|
 |
Renaming the cities of other countries... | ||
Tags: Names | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| QiuJP Triglot Senior Member Singapore Joined 5863 days ago 428 posts - 597 votes  Speaks: Mandarin*, EnglishC2, French Studies: Czech, GermanB1, Russian, Japanese | Message 41 of 192 17 November 2009 at 8:08am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Speaking of Georgia reminds me of a funny incident last year (during the Russia- Georgia war). I have a friend who has studied in the US and he knows the geography of the US very well. On 8th August 2008 ( the same day when the Bejing Olympics starts), I started talking about Russia is now having a war in Georgia with him. He was very shocked and said that World War 3 had began and there woulb be a nuclear war! I asked him why is it so serious. He replied that the Russian are already in Georgia, USA! I claimed him down by showing him a map of the Caucacus and pointed out the real area of conflict. We have a good laugh....... I wonder how many places have the same names but on diffeent side of the globe? 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Levi Pentaglot Senior Member United States Joined 5575 days ago 2268 posts - 3328 votes Speaks: English*, French, Esperanto, German, Spanish Studies: Russian, Dutch, Portuguese, Mandarin, Japanese, Italian | Message 42 of 192 17 November 2009 at 8:39am | IP Logged | ||||||||
The Galicia in western Europe is in Iberia. The Galicia in eastern Europe is in Poland and Ukraine, far from the eastern European Iberia, which incidentally is in Georgia. I can visit Rome, Syracuse, Geneva, Dunkirk, Madrid, Amsterdam, Greenwich, Cambridge, Belfast, Warsaw, Delhi, Bombay, Medina, Mexico and Cuba without leaving my home state of New York. I can even visit ancient lands like Phoenicia and Carthage. :) Also, your post reminded me of a really funny video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13RhSc-DaOI Edited by Levi on 17 November 2009 at 9:00am 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| tritone Senior Member United States reflectionsinpo Joined 6128 days ago 246 posts - 385 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Spanish, Portuguese, French | Message 43 of 192 17 November 2009 at 9:16am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Don't forget Jamaica. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6711 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 44 of 192 17 November 2009 at 10:50am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
... And Iveria was the old name of one half of the country Georgia.
When I speak Danish I generally try to use the correct local name, though adapted to Danish speech patterns. Of course I say Bangkok like everyone else because I can't remember the seven pages or so following Krungtep. If I mention Paris and only Paris then I pronounce the final -s, but I cringe because I know that it should be pronounced barI. And if I list a long list of French towns then I can use this as an excuse for saying 'barI'. However I stubbornly say Praha, Lisboa, Venezia, Roma and Hamburg instead of Prag, Lissabon, Venedig, Rom and Hamborg, and I honestly try to pronounce (and remember!) the native names for Greenlandic cities: Nuuk (and not Godthåb) etc. I write "Athen", but say /Athinæ/, and I write towns like Flórina and Kastoriá with accents because everybody here otherwise would put the stress on the second syllable in both words - myself included. Keeping the 'native' forms is a bit more difficult to do in English because the list of mangled Anglicized town names is longer then the corresponding Danish list: for instance all Italian towns except Roma and Venezia (and sometimes Napoli 'Neapel') are called by their correct Italian names in Danish, - though of course adapted to Danish pronunciation patterns (i.e. back tongue R instead of tongue flip R). But the English have the infamous 'Leghorn' for Livorno, plus Venice, Rome, Naples and other vile things. Plus 'Milan', which it is hard to condemn when a local soccer club down there call itself "AC Milan". The logic stops when it comes to country names: as other Danes I say 'Bulgarien', 'Frankrig' and 'Tyskland', following the almost obligatory rule in Danish that countries in Europe are called by their Danish nameforms. However with more exotic country names the rules are more relaxed, and I can allow myself to say 'Colombia' and 'Namibia'. But Brazil is "Brasilien", probably because it is used so often with reference to samba and soccer. Personally I would prefer the same rule for countries as with towns: use the local name, but adapt its pronunciation. But it would sound affected and stilted when everybody else use the mangled names. Edited by Iversen on 17 November 2009 at 2:53pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Gusutafu Senior Member Sweden Joined 5529 days ago 655 posts - 1039 votes Speaks: Swedish* | Message 45 of 192 17 November 2009 at 11:49am | IP Logged | ||||||||
...which of course isn't correct Danish. Why would you want to do this? Does it not make people see you as a show-off? When speaking Danish, why not say everything in Danish? And if you feel the need to inject a few foreign words here and there, why stop at place names? So why DO you cringe at saying Paris the way it is pronounced in Danish? If a Frenchman happens to be around, don't you think he'll consider what he calls Copenhagen before he gets mad? Or perhaps he'll realise that you aren't speaking French. Or perhaps he'll know some history, and figure that parI isn't the "correct" pronounciation either. In fact, given that "Paris" came by way of Latin, pronouncing the s would seem more reasonable. Edited by Gusutafu on 17 November 2009 at 12:51pm 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6711 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 46 of 192 17 November 2009 at 2:44pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Which of course isn't a correct description of the situation. The fact is that most city names in the world don't have a Danish form, some have one that isn't used by everyone (Venedig/Venezia or Hamborg/Hamburg), and only a small number have a foreign form that is universally used - such as Paris with a pronounced 's'. My position is that I prefer the original city names in all cases, except those where the Danish form is totally dominant. But I try to push the limit where ever I can, probably because two of my main interests are foreign languages and travel. Those foreign places aren't Danish property, and therefore the decent position would in my mind be to refer to them in something close to the original form. For instance I don't see any substantial difference between Paris and Strasbourg - both places I know fairly well. So if I say Strasbourg instead of Strasborg then the logical position must also be to pronounce Paris without the s - and it is only the weight of an accumulated inertia based on centuries of linguistic malpractice that keeps me from doing it. With countries the situation is different: here the inertia in Denmark is so totally overwhelming that it would be a provocation to say 'France' instead of Frankrig. You have to choose your battle grounds with care, and the rule in Danish is that country names generally ARE altered, while city names only are changed if geographically challenged persons centuries ago had heard about those cities, but didn't know how to pronounce them ..
I don't feel any need to "inject a few foreign words here and there". However I sometimes have to refer to places outside Denmark (most of the world is actually outside Denmark!) - even with the risk that somebody sees that as 'showing off'. This case is clearly separate from the more general question about loanwords. For instance I sit right now at a contraption that is spelled 'computer' and pronounced 'kompjutå' (å = open o-sound). Here it would be seen as 'downwards snobbery' to say 'komputter'. In other cases it would be 'upwards snobbery' to use the original form - especially if it is from another language than English. There are clearcut cases, but also a large greyzone where individual preferences can be relevant. Edited by Iversen on 17 November 2009 at 3:33pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
 Fasulye Heptaglot Winner TAC 2012 Moderator Germany fasulyespolyglotblog Joined 5855 days ago 5460 posts - 6006 votes 1 sounds Speaks: German*, DutchC1, EnglishB2, French, Italian, Spanish, Esperanto Studies: Latin, Danish, Norwegian, Turkish Personal Language Map | Message 47 of 192 17 November 2009 at 3:26pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
I also have a tendency to use the origninal city names when speaking German. For example I say "Nijmegen" instead of "Nimwegen", "Vilnius" instead of "Wilna", "Venezia" insted of "Venedig" and even "Opole" instead of "Oppeln". Some people in Germany criticize me for doing so, but I find this more authentic. Fasulye
1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Gusutafu Senior Member Sweden Joined 5529 days ago 655 posts - 1039 votes Speaks: Swedish* | Message 48 of 192 17 November 2009 at 3:32pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Well, that isn't really relevant, as you are not trying to actually RENAME the cities, you just REFER to them. A more pertinent observation is that the Danish language isn't the property of the city of Paris, so Danes can call Paris whatever pleases them. Also, if you have a French friend that owns a car, would you feel that you have to refer to that as a "voiture"? That car isn't Danish property either. Or let's take the Alps, they are French property. Can't you still call the snow on them "snow"? Whatever is the logic behind this, it isn't ownership. Also, don't forget that your forebears DID control Paris for a year or so, more than a millenium ago. I believe that the final "s" was still pronounced at that time.
As you know, insistence on "logic" when it comes to language usage will often get you wrong. You might as well say: Because I say "run - ran", I should also logically speaking say "shun - shan". But what reasoning do you call [Paris] "linguistic malpractice"? The name "Paris" isn't even originally French. The pronounciation you favour is probably less "correct" than the normal Danish one, archaeologically speaking. And since Danish doesn't even contain many of the sounds of French, it could never be correct Danish to use the French forms. And no matter the logic behind it, I am still very curious as to how people react to this. I would be surprised if they didn't find it pedantic and a very petty form of showing off. Edited by Gusutafu on 17 November 2009 at 3:41pm 4 persons have voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
