As you know, I don't heed blogger rule #11
, so for the time being, I quote a comment
I left over at Mar Gavriel's
davenen (or should that be davenin?
(Any reason you don't write that with a double v? (Though, of course, it depends if the word is taken to be Standard Yiddish or Litvish, for instance, on the one hand, or Galitzyaner Yiddish, for instance, on the other, because in the latter dialect group, vowel length is distinguished, of course, so that *dav(e)nen ['da:v(ə)nən] and davv(e)nen ['dav(ə)nən] would actually be pronounced differently. (Though I'm not sure one would have to write it in the forms that drop the first e [ə], as the preceding syllable is closed then, and in closed syllables, the difference might be rescinded.)))
Anyway, for your question - in English, I'd recommend to use the mere stammform, without any ending. At least, that's most commonly done this side of the pond, and I guess, sorry, I gather the same is true for colonial English. So, simply "to dav(v)en". (In this case, the e [ə] isn't dropped, and I still think double v is better.)
Nevertheless, the word is oren, or, as you'd spell it, ohren, in an English context without the ending, to ore or ohr.
Of course, OZ isn't Yekkish, and I hear that those Easterners, under the influence of that chasidist kishef, drink and licentiously sing and shout all the time ch"v, so what we know as a decent Synagoge or a Betlocal*, might well correspond to a Poilishe "davven inn".
* The orthography of Local changed to Lokal some 80 or so years ago in German, but at that time, the nice word Betlocal had fallen into disuse bevôneseimerabbem meanwhile.
1. Blog. Much. (back to text)