Following up to Boo
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Is Everest an Anglicisation of Chomalungma?
Well that's a fair point, but I still don't see what difference it makes what a
place is called on "foreign" maps (for whatever definition of foreign suits the
case ;-) ?
I don't know what all other countries do, do they use
Tibetan/Nepalese names for Everest, or Everest derivatives?
It seems to me a fair case that its rather disrespectful to
ignore an existing name and make a new one up, that's how I
interpret the PC point of view. Basically it smacks of "you're
only dusky foreigners, you're naming doesn't really count, we are
the first Europeans here, so *we* choose the name. I assume
that's why McKinley has gone back to Denali.
Quoted message said:It wouldn't bother me to hear that eg the Danes know places in the
UK by completely different names from us owing to their seafaring history. I
still don't understand why it's considered wrong to have a place named different
things in different languages any more than that they should have different
words in the first place ?
Its common to have Anglicised or whateverfied names for important
places, although it seems to be diminishing as the world becomes
a smaller place. (Makes sense if you cant pronounce the word).
Its more unusual to go along to someone elses country and name
things with a completely different name from the one they already
have. I expect the Danes etc named a lot of places in UK when
they were raping (when they probably didnt even ask the young
ladies name?) and pillaging, some stuck though, like Sutherland
and Blencathra, I assume some didnt, hence different Danish name?
Its the way empires and colonisers behave isn't it? Either you
don't care what the locals call it as you intend to kill or
enslave them anyway, or in this instance, just a little arrogant?
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" <-- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap
