7

There is a pithy Yiddish description for a simple matter that has been massively bungled:

"Noiach mit zibn greizen" -- [The two-letter name] Noach (נח) spelled with seven mistakes.

Does anyone know how this can actually be done?

closed as off-topic by Scimonster, sabbahillel, Shmuel Brin, mevaqesh, Daniel Jan 17 '16 at 21:36

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "Questions about the Hebrew language or about history or news of the Jewish people, Jewish individuals, or the State of Israel, except as related to Judaism, are off-topic. If this question does relate to Judaism, please edit it to indicate how." – Scimonster, sabbahillel, Shmuel Brin, mevaqesh, Daniel
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

7

Interestingly (but unsurprisingly), there is a Wikipedia page about this! They give the spelling ןאוייעך, which is how the word would be transcribed into Yiddish based on sound alone.

  • Phonetics plus the mistaken final ן. – WAF Dec 12 '10 at 17:50
  • They could have used a regular כ at the end (as in Gershon's answer), and made it 8 mistakes. "Noiach mit acht greizin" doesn't sound half as good, though. – Dave Dec 12 '10 at 18:09
6

נויאהעכ or ןויאהכ

The Chof at the end is 2 mistakes - as it is instead of the Ches and if it was a Chaf it should be a Chof Sofit

  • 1
    The ה and ע are just fillers, no real ignoramus would do that. :) But if you're using "end letters" already, you might as well put a Nun Sofit at the beginning. – Dave Dec 12 '10 at 3:41
  • 1
    -1, it wouldn't make a difference if it were a כ or a ך, because both of them are wrong. – Adam Mosheh May 22 '12 at 16:27
  • @AdamMosheh Yes but a כ is a double mistake: mistaken consonant and mistaken form. – Double AA May 23 '12 at 13:45
  • @DoubleAA - But nevertheless one mistake within a single letter. – Adam Mosheh May 25 '12 at 4:40
  • 1
    @AdamMosheh Well clearly he is following my way of counting. Yours is also an inherently consistent way of counting, but since neither is objectively better, I don't see how you can complain about his choice regarding which to use. – Double AA May 25 '12 at 6:02

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .