.gif)
Firstly, I want to apologize to Magdalena. I guess that I lumped her in with Harry and Jon when she had taken their side and vice versa. When two troublemakers defend someone honest and vice versa, to tell who's honest and who's not gets hard. Secondly, I want to warn you to watch out for Harry and particular (as the exchange below will show). By the way, this guy has denied that Dad has ever abused me and has said that Dad loves me, and he doesn't even know anything other than what I've said—and what does that tell you about him? He denies abuse and falsely defends an abuser, and slanders the abuse victim who would have no reason to lie—and if he wants to talk about evidence, he can look up "Czarnecki v. Czarnecki (2006)" (or whatever the case is called—perhaps "En re Czarnecki" (2006)) in the Howard County, Maryland court system. The verdict was in my and my sister's favor.
Also, I have nothing to hide about my family, etc., regardless of that my family did. As the exchange below will show, my great-great-granddad's parents clearly went out of their way to hide from their ro'eh that they married Roman Catholicly. They went nine hours and 34 minutes away to marry.
No wonder, then, that they would be angry when their son and in-law daughter became Anusim during the pogroms—to them, that their son and in-law daughter would become Anusim after they returned to Judaism and had married Roman Catholicly only to secure their freedom was a slap in the face in their minds. They must've been thinking, "Did you not learn from our mistake? You have committed a chillul HaShem! You have made your lives more important than your nefashot."
Besides, there had already been the January Uprising, and Poles couldn't own land. So, why did Antoni and Katarzyna own a farm in Lipsk? Besides, Julian Danilowicz fled conscription. Poles may have been unlucky, but Jews were worse off:
"Unlike enlightened Jews in the Polish Congress Kingdom who argued for Jewish personal army service to prove their patriotism and eventually to bring them full emancipation, Jewish communal elders throughout the Pale of Settlement had well-grounded doubts about the good will of the Russian authorities. Before the publication of the statute, Jews realized that conscription jeopardized the traditional status of their community. Accordingly, Jews flocked to such tsadikim as Avraham Yehoshu‘a Heshel (d. 1825), seeking intercession with the Almighty. Supported by Hasidic tsadikim and wealthy Jews, they raised funds to bribe state officials, vainly struggling to prevent the law on Jewish conscription from being implemented."
Also, there were "Jew hunts", not Catholic hunts. So, Julian Danilowicz and Julian and Alexandria Czernecki took the course of converting to Roman Catholicism and living as Anusim in the United States.
By the way, as I type, the exchange is getting worse. I meant "out of the way of Lipsk and Krasne". Maybe I don't apologize to Magdalena after all. Furthermore, there are no random events or coincidences in life (co[inciding]-incidences? Sure. Coincidences? No.)—I just wanted to note that in case anyone else wants to pull the "How do you know that you're related to those Andruleviches?" card, for example.
I am also telling you that the sentence was translated correctly. But you obviously don't want to take my word for that either.
As for whether you can trust Magdalena, I notice you accepted without question her translation of the marriage certificate, so why would you doubt her translation of that sentence? Because it doesn't fit in with what you thought it meant? Magdalena is also a professional translator,so why would she put her reputation on the line giving you an inaccurate translation that anyone with any knowledge of Polish could pick up on as being wrong? I think you are doing her an injustice here.
I use it for translation of a few words here and there.
When it comes to sentences, in my opinion it's more often wrong than right.
Your opinion seems to contradict with the evidence, though; and then I get the rapsheet when I bring up evidence that points to something? I'm sorry for you that I'm not the mold-fitting Jew; and if something seems questionable and agenda pushed, I'm going to bring it up.
I am not interested in what other users of Google Translate think Nicki. I am telling you that on the many occasions that I have used it in the past, it was inaccurate and unreliable which is why I rarely use it these days. Presuming that you don't speak another language and haven't had occasion to use Google Translate that often, you wouldn't understand that it doesn't translate everything verbatim.
I don't have any axe to grind with you Nicki. Whether you are Jewish or not doesn't actually interest me.
I spoke up only because Magdalena's translation is correct, and from initially thanking her for her translation of the marriage certificate, you are now condemning someone who tried to help you as a liar.
I don't think that's very fair.
Both of those questions were answered above (i.e. there are millions of reasons), you just didn't like the answers, especially given that your preferred answer is directly contradicted by this marriage certificate.
No, Magda is most certainly not lying to you. Google translate very often produces incorrect translations. It is possible that this document does refer to other people but it's more likely that it does refer to the people you think it refers to. Most probably it is you who is mistaken.
You mean that they were so well connected that even though they were Jews they could get married as Catholics but they were not so well connected that they could get a rabbi to come to their tiny village? Interesting interpretation of the facts.
Same reason the document didn't mention that they were humans: because it was so obvious!
Nickie, I really do not give a cr@p how your family history fits with anything. I don't believe that there is a 'normal' history for any Jew; please stop lying about me.
She tried to help you and because you didn't like what the document says you accuse her of lying to you. I hope you don't expect any help from anybody else with translations in the future.
Maybe he loved her? Maybe they got drunk and he knocked her up? Maybe she had a ton of cash and he wanted to get his hands on it? Maybe he had a fetish for Jews? Maybe his father was a virulent anti-semite and he wanted to really annoy his father because he hated his father? There are lots of possible reasons, including one which seems to have completely eluded you: maybe his bride was not a Jew?
You only know that he fell out with his parents, not why he fell out with them. Given that they were married as Catholics, it's rather unlikely that they would have objected to him being a Catholic.
See above. There are lots of possible reasons, including one which seems to have completely eluded you: maybe their brides were not Jews?
You keep quoting these JewishGen records... and I agree, these people have some similar surnames to the ones in your family, and they did exist. There is only one problem here: how do you prove that they were related to you in any way? Simply having the same surname and living in roughly the same area is not much proof one way or the other. My paternal grandparents had the same surname as a very wealthy szlachta family living in their area, but they were not related to them at all - they were their freed serfs (this is just an example, I am not trying to imply anything about who your ancestors were by this).
As you know, Jews were made to start using surnames around the start of the 19th century, and many of them took the surnames that were popular in the general populace surrounding them. This is another reason not to trust in surname alone. You could be looking for Polish ancestors with a name like Złotopolski and find out you are Jewish, as well as think you might be Jewish and come across gentiles. As you said, it's not cut and dried at all.
This is why you need to look for further, more detailed info than that, is all I'm saying. I will repeat myself once again: the marriage certificate is not proof of your Jewish origin and I think you are starting to read too much into it, like "could 'priest' actually mean 'rabbi'" etc. If it were a rabbi marrying them, don't you think he would have written the certificate in Yiddish and kept the records in the Synagogue or some such place?
Another important clue: the certificate I translated clearly states that all of the participants were illiterate. As far as I know, all Jewish boys were taught to read and write? Wouldn't at least one of them be able to sign the certificate? "Illiterate" and "Polish-speaking" screams Catholic peasants to me.
For all I know, you might be Jewish, and I frankly couldn't care less one way or the other; but this particular document does nothing to prove that. I would be looking for late baptisms, intermarriages, typically Jewish first names in your family's records (not any and all Jewish records that fit the general area though).
Nickidewbear:And how do I know? She's not one of these people that I can exactly trust.
I am also telling you that the sentence was translated correctly. But you obviously don't want to take my word for that either.
As for whether you can trust Magdalena, I notice you accepted without question her translation of the marriage certificate, so why would you doubt her translation of that sentence? Because it doesn't fit in with what you thought it meant? Magdalena is also a professional translator,so why would she put her reputation on the line giving you an inaccurate translation that anyone with any knowledge of Polish could pick up on as being wrong? I think you are doing her an injustice here.
I told you why. Also, I did question the translation of the certificate by raising a question after that. I said, "I have a question, though." So, I did see something which I believed suspect
I even said for the basic gist. I understand that it doesn't translate everything verbatim. I've even had to submit corrections. What I resent, too, is the implication that I'm stupid about it. "Presuming that you don't speak another language and haven't had occasion to use Google Translate that often, you wouldn't understand that it doesn't translate everything verbatim."
As you know, Jews were made to start using surnames around the start of the 19th century, and many of them took the surnames that were popular in the general populace surrounding them. This is another reason not to trust in surname alone. You could be looking for Polish ancestors with a name like Złotopolski and find out you are Jewish, as well as think you might be Jewish and come across gentiles. As you said, it's not cut and dried at all.
This is why you need to look for further, more detailed info than that, is all I'm saying. I will repeat myself once again: the marriage certificate is not proof of your Jewish origin and I think you are starting to read too much into it, like "could 'priest' actually mean 'rabbi'" etc. If it were a rabbi marrying them, don't you think he would have written the certificate in Yiddish and kept the records in the Synagogue or some such place?
Another important clue: the certificate I translated clearly states that all of the participants were illiterate. As far as I know, all Jewish boys were taught to read and write? Wouldn't at least one of them be able to sign the certificate? "Illiterate" and "Polish-speaking" screams Catholic peasants to me.
For all I know, you might be Jewish, and I frankly couldn't care less one way or the other; but this particular document does nothing to prove that. I would be looking for late baptisms, intermarriages, typically Jewish first names in your family's records (not any and all Jewish records that fit the general area though).
All I'm saying is that they may have been considered "illiterate" because they were not literate in Polish. Many Jews did not speak what they considered treif or goyische leshonot. Also, we don't have a family tree that traces beyond the 1700s. When they went to Lipsk, they may have remarried as "ba'alim teshuvah" who were "ba'alim b'lashon hakodesh. I just wanted to make sure that I am getting an honest translation because of what has happened in the past and what you are saying here.
Please understand that I am not ungrateful, and that I just don't take everything at face value. I apologize for any point at which I got contentious and went over the line in the way that I raised my question, and I am grateful for the translation.
PS As for Harry:
When you, Harry, make statements like that, you shatter your credibility altogether. There is no evidence of any of that, including the "fetish" statement. Also, she was a Jew from Stakliskes who had Anusi family.
Saying that Magda is lying isn't going to make your ancestors Jewish. The only thing it's going to do is decrease the chances that anybody will help you with translations in the future.
Your question has now been repeatedly answered. Unfortunately the documentary evidence does not fit your hypothesis; that means you need to re-assess your hypothesis, not claim that the translator is lying.
Run what your cousin said through google translate: "Mysle ze tak a nawet napewno to sa katolicy" http://translate.google.pl/#pl/en/Mysle%20ze%20tak%20a%20nawet%20 napewno%20to%20sa%20katolicy "I think that so even sure these are Catholics"
There is exactly as much evidence that they married for love as there is that they did shidduch, i.e. absolutely none. However, there is documentation which strongly suggests that they did not did shidduch, i.e. their marriage certificate.
Let me guess, the 'evidence that she was a Jew is that she married somebody you claim was a Jew and the 'evidence' that he was a Jew is that he married somebody you claim was a Jew, right?
Saying that Magda is lying isn't going to make your ancestors Jewish. The only thing it's going to do is decrease the chances that anybody will help you with translations in the future.
I already apologized, and you look like a fool for rehashing it.
Actually, it does. I'd hate to be you right now because you're ignoring how far Maćkowa Ruda is from Lipsk and Krasne . If a condition for their freedom was to marry Catholic for their freedom, they were going to do it in an out-of-the-way town where the "rabbi"s would never be the wiser.
It said, ""Mysle ze tak a nawet napewno to sa katolicy no ale tylko tyle znalazlem:)"." Nice try, though.
Actually, the documentation does suggest shidduch. Nice try, though.
You clearly didn't pay attention, did you? This is why I ignore you. You cherrypick evidence for your convenience and then ignore evidence that I bring up, and then tell me that I'm cherrypicking. I'm going to tell you again, whether or not you give a darn, that she had Jewish cousins named Nik and Vil'gel'm, that her cousin Rochla was listed as "Hebrew", that her cousin Shmuil Morgovich died in Stakliskes and that (thus) her birthdate of June 26, 1882 actually checks out, that Jews did not intermarry in those days unless they wanted severe reprecussions, and that people converted "up" and not "down" in those days unless they wanted severe reprecussions (and, in fact, many of the gerim known as Subbotniks themselves became gerim Anusimbecause of that).
Don't expect me to read or respond to your posts in the future. I keep letting you get to me, and to do so is a mistake on my part.
[Updated exchange. By the way, Wigry is not even in the same parish.] Thank you for proving my point, Magdalena.]
Nicki, when I put that phrase above (in its entirety) I get the following:
"I think that so even sure these are not Catholics but only so much I found"
Can you translate that for me? It makes no sense whatsoever to me. I wouldn't trust Google Translate as far as I could throw it. Especially if it has any colloquial Polish in it.
Actually, if the certificate is anything to go by, they got married at Wigry (not such a very out-of-the-way place at all):
http://wigry.diecezja.elk.pl/obszar-parafii.html
(area of the Parish - Maćkowa Ruda is included)
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?client=tmpg&de pth=1&hl=en&langpair=pl|en&rurl=translate.google.com&u=http://www .wigry.pro/&usg=ALkJrhgQ08ejbeBelHdDJXgO9ul7ih3UjQ
The problem is that your cousin didn't use any punctuation marks etc., correctly it should look like: "Myślę, że tak, a nawet na pewno to są katolicy, no ale tylko tyle znalazłem". Your cousin (male as I can see) was probably writing too hastily - or was it a quick message on the phone? Classic, sadly too many Polish people don't use punctuation nor Polish characters when writing quickly. Don't trust google translate too much, as Polish is gramatically a very complex language and google just can't translate correctly either from or to Polish (especially long sentences, short or one-word phrases are usually correct).
An experiment for you: translate there this very simple sentence: "Byłam tam z dwiema paniami". [Byłam is a female form of "być"="to be" in a past tense and that sentence means "I was there with two ladies" - where "I" is a woman.] Now copy the result and try to translate that sentence back to Polish. What did you get? Does it look the same as original?
I already saw that google translate has problems with the word "no" in Polish, which is actually untranslatable - it's an informal [common language] pause-word that is often used to emphasize the word/phrase that follows it. The most simple examples: we say "no tak" when we agree with something = we emphasize "tak" (english: yes), we scream "no nie!" in anger or sadness to emphasize "nie" (english: no) when we e.g. see something wrong. We also often keep saying "no... no... no..." when listening to someone and want him/her to continue (it often happens during phone conversations - to make the caller sure we're listening and keeping up with the story).
So, your cousin, male, wrote: "I think that yes, even certainly they are Catholics, but that's all I found" - "no" was to emphasize the fact that it was all he found.
The priest in the certificate - "ksiądz" or "ks." in short - is certainly Christian. If that was a rabbi, a word "rabin" would be used.
I don't want to interfere in this topic too much, but those particular language details are very obvious and simple. Nickidewbear - if you don't have the trust in yourself for the answers you got, why don't you start learning Polish yourself?
An experiment for you: translate there this very simple sentence: "Byłam tam z dwiema paniami". [Byłam is a female form of "być"="to be" in a past tense and that sentence means "I was there with two ladies" - where "I" is a woman.] Now copy the result and try to translate that sentence back to Polish. What did you get? Does it look the same as original?
I already saw that google translate has problems with the word "no" in Polish, which is actually untranslatable - it's an informal [common language] pause-word that is often used to emphasize the word/phrase that follows it. The most simple examples: we say "no tak" when we agree with something = we emphasize "tak" (english: yes), we scream "no nie!" in anger or sadness to emphasize "nie" (english: no) when we e.g. see something wrong. We also often keep saying "no... no... no..." when listening to someone and want him/her to continue (it often happens during phone conversations - to make the caller sure we're listening and keeping up with the story).
So, your cousin, male, wrote: "I think that yes, even certainly they are Catholics, but that's all I found" - "no" was to emphasize the fact that it was all he found.
The priest in the certificate - "ksiądz" or "ks." in short - is certainly Christian. If that was a rabbi, a word "rabin" would be used.
I don't want to interfere in this topic too much, but those particular language details are very obvious and simple. Nickidewbear - if you don't have the trust in yourself for the answers you got, why don't you start learning Polish yourself?
I just wanted to make sure, and I already apologized for what I needed to apologize. I also already said that I accept the certificate. How when I bring up evidence is ignored, but I'm cherrypicked. How convenient.
Then how come you conveniently ignored that I already apologized, for example? I was very explicit in saying that "I apologize for any point at which I got contentious and went over the line in the way that I raised my question, and I am grateful for the translation." Also, I am cherrypicked. That's very obvious, and I didn't mean by you at all up until this point. I meant by people like Harry. Also, I kept bringing up the Andruleviches, etc., and that was conveniently ignored.
Also, I have nothing to hide about my family, etc., regardless of that my family did. As the exchange below will show, my great-great-granddad's parents clearly went out of their way to hide from their ro'eh that they married Roman Catholicly. They went nine hours and 34 minutes away to marry.
No wonder, then, that they would be angry when their son and in-law daughter became Anusim during the pogroms—to them, that their son and in-law daughter would become Anusim after they returned to Judaism and had married Roman Catholicly only to secure their freedom was a slap in the face in their minds. They must've been thinking, "Did you not learn from our mistake? You have committed a chillul HaShem! You have made your lives more important than your nefashot."
Besides, there had already been the January Uprising, and Poles couldn't own land. So, why did Antoni and Katarzyna own a farm in Lipsk? Besides, Julian Danilowicz fled conscription. Poles may have been unlucky, but Jews were worse off:
"Unlike enlightened Jews in the Polish Congress Kingdom who argued for Jewish personal army service to prove their patriotism and eventually to bring them full emancipation, Jewish communal elders throughout the Pale of Settlement had well-grounded doubts about the good will of the Russian authorities. Before the publication of the statute, Jews realized that conscription jeopardized the traditional status of their community. Accordingly, Jews flocked to such tsadikim as Avraham Yehoshu‘a Heshel (d. 1825), seeking intercession with the Almighty. Supported by Hasidic tsadikim and wealthy Jews, they raised funds to bribe state officials, vainly struggling to prevent the law on Jewish conscription from being implemented."
Also, there were "Jew hunts", not Catholic hunts. So, Julian Danilowicz and Julian and Alexandria Czernecki took the course of converting to Roman Catholicism and living as Anusim in the United States.
By the way, as I type, the exchange is getting worse. I meant "out of the way of Lipsk and Krasne". Maybe I don't apologize to Magdalena after all. Furthermore, there are no random events or coincidences in life (co[inciding]-incidences? Sure. Coincidences? No.)—I just wanted to note that in case anyone else wants to pull the "How do you know that you're related to those Andruleviches?" card, for example.
Nickidewbear:
And how do I know? She's not one of these people that I can exactly trust.I am also telling you that the sentence was translated correctly. But you obviously don't want to take my word for that either.
As for whether you can trust Magdalena, I notice you accepted without question her translation of the marriage certificate, so why would you doubt her translation of that sentence? Because it doesn't fit in with what you thought it meant? Magdalena is also a professional translator,so why would she put her reputation on the line giving you an inaccurate translation that anyone with any knowledge of Polish could pick up on as being wrong? I think you are doing her an injustice here.
Nickidewbear:
Nickidewbear:Then why do I get so many hits saying that is reliable for the basic gist?I use it for translation of a few words here and there.
When it comes to sentences, in my opinion it's more often wrong than right.
Your opinion seems to contradict with the evidence, though; and then I get the rapsheet when I bring up evidence that points to something? I'm sorry for you that I'm not the mold-fitting Jew; and if something seems questionable and agenda pushed, I'm going to bring it up.
I am not interested in what other users of Google Translate think Nicki. I am telling you that on the many occasions that I have used it in the past, it was inaccurate and unreliable which is why I rarely use it these days. Presuming that you don't speak another language and haven't had occasion to use Google Translate that often, you wouldn't understand that it doesn't translate everything verbatim.
I don't have any axe to grind with you Nicki. Whether you are Jewish or not doesn't actually interest me.
I spoke up only because Magdalena's translation is correct, and from initially thanking her for her translation of the marriage certificate, you are now condemning someone who tried to help you as a liar.
I don't think that's very fair.
Nickidewbear:
I just had a legitimate question: "Why would they fall out with their son if they were Catholic, since he and his wife converted to Catholicism? Also, they didn't fall out until after Great-Granddad was born. Furthermore, why would he have to lie so much on his naturalization, etc. documents?"Both of those questions were answered above (i.e. there are millions of reasons), you just didn't like the answers, especially given that your preferred answer is directly contradicted by this marriage certificate.
Nickidewbear:
To be honest, I think that someone is mistaken or lying: either Google Translate is or Magdalena is, or Maciej found a document with the same names that Great-Great-Granddad gave but with people who different people.No, Magda is most certainly not lying to you. Google translate very often produces incorrect translations. It is possible that this document does refer to other people but it's more likely that it does refer to the people you think it refers to. Most probably it is you who is mistaken.
Nickidewbear:
Also, that they married Catholic doesn't preclude them from being Jewish if they are the right people.You mean that they were so well connected that even though they were Jews they could get married as Catholics but they were not so well connected that they could get a rabbi to come to their tiny village? Interesting interpretation of the facts.
Nickidewbear:
Why would they not mention if the parents were Catholic, too?Same reason the document didn't mention that they were humans: because it was so obvious!
Nickidewbear:
She, Harry, and Jon have had problems with that my family history doesn't fit the mold for how a Jew's history normally fits.Nickie, I really do not give a cr@p how your family history fits with anything. I don't believe that there is a 'normal' history for any Jew; please stop lying about me.
Nickidewbear:
she could be lying to me in order to affect me to think something different, since she is fluent in Polish and I have no clue what is being said. So, she could be trying to dupe me.She tried to help you and because you didn't like what the document says you accuse her of lying to you. I hope you don't expect any help from anybody else with translations in the future.
Nickidewbear:
If he was born Catholic, why did he marry a Jew?Maybe he loved her? Maybe they got drunk and he knocked her up? Maybe she had a ton of cash and he wanted to get his hands on it? Maybe he had a fetish for Jews? Maybe his father was a virulent anti-semite and he wanted to really annoy his father because he hated his father? There are lots of possible reasons, including one which seems to have completely eluded you: maybe his bride was not a Jew?
Nickidewbear:
Also, why did he fall out with his parents for converting?You only know that he fell out with his parents, not why he fell out with them. Given that they were married as Catholics, it's rather unlikely that they would have objected to him being a Catholic.
Nickidewbear:
Why did his son and grandson marry Jews?See above. There are lots of possible reasons, including one which seems to have completely eluded you: maybe their brides were not Jews?
Nickidewbear:
By the way, a Jewish Danilovich named Anton (as if Jews can't have Polish names):You keep quoting these JewishGen records... and I agree, these people have some similar surnames to the ones in your family, and they did exist. There is only one problem here: how do you prove that they were related to you in any way? Simply having the same surname and living in roughly the same area is not much proof one way or the other. My paternal grandparents had the same surname as a very wealthy szlachta family living in their area, but they were not related to them at all - they were their freed serfs (this is just an example, I am not trying to imply anything about who your ancestors were by this).
As you know, Jews were made to start using surnames around the start of the 19th century, and many of them took the surnames that were popular in the general populace surrounding them. This is another reason not to trust in surname alone. You could be looking for Polish ancestors with a name like Złotopolski and find out you are Jewish, as well as think you might be Jewish and come across gentiles. As you said, it's not cut and dried at all.
This is why you need to look for further, more detailed info than that, is all I'm saying. I will repeat myself once again: the marriage certificate is not proof of your Jewish origin and I think you are starting to read too much into it, like "could 'priest' actually mean 'rabbi'" etc. If it were a rabbi marrying them, don't you think he would have written the certificate in Yiddish and kept the records in the Synagogue or some such place?
Another important clue: the certificate I translated clearly states that all of the participants were illiterate. As far as I know, all Jewish boys were taught to read and write? Wouldn't at least one of them be able to sign the certificate? "Illiterate" and "Polish-speaking" screams Catholic peasants to me.
For all I know, you might be Jewish, and I frankly couldn't care less one way or the other; but this particular document does nothing to prove that. I would be looking for late baptisms, intermarriages, typically Jewish first names in your family's records (not any and all Jewish records that fit the general area though).
pam:
Nickidewbear:And how do I know? She's not one of these people that I can exactly trust.
I am also telling you that the sentence was translated correctly. But you obviously don't want to take my word for that either.
As for whether you can trust Magdalena, I notice you accepted without question her translation of the marriage certificate, so why would you doubt her translation of that sentence? Because it doesn't fit in with what you thought it meant? Magdalena is also a professional translator,so why would she put her reputation on the line giving you an inaccurate translation that anyone with any knowledge of Polish could pick up on as being wrong? I think you are doing her an injustice here.
I told you why. Also, I did question the translation of the certificate by raising a question after that. I said, "I have a question, though." So, I did see something which I believed suspect
Nickidewbear:Nickidewbear:Then why do I get so many hits saying that is reliable for the basic gist?
I use it for translation of a few words here and there.
When it comes to sentences, in my opinion it's more often wrong than right.
Your opinion seems to contradict with the evidence, though; and then I get the rapsheet when I bring up evidence that points to something? I'm sorry for you that I'm not the mold-fitting Jew; and if something seems questionable and agenda pushed, I'm going to bring it up.
I am not interested in what other users of Google Translate think Nicki. I am telling you that on the many occasions that I have used it in the past, it was inaccurate and unreliable which is why I rarely use it these days. Presuming that you don't speak another language and haven't had occasion to use Google Translate that often, you wouldn't understand that it doesn't translate everything verbatim.
I don't have any axe to grind with you Nicki. Whether you are Jewish or not doesn't actually interest me.
I spoke up only because Magdalena's translation is correct, and from initially thanking her for her translation of the marriage certificate, you are now condemning someone who tried to help you as a liar.
I don't think that's very fair.
I use it for translation of a few words here and there.
When it comes to sentences, in my opinion it's more often wrong than right.
Your opinion seems to contradict with the evidence, though; and then I get the rapsheet when I bring up evidence that points to something? I'm sorry for you that I'm not the mold-fitting Jew; and if something seems questionable and agenda pushed, I'm going to bring it up.
I am not interested in what other users of Google Translate think Nicki. I am telling you that on the many occasions that I have used it in the past, it was inaccurate and unreliable which is why I rarely use it these days. Presuming that you don't speak another language and haven't had occasion to use Google Translate that often, you wouldn't understand that it doesn't translate everything verbatim.
I don't have any axe to grind with you Nicki. Whether you are Jewish or not doesn't actually interest me.
I spoke up only because Magdalena's translation is correct, and from initially thanking her for her translation of the marriage certificate, you are now condemning someone who tried to help you as a liar.
I don't think that's very fair.
I even said for the basic gist. I understand that it doesn't translate everything verbatim. I've even had to submit corrections. What I resent, too, is the implication that I'm stupid about it. "Presuming that you don't speak another language and haven't had occasion to use Google Translate that often, you wouldn't understand that it doesn't translate everything verbatim."
Magdalena:
You keep quoting these JewishGen records... and I agree, these people have some similar surnames to the ones in your family, and they did exist. There is only one problem here: how do you prove that they were related to you in any way? Simply having the same surname and living in roughly the same area is not much proof one way or the other. My paternal grandparents had the same surname as a very wealthy szlachta family living in their area, but they were not related to them at all - they were their freed serfs (this is just an example, I am not trying to imply anything about who your ancestors were by this).As you know, Jews were made to start using surnames around the start of the 19th century, and many of them took the surnames that were popular in the general populace surrounding them. This is another reason not to trust in surname alone. You could be looking for Polish ancestors with a name like Złotopolski and find out you are Jewish, as well as think you might be Jewish and come across gentiles. As you said, it's not cut and dried at all.
This is why you need to look for further, more detailed info than that, is all I'm saying. I will repeat myself once again: the marriage certificate is not proof of your Jewish origin and I think you are starting to read too much into it, like "could 'priest' actually mean 'rabbi'" etc. If it were a rabbi marrying them, don't you think he would have written the certificate in Yiddish and kept the records in the Synagogue or some such place?
Another important clue: the certificate I translated clearly states that all of the participants were illiterate. As far as I know, all Jewish boys were taught to read and write? Wouldn't at least one of them be able to sign the certificate? "Illiterate" and "Polish-speaking" screams Catholic peasants to me.
For all I know, you might be Jewish, and I frankly couldn't care less one way or the other; but this particular document does nothing to prove that. I would be looking for late baptisms, intermarriages, typically Jewish first names in your family's records (not any and all Jewish records that fit the general area though).
All I'm saying is that they may have been considered "illiterate" because they were not literate in Polish. Many Jews did not speak what they considered treif or goyische leshonot. Also, we don't have a family tree that traces beyond the 1700s. When they went to Lipsk, they may have remarried as "ba'alim teshuvah" who were "ba'alim b'lashon hakodesh. I just wanted to make sure that I am getting an honest translation because of what has happened in the past and what you are saying here.
Please understand that I am not ungrateful, and that I just don't take everything at face value. I apologize for any point at which I got contentious and went over the line in the way that I raised my question, and I am grateful for the translation.
PS As for Harry:
Harry:
Maybe he loved her? Maybe they got drunk and he knocked her up? Maybe she had a ton of cash and he wanted to get his hands on it? Maybe he had a fetish for Jews? Maybe his father was a virulent anti-semite and he wanted to really annoy his father because he hated his father? There are lots of possible reasons, including one which seems to have completely eluded you: maybe his bride was not a Jew?When you, Harry, make statements like that, you shatter your credibility altogether. There is no evidence of any of that, including the "fetish" statement. Also, she was a Jew from Stakliskes who had Anusi family.
Nickidewbear:
I told you why.Saying that Magda is lying isn't going to make your ancestors Jewish. The only thing it's going to do is decrease the chances that anybody will help you with translations in the future.
Nickidewbear:
Also, I did question the translation of the certificate by raising a question after that. I said, "I have a question, though."Your question has now been repeatedly answered. Unfortunately the documentary evidence does not fit your hypothesis; that means you need to re-assess your hypothesis, not claim that the translator is lying.
Nickidewbear:
I even said for the basic gist. I understand that it doesn't translate everything verbatim.Run what your cousin said through google translate: "Mysle ze tak a nawet napewno to sa katolicy" http://translate.google.pl/#pl/en/Mysle%20ze%20tak%20a%20nawet%20 napewno%20to%20sa%20katolicy "I think that so even sure these are Catholics"
Nickidewbear:
There is no evidence of any of that, including the "fetish" statement.There is exactly as much evidence that they married for love as there is that they did shidduch, i.e. absolutely none. However, there is documentation which strongly suggests that they did not did shidduch, i.e. their marriage certificate.
Nickidewbear:
Also, she was a Jew from Stakliskes who had Anusi family.Let me guess, the 'evidence that she was a Jew is that she married somebody you claim was a Jew and the 'evidence' that he was a Jew is that he married somebody you claim was a Jew, right?
Harry:
Nickidewbear:I told you why.Saying that Magda is lying isn't going to make your ancestors Jewish. The only thing it's going to do is decrease the chances that anybody will help you with translations in the future.
I already apologized, and you look like a fool for rehashing it.
Nickidewbear:Also, I did question the translation of the certificate by raising a question after that. I said, "I have a question, though."
Your question has now been repeatedly answered. Unfortunately the documentary evidence does not fit your hypothesis; that means you need to re-assess your hypothesis, not claim that the translator is lying.
Your question has now been repeatedly answered. Unfortunately the documentary evidence does not fit your hypothesis; that means you need to re-assess your hypothesis, not claim that the translator is lying.
Actually, it does. I'd hate to be you right now because you're ignoring how far Maćkowa Ruda is from Lipsk and Krasne . If a condition for their freedom was to marry Catholic for their freedom, they were going to do it in an out-of-the-way town where the "rabbi"s would never be the wiser.
Nickidewbear:I even said for the basic gist. I understand that it doesn't translate everything verbatim.
Run what your cousin said through google translate: "Mysle ze tak a nawet napewno to sa katolicy" http://translate.google.pl/#pl/en/Mysle%20ze%20tak%20a%20nawet%20 napewno%20to%20sa%20katolicy "I think that so even sure these are Catholics"
Run what your cousin said through google translate: "Mysle ze tak a nawet napewno to sa katolicy" http://translate.google.pl/#pl/en/Mysle%20ze%20tak%20a%20nawet%20 napewno%20to%20sa%20katolicy "I think that so even sure these are Catholics"
It said, ""Mysle ze tak a nawet napewno to sa katolicy no ale tylko tyle znalazlem:)"." Nice try, though.
Nickidewbear:There is no evidence of any of that, including the "fetish" statement.
There is exactly as much evidence that they married for love as there is that they did shidduch, i.e. absolutely none. However, there is documentation which strongly suggests that they did not did shidduch, i.e. their marriage certificate.
There is exactly as much evidence that they married for love as there is that they did shidduch, i.e. absolutely none. However, there is documentation which strongly suggests that they did not did shidduch, i.e. their marriage certificate.
Actually, the documentation does suggest shidduch. Nice try, though.
Nickidewbear: Also, she was a Jew from Stakliskes who had Anusi family.
Let me guess, the 'evidence that she was a Jew is that she married somebody you claim was a Jew and the 'evidence' that he was a Jew is that he married somebody you claim was a Jew, right?
Let me guess, the 'evidence that she was a Jew is that she married somebody you claim was a Jew and the 'evidence' that he was a Jew is that he married somebody you claim was a Jew, right?
You clearly didn't pay attention, did you? This is why I ignore you. You cherrypick evidence for your convenience and then ignore evidence that I bring up, and then tell me that I'm cherrypicking. I'm going to tell you again, whether or not you give a darn, that she had Jewish cousins named Nik and Vil'gel'm, that her cousin Rochla was listed as "Hebrew", that her cousin Shmuil Morgovich died in Stakliskes and that (thus) her birthdate of June 26, 1882 actually checks out, that Jews did not intermarry in those days unless they wanted severe reprecussions, and that people converted "up" and not "down" in those days unless they wanted severe reprecussions (and, in fact, many of the gerim known as Subbotniks themselves became gerim Anusimbecause of that).
Don't expect me to read or respond to your posts in the future. I keep letting you get to me, and to do so is a mistake on my part.
[Updated exchange. By the way, Wigry is not even in the same parish.] Thank you for proving my point, Magdalena.]
Nickidewbear:
It said, ""Mysle ze tak a nawet napewno to sa katolicy no ale tylko tyle znalazlem:)"." Nice try, though.Nicki, when I put that phrase above (in its entirety) I get the following:
"I think that so even sure these are not Catholics but only so much I found"
Can you translate that for me? It makes no sense whatsoever to me. I wouldn't trust Google Translate as far as I could throw it. Especially if it has any colloquial Polish in it.
