On 19/01/2010 12:28, Jeremy Double wrote:
Peter Beale wrote:

Surely Hannover/Hanover is not a misspelling, but simply the English
version - cf Wien/Vienna and countless others. Admittedly nowadays in
many cases the "native" version is normally used - Brits used to refer
to Coblence, Mayence, Brunswick, Frankfort and the like.

Also, the German spelling of place names has changed over the years: for
instance 19th century signs often use C instead of K. I saw an old sign
referring to Cöln (not Köln) recently, and Coblenz was the usual German
spelling of Koblenz until the 1920s.

And in most cases the soft C in German has changed to Z: now "Zentrum",
formerly "Centrum".

Well-known cities often have different placenames in different
languages: Venezia-Venedig-Venise-Venecia-Veneza-Venetië-Venice for
instance.

And there are the somewhat unpredictable rules about what is
"acceptable" to use. Any Briton who says "Madras" or "Calcutta" is
considered personally responsible for Amritsar, the Irish potato famine
and slavery, yet no-one gives a hoot about "Londres".

A Briton who says "Peking" may as well just set up a direct debit to the
BNP, yet many Continetals seem to use it as standard. Giving up on
trying to say "Gdansk" is morally no different to issuing the orders to
/Schleswig-Holstein/, yet Poles happily say "Breslau" when they
realise we struggle to say Wroclaw.

Meanwhile Czechs will happily and probably needlessly use an Anglicised
version (of the German version?) of names, while Danes will use English
versions we don't use ourselves.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:00:51 +0000, Arthur Figgis
wrote:

And there are the somewhat unpredictable rules about what is
"acceptable" to use. Any Briton who says "Madras" or "Calcutta" is
considered personally responsible for Amritsar, the Irish potato famine
and slavery, yet no-one gives a hoot about "Londres".

And then there's "Bayern Munich", which has never made *any* sense to
me, as it's only half an Anglicisation.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:00:02 GMT, (Neil
Williams) wrote:

And then there's "Bayern Munich", which has never made *any* sense to
me, as it's only half an Anglicisation.


That's probably because British people (mostly football fans) couldn't
work out what Bayern meant, whereas they nearly all knew that München
(or Muenchen) was Munich. So they translated the familiar word and
left the unfamiliar one alone.

Plus, "Bavarian Munich" doesn't scan. ;-)

Back in the glory days of the Liverpool FC's European Cup exploits,
Liverpool fans had a particular favourite in Borussia Mönchengladbach.
The Scouse accent is perfect for pronouncing this - there was no need
for any translation into English. ;-)

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:21:34 +0000, Bruce
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:00:02 GMT, (Neil
Williams) wrote:

And then there's "Bayern Munich", which has never made *any* sense to
me, as it's only half an Anglicisation.

Possibly because too many people knew what and where Munchen/Munich
was but not enough knew what "Bayern" was ?

That's probably because British people (mostly football fans) couldn't
work out what Bayern meant, whereas they nearly all knew that München
(or Muenchen) was Munich. So they translated the familiar word and
left the unfamiliar one alone.

Plus, "Bavarian Munich" doesn't scan. ;-)

Back in the glory days of the Liverpool FC's European Cup exploits,
Liverpool fans had a particular favourite in Borussia Mönchengladbach.
The Scouse accent is perfect for pronouncing this - there was no need
for any translation into English. ;-)

On 19/01/2010 18:57, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:59:18 +0000, Peter
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:

In other cases there was an established spelling but as applies in
this someone came along later and recorded/copied it incorrectly.
Rum/Rhum
Hannover/Hanover
Hazelton/Hazleton (Pennsylvania - allegedly misspelled in the
incorporation documents in 1857 and "it's too late to change it now")

Surely Hannover/Hanover is not a misspelling, but simply the English
version - cf Wien/Vienna and countless others.

IOW a stranger getting it wrong.

Was there such a thing as "right" at the time? And anyway, isn't it
potentially racist to suggest that a stranger's opinion is less valid
than a local opinion?

Admittedly nowadays in
many cases the "native" version is normally used - Brits used to refer
to Coblence, Mayence, Brunswick, Frankfort and the like.

