Introductory lecture on jargon

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Introductory lecture on jargon is a lecture by Franz Kafka from the estate that he gave in February 1912 as an introduction to an evening of recitation by his friend Jizchak Löwy . Its subject is the understanding of the jargon , i.e. Yiddish , among assimilated Jews.

Emergence

Through his friendship with Löwy, Kafka soon became infected with his enthusiasm for Jewish theater , as he describes it in the fragment On the Jewish Theater . But Kafka also saw the manifold difficulties that this theater troupe from Eastern Europe, which spoke mainly Yiddish, encountered in Prague. In his diaries, Kafka describes how he supported her with a lot of organizational assistance, which, however, was also very difficult and annoying for him.

The introductory lecture on jargon is just as helpful for Löwy's intended recitations, because Yiddish was not only in use among the Jews of Prague, but also with most Western, assimilated Jews. One did not identify with it, but with German high culture .

The lecture comes from the recordings in the context of the so-called convolute , the present one referred to as the convolute introductory lecture on jargon .

The fragment cannot be found in all standard Kafka editions, but is mentioned by current biographers and publications. (See Peter-André Alt Kafka The Eternal Son , Reiner Stach “Kafka The Years of Decisions”, website The Kafka project by Mauro Nervi with the text.)

content

First, Kafka assures the audience that they will understand more jargon than they think. Some are afraid of the jargon and that is understandable. The orderly conditions in Western Europe, which one is used to, made it impossible to understand the confused jargon. Kafka describes the jargon as the youngest European language, the expression short and quick, without grammar and only consisting of foreign words and dialect, but also with roots in Middle High German. It is not a world language, only the crook language takes some from it.

With an ironic twist, Kafka postulates, contradicting himself, that he has probably convinced most of them not to understand a word of the jargon and that no "momentary explanation" can help either. He now briefly outlines the three poems that Löwy will recite. He appeals to the audience to feel the jargon; not to complain about the lack of understanding, but to surrender to the jargon with fear and self-forgetfulness. These feelings will be lost, however, as only one lecture evening cannot keep the memory alive.

Text analysis

In contrast to the Jewish theater, body language and external drama are reduced in poem recitation, so the demands on language understanding are higher. Kafka attempts this understanding of language with his text z. In part, to achieve with contradictions, relativizations and a touch on actual or supposed resistance of the audience to Yiddish.

His appeal is to see the jargon as an emotional moment without rational reflection, as a medium of communication beyond writing.

To describe the jargon, Kafka uses terms of rapid movement such as “short and quick, haste and liveliness; the hustle and bustle of language, the jargon does not come to rest ” . Anyone who is caught up in the jargon will no longer recognize their “ former calm ” .

Relation to other Kafka works

In his last story Josefine, the singer or The people of the mice from the anthology Ein Hungerkünstler , Kafka took up various things that create associations with the present lecture. The imperfect whistling of the artist Josefine, which actually masters every other mouse, is interpreted by various interpreters as an indication of the term mauscheln , as one describes the expression of the Jews. In the description of the mouse people, who are representative of the Jewish people, terms such as “of haste, restlessness, in the midst of tumult” are used , which in turn are reminiscent of the essential characteristics of the jargon.

Quote

  • By translating it into French, for example, jargon can be conveyed to the French; by translating it into German it is destroyed. For example, “Toit” is not “dead” and “Blüt” is by no means “blood” .

output

  • Post-processed writings and fragments I Edited by Malcom Pasley (Born / Neumann / Schillemeit) Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag pp. 188–193 ISBN 3-596-15700-5

Secondary literature

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Diaries p. 377
  2. ↑ Stach p. 48
  3. ↑ Posthumous writings and fragments I Appendix, Contents, p. 1
  4. ↑ Alt p. 235.
  5. ↑ Alt p. 666.
  6. ^ Schmidt-Dengler p. 273. Contribution by Eduard Timms.

Web links