Nickidewbear:
Actually, it does. I'd hate to be you right now because you're ignoring how far Maćkowa Ruda is from Lipsk and Krasne . If a condition for their freedom was to marry Catholic for their freedom, they were going to do it in an out-of-the-way town where the "rabbi"s would never be the wiser.Actually, if the certificate is anything to go by, they got married at Wigry (not such a very out-of-the-way place at all):
http://wigry.diecezja.elk.pl/obszar-parafii.html
(area of the Parish - Maćkowa Ruda is included)
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?client=tmpg&de pth=1&hl=en&langpair=pl|en&rurl=translate.google.com&u=http://www .wigry.pro/&usg=ALkJrhgQ08ejbeBelHdDJXgO9ul7ih3UjQ
The problem is that your cousin didn't use any punctuation marks etc., correctly it should look like: "Myślę, że tak, a nawet na pewno to są katolicy, no ale tylko tyle znalazłem". Your cousin (male as I can see) was probably writing too hastily - or was it a quick message on the phone? Classic, sadly too many Polish people don't use punctuation nor Polish characters when writing quickly. Don't trust google translate too much, as Polish is gramatically a very complex language and google just can't translate correctly either from or to Polish (especially long sentences, short or one-word phrases are usually correct).
An experiment for you: translate there this very simple sentence: "Byłam tam z dwiema paniami". [Byłam is a female form of "być"="to be" in a past tense and that sentence means "I was there with two ladies" - where "I" is a woman.] Now copy the result and try to translate that sentence back to Polish. What did you get? Does it look the same as original?
I already saw that google translate has problems with the word "no" in Polish, which is actually untranslatable - it's an informal [common language] pause-word that is often used to emphasize the word/phrase that follows it. The most simple examples: we say "no tak" when we agree with something = we emphasize "tak" (english: yes), we scream "no nie!" in anger or sadness to emphasize "nie" (english: no) when we e.g. see something wrong. We also often keep saying "no... no... no..." when listening to someone and want him/her to continue (it often happens during phone conversations - to make the caller sure we're listening and keeping up with the story).
So, your cousin, male, wrote: "I think that yes, even certainly they are Catholics, but that's all I found" - "no" was to emphasize the fact that it was all he found.
The priest in the certificate - "ksiądz" or "ks." in short - is certainly Christian. If that was a rabbi, a word "rabin" would be used.
I don't want to interfere in this topic too much, but those particular language details are very obvious and simple. Nickidewbear - if you don't have the trust in yourself for the answers you got, why don't you start learning Polish yourself?
lunacy:
The problem is that your cousin didn't use any punctuation marks etc., correctly it should look like: "Myślę, że tak, a nawet na pewno to są katolicy, no ale tylko tyle znalazłem". Your cousin (male as I can see) was probably writing too hastily - or was it a quick message on the phone? Classic, sadly too many Polish people don't use punctuation nor Polish characters when writing quickly. Don't trust google translate too much, as Polish is gramatically a very complex language and google just can't translate correctly either from or to Polish (especially long sentences, short or one-word phrases are usually correct).An experiment for you: translate there this very simple sentence: "Byłam tam z dwiema paniami". [Byłam is a female form of "być"="to be" in a past tense and that sentence means "I was there with two ladies" - where "I" is a woman.] Now copy the result and try to translate that sentence back to Polish. What did you get? Does it look the same as original?
I already saw that google translate has problems with the word "no" in Polish, which is actually untranslatable - it's an informal [common language] pause-word that is often used to emphasize the word/phrase that follows it. The most simple examples: we say "no tak" when we agree with something = we emphasize "tak" (english: yes), we scream "no nie!" in anger or sadness to emphasize "nie" (english: no) when we e.g. see something wrong. We also often keep saying "no... no... no..." when listening to someone and want him/her to continue (it often happens during phone conversations - to make the caller sure we're listening and keeping up with the story).
So, your cousin, male, wrote: "I think that yes, even certainly they are Catholics, but that's all I found" - "no" was to emphasize the fact that it was all he found.
The priest in the certificate - "ksiądz" or "ks." in short - is certainly Christian. If that was a rabbi, a word "rabin" would be used.
I don't want to interfere in this topic too much, but those particular language details are very obvious and simple. Nickidewbear - if you don't have the trust in yourself for the answers you got, why don't you start learning Polish yourself?
I just wanted to make sure, and I already apologized for what I needed to apologize. I also already said that I accept the certificate. How when I bring up evidence is ignored, but I'm cherrypicked. How convenient.
lunacy:
Wow. You're not cherrypicked by anyone. I just wanted to help and explain the Polish "no", because the sentence written by your cousin caused such a buzz and ShawnH asked for translation.Then how come you conveniently ignored that I already apologized, for example? I was very explicit in saying that "I apologize for any point at which I got contentious and went over the line in the way that I raised my question, and I am grateful for the translation." Also, I am cherrypicked. That's very obvious, and I didn't mean by you at all up until this point. I meant by people like Harry. Also, I kept bringing up the Andruleviches, etc., and that was conveniently ignored.
