, yud might not be represented at all in the Latin-alphabet equivalent if they are essentially silent in pronunciation. In this way, this system has both prescriptive (based on Hebrew orthography) and descriptive (based on actual modern Israeli pronunciation) aspects.
IPA
It is important to mention the International Phonetic Alphabet here. Unlike the systems discussed above, this alphabet does not take Hebrew writing and “translate” each consonant and vowel into Latin characters (as in the definition of “transliteration” above). Rather, it prioritizes how a language sounds, as noted for “transcription.” IPA transcriptions are generally derived from audio recordings, even studying images of sound waves (waveforms) to identify how different sounds appear visually and can be measured. It consists of many characters that are not familiar to speakers of standard English, in order to represent all possible phonemes (distinctive sounds in all world languages). The IPA chart consists of 107 symbols representing consonant and vowel sounds. No language contains all these sounds; English is generally understood to use around 44 and Hebrew between 30 and 32. IPA is primarily descriptive, as opposed to prescriptive, and can be used to represent very fine distinctions in pronunciation. A phonologist (a linguist who specializes in the sounds of a language) might transcribe different people saying the same Hebrew word, שַׁבָּת “Shabbat,” in a number of different ways:
-
/ʃəˈbɑt/ - British Sephardi/Modern Israeli
-
/ʃaˈbat/ - American Sephardi/Modern Israeli
-
/ˈʃabəs/ - Ashkenazi/Yiddish
-
/ʃæbˈbɔθ/ - Yemenite
All of these are correct, for each individual speaker, and they describe the wonderful variety of contemporary Hebrew pronunciation traditions. However, this is not a particularly accessible transliteration system for most people because it requires learning the complex and substantial alphabet of symbols in order to decipher a transcription. Therefore, it is used only in specialist, generally academic, contexts.
Here are four Hebrew words, which might be commonly written in Jewish English as Mitzvah, Pesach, Shavuot, and Torah, represented in some of these systems:
Hebrew Text | ACA-LC | Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics (biblical) | Academy of Hebrew Language (simple) | IPA (Ashkenazi Hebrew) | IPA (Modern Israeli Hebrew) | IPA (Libyan Hebrew) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
תּוֹרָה | torah | tôrāh | torá | /ˈtoːʁə/ | /toːˈʁaː/ | /toːˈʁɑː/ |
שָׁבוּעוֹת | shavuʹot | šāvuʿōt | shavuʿót | /ʃəˈvuəs/ | /ʃavuˈot/ | /ʃavuːˈʕoːt/ |
פֶּסַח | pesaḥ | pɛsaḥ | pésaẖ | /ˈpesaχ/ | /ˈpesaχ/ | /ˈpesaħ/ |
מִצְוָה | mitsṿah | miṣwāh | mitsvá | /ˈmɪtsvə/ | /mitsˈvaː/ | /mitsˈwɑː/ |
Transliteration in Jewish Communal Life
Most Jewish publications and organizations do not use any of these systems. Some have style guides, such as using “ch” or “ḥ” for chet/ḥet and “kh” or “ch” for khaf/chaf. Others have a list of preferred spellings for hundreds of Hebrew (and Yiddish) words. Most simply make decisions based on what “looks right,” which often means adopting spelling norms that have crystallized on a word-by-word basis. The Jewish Language Project uses diverse approaches, depending which language and pronunciation traditions we are discussing. The Jewish English Lexicon selects for entry spelling the one with the most hits in an English Google search but also lists alternate spellings (sometimes dozens!). For example, tselem is the primary entry for the Hebrew word meaning ‘crucifix,’ and alternate spellings include tzeylem, tseilem, tzelem, and more.
In Jewish communal life, the function of transliteration is usually to demonstrate how a word is pronounced, rather than how it is written. In this way, everyday transliteration is more similar to transcription than to some of the formal transliteration systems discussed above. Because transliteration in Jewish communal spaces is used to enable non-Hebrew-readers to access and articulate Hebrew words in prayer books, Jewish cultural program materials, or signage in buildings, it is important that it uses common orthography, in other words, everyday English letters and symbols.
When choosing a transliteration system, it is crucial to ask yourself: what is its function?
Maybe the function is to show people which geographical/historical-ethnic accent you use to pronounce Hebrew in this particular space. In this case, certain letters are crucial. You might transliterate שׁבּת as shabbos (rather than shabbat) and ציצית as tsistis (rather than tsitsit) to demonstrate the final “s” sound of the letter ת in Ashkenazi pronunciation, as compared with the “t” sound of Sephardi/Israeli pronunciation. Or you might transliterate the numbers one, three, and five as ahodh, sholosh, and homesh to approximate Yemenite Hebrew, as opposed to echad, shalosh, and chamesh in Sephardi/Israeli pronunciation.
There are some corners of the Jewish English writing world with very specific conventions and combinations of geographic-linguistic identity. For example, some of the ArtScroll series of religious books, published by Mesorah Publications, use transliteration with Ashkenazi consonants and Sephardi vowels. For example, the story of the binding of Isaac - עֲקֵדַת יִצְחָק - would be transliterated in Sephardi/Israeli pronunciation Akeidat Yitzchak and in Ashkenazi pronunciation Akeidas Yitzchok. ArtScroll combines these to give Akeidas Yitzchak.
Or the function could be to help make a text “look” particularly Jewish. Maybe you want to culturally code a sign or piece of writing by using transliterated Hebrew names rather than their anglicized equivalents within an otherwise English piece of writing. This is referred to as a “foreignizing” strategy in the language of translation scholar Lawrence Venuti. This means that the text conforms a little less to English conventions and uses more features of the Hebrew source, like the sound of people’s names, “Avraham” (Abraham), or places, “Yerushalayim” (Jerusalem). If this is your aim, then you might deliberately choose spellings that vary from accepted English versions of names or words. Additional examples include Channah (Hannah), Yisrael (Israel), and Miryam (Miriam).
In addition to how “Jewish” an English text appears, there is also the question of how “normal” (like any non-Jewish English text) it looks. With the academic and formal transliteration systems described above, there is a spectrum – from the highly technical markings of IPA to some diacritics like a ḥ for chet to completely “standard” English writing. This impacts how it is read and how accessible the text is, but also how it looks. For example, the festival celebrating the conclusion and restarting of the annual reading of the Five Books of Moses could be:
-
/sɪmˈχɑːt toːˈʁɑː/ (certainly not looking like standard English, but not looking particularly “Jewish” or “Hebraic” either);
-
Simḥat Tora (perhaps looking “Jewish” to some with the diacritic mark – a dot under the h – but perhaps too technical for others);
-
Simchat Torah (for many the most conventionally “communal Jewish” looking transliteration with the common “ch” for the guttural chet sound and “h” representing the final ה heh of “Torah”);
-
or many other options.
Perhaps you are writing for an audience with little, no, or very diverse Hebrew knowledge, and so the function is primarily accessibility. For this purpose, you would want to use transliteration that conforms as closely as possible to English spelling and writing conventions, avoiding syllables and sounds that could be mispronounced. For example, Hanuka or Hanooka might be easier for a non-Hebrew-speaker to read than Chanukah. Alternatively, Chanukah might “look” more Jewish in certain socio-cultural circles. You might prioritize using characters for the sounds they most often represent in English, as opposed to social conventions or other formal transliteration systems discussed above.
If, however, the aim of transliteration is to give some sense of how the Hebrew is written, including letters that are no longer distinctive in contemporary pronunciation, this use of “Kibbutz” would not allow the reader to know whether the word begins with a ק quf or כּ kaf, or whether it included a י yud or not. To achieve this, you would need to use one of the prescriptive formal systems above, which assign Latin letters to Hebrew consonants and vowels so that the transliteration can be reverse-engineered back into Hebrew. קִבּוּץ could be transliterated qibūṣ according to the EHLL system, but that might not be the most accessible or familiar option for a sign at a summer camp.
Choosing a way to transliterate requires you to balance these factors:
-
Geographical/historical-ethnic accent
-
How the text looks
-
Ease of pronunciation
-
Ability to distinguish how the word is written in Hebrew
Often, two or more of these factors are important, and compromises are necessary to reach a satisfactory solution while navigating the hierarchy of priorities. Different words or texts may call for different systems, and one might even use multiple systems within the same word.
The common Hebrew word קִבּוּץ is transliterated as “kibbutz” across denominational spaces, from the name of a 10th-grade cabin at a Reform summer camp in Texas to an Orthodox boys’ learning camp in New York.
[Image from Ohev Shalom - The National Synagogue’s “Camp Kibbutz”]
Is it important that חֲנֻכָּה starts with a chet, includes a kaf (with dagesh), and ends with a heh? Then Ḥanukkah it is!
Are you more concerned about those unfamiliar with the festival or completely new to Hebrew being able to pronounce the word? Go with Hánuka.
Is there a standardized “Jewish community” norm you’d like to conform to? Perhaps your community will recognize Chanukah as the most familiar option.
Hoping to demonstrate your Ashkenazi identity with your choice of transliteration? Khanike is the one for you!
Conclusion
Given the many Hebrew and Aramaic words used in Jewish English, as well as words from Yiddish and other languages that do not use Latin letters, transliteration is ubiquitous in contemporary English-speaking Jewish communal life. How you choose to represent these words and phrases can serve a range of purposes. You might demonstrate aspects of your community’s religious, geographical, or historical identity; or you might prioritize how the original Hebrew was spelled, or how it is normally read aloud. All of these choices make statements about the significance and place of Hebrew in the community for which you are writing. It might be important that the text looks a certain way so that it is easily identifiable by those in the know, or you might choose the representation that will be most accessible for those unfamiliar with Hebrew. Transliteration can do all of this and more, helping to preserve and enrich the distinctive Jewish character of our languages.
To cite: Grabiner, Sarah. n.d. How do you spell חֲנֻכָּה? Chanukkah, Xanuka, Ḥanuke and the World of Transliteration. Jewish Language Website, Sarah Bunin Benor (ed.). Los Angeles: Jewish Language Project. https://www.jewishlanguages.org/theater. Attribution: Creative Commons Share-Alike 4.0 International.