In recent perusals of Baseball-Reference.com, I have noticed that some Hispanic players with the name “Jose” are spelled (on that web site) with a plain, unaccented “e” at the end, and some with the letter accented like “é”. Is this simply a mistake on the part of Baseball-Reference.com, or are these genuine spelling variations in Spanish? If genuine, are the two pronounced differently? (At the moment, I consider the name to be pronounced Hoe-zay whichever way I see it.) Do these (if genuine) reflect different Hispanic cultures, e.g., Mexican vs Dominican vs Venezuelan?
Actually, looking at Baseball Reference, I’ve yet to find one who isn’t shown with the accent on the main entry. The search doesn’t show the accent, but that’s a technical issue: most people would not know how to include the accented e in the search.
The general rule is that you spell names the way the named person preferred. If there’s a variation, it would be because some players chose to keep the accent and others did not. No real cultural differences in this.
Reality Chuck:
Here are two examples:
Until some years ago, I would have said that only José is valid in Spanish, but explained that in international contexts it tends to lose the diacritic as a matter of people not knowing how to type it, thinking it’s unimportant, or software not accepting it. But there are also some people who as a nick pronounce it with the stress in the first syllable, and for that the orthographic Spanish spelling is without the mark, Jose.
For example, actor Jose Coronado, whose diacritic pops up and down depending on whomever wrote the name (he doesn’t usually bother scold people for it, but if asked, says he prefers Jose). The English-language listing:
- has the diacritic,
- indicates “as Jose Coronado” for any entry where his name is written in his preferred way,
- and gives “born as José Coronado García” as if he’d gotten a name change or some such. Dude’s using his name in the way in which you’d expect to find it outside of class lists and written contracts…
How many people put the accent on café. A quick google reveals that near me… Not many.
For people only familiar with English, those weird marks that other languages sometimes put on their letters can be pretty mystifying. The English language justifiably takes some flak over its difficulty or irregularity in spelling, but at least once we’ve chosen the right letters and put them in the correct order, our job is done; we don’t have to worry about decorating them properly.
Are you sure you want to open that whole can of worms which can be abbreviated as “English spelling sucks”? Because for those of us who are used to having no trouble figuring how a word is pronounced (including how it’s stressed) from how it’s spelled, it sure does…
Having struggled for many years with writing and editing bilingual texts in English and Spanish I would say it is really a matter of style (in English) whether or not to use the diacritics (rather than not knowing how to type it or other reasons). In general, English only uses diacritics in words recognized as foreign, so my tendency is not to use them in English text. Unlike Spanish, English spelling does not conform to pronunciation, and does not use diacritics to indicate stress, so there is no reason to include them.
For example, the name of the country I live in is properly spelled “Panama” in English, while it is spelled “Panamá” in Spanish. (However, in English the name is pronounced with the accent on the first syllable.) Likewise I would generally just write Jose (in English) even if the name would be pronounced with the accent on the final syllable.
The one exception I generally make is with ñ, which represents more of a pronunciation change than simply indicating a stressed syllable. (And in some words adapted fully into English the spelling has been changed to represent the pronunciation of that letter, as in canyon instead of cañon.)
English is nothing if not erratic in its orthography. Although café is certainly no longer regarded as a foreign word, the “correct” spelling is still regarded as including the diacritic (although in practice it is often omitted).
No argument there. 
In fact, that’s my point.
Both Florida and Panama would get a diacritic if transliterated back to Spanish… 
It’s one of the things that will cause me to do double takes 'til the day I die, words which I’ve known in writing for years before hearing them pronounced and then I hear them and “the stress goes where? D’oh :smack:”
To answer the question directly, yes, those are certainly mistakes (or at least inconsistencies) in Baseball Reference. You should either include the accents in all cases; or leave them off in all cases.
The name José is normally written and pronounced the same in Spanish speaking countries, with the possible exception mentioned by Nava. However, it’s far more likely that Baseball Reference just made a mistake rather than that they are attempting to reflect a different pronunciation.
The issue has driven me crazy in some publications in which I wanted to spell the names of Panama’s provinces with diacritics, one of which is Panamá, but also refer to Panama City in English (which in Spanish is just Panamá). Panamá City just looks weird (and doesn’t reflect the pronunciation in English). There’s no good resolution to the issue.
Or on résumé?
I smirk when an applicant, in their email cover letter, asks me to find their attached resume.
I would say it’s very likely that some of the Joses listed have chosen to adopt an unaccented transliteration of their names (or their parents did). I know two Joses of American Hispanic origin and neither spells his name with the diacritic.
Entirely possible that in daily use many Joses in the US don’t write the diacritical. However, I think its much more likely that Baseball Reference simply didn’t include it rather than checking the player’s personal preference. José DeJesús’s Wikepedia reference spells his name with the diacritics, while Baseball Reference not only leaves them out, it spells his last name de Jesus. (From other references, DeJesús appears to be correct.) Likewise José Rosado.
Baseball Reference