With increased foreign travel or transport of goods it decreases the
chance of confusion caused by several versions of the same placename
cropping up from different directions. In some cases the reversion to
original is almost total; apart from Stornoway and the island names my
road atlas only has Gaelic placenames in Lewis/Harris.

And in other cases new "old" names are thought up to avenge some
mythical injustice or re-write an inconvenient bit of history.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message
...
On 19/01/2010 18:57, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:59:18 +0000, Peter
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:

In other cases there was an established spelling but as applies in
this someone came along later and recorded/copied it incorrectly.
Rum/Rhum
Hannover/Hanover
Hazelton/Hazleton (Pennsylvania - allegedly misspelled in the
incorporation documents in 1857 and "it's too late to change it now")

Surely Hannover/Hanover is not a misspelling, but simply the English
version - cf Wien/Vienna and countless others.

IOW a stranger getting it wrong.

Was there such a thing as "right" at the time? And anyway, isn't it
potentially racist to suggest that a stranger's opinion is less valid than
a local opinion?

Admittedly nowadays in
many cases the "native" version is normally used - Brits used to refer
to Coblence, Mayence, Brunswick, Frankfort and the like.

With increased foreign travel or transport of goods it decreases the
chance of confusion caused by several versions of the same placename
cropping up from different directions. In some cases the reversion to
original is almost total; apart from Stornoway and the island names my
road atlas only has Gaelic placenames in Lewis/Harris.

And in other cases new "old" names are thought up to avenge some mythical
injustice or re-write an inconvenient bit of history.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

I'm with you on that, mate. In our case, supposedly Aboriginal names are
used in place of "British" names. It's not convenient to be reminded that
the British took posession of Australia by force and by unintended
biological warfare. The indigenous peoples (who were never united) were
defeated in almost all battles, and certainly lost possession.

But the bleeding hearts within have proven an unassailable 5th column. The
result, money being thrown at useless projects and welfare payments hand
over fist. If we'd recognised possession rather than tried to exercise the
legal fiction of "terra nullis", perhaps more meaningful proogrammes could
have been developed during the otherwise idealistic period (the 1970s) - and
we wouldn't have the pandering to "sensitivities" that we have leading to an
insistence on "indigenous" names.


DW downunder

Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 19/01/2010 18:57, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:59:18 +0000, Peter
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:

In other cases there was an established spelling but as applies in
this someone came along later and recorded/copied it incorrectly.
Rum/Rhum
Hannover/Hanover
Hazelton/Hazleton (Pennsylvania - allegedly misspelled in the
incorporation documents in 1857 and "it's too late to change it now")

Surely Hannover/Hanover is not a misspelling, but simply the English
version - cf Wien/Vienna and countless others.

IOW a stranger getting it wrong.

Was there such a thing as "right" at the time? And anyway, isn't it
potentially racist to suggest that a stranger's opinion is less valid
than a local opinion?

No-one's suggesting it is less valid - just that in another language it
may be rendered differently. Or do you always refer to Bangkok as Krung
Thep Mahanakhon? There's nothing potentially racist in the French
speaking of Êdimbourg or Pêkin - or the British speaking of Peking or
Bombay!

Peter Beale

Peter Beale wrote:

Êdimbourg or Pêkin

Sorry - Édimbourg or Pékin - I need to retype my list of ALT + numbers
in a larger font, the eyes aren't as good as they were! And yes, I do
know that accents are not essential on capitals.

Peter Beale

On 20 Jan, 10:35, Peter Beale wrote:
Peter Beale wrote:

* Êdimbourg or Pêkin

Sorry - Édimbourg or Pékin - I need to retype my list of ALT + numbers
in a larger font, the eyes aren't as good as they were! And yes, I do
know that accents are not essential on capitals.

Peter Beale

Why insert a letter m for the French? That's more likely to appear in
English pronunciation. In French, the sound before the b is a nasal
vowel, with the lips not closing till the b.

Peter Beale wrote:

There's nothing potentially racist in ... the British speaking of ... Bombay!

Racism isn't the issue. It's colonialism.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9683757.html
(142 095 at Harrogate, 29 May 1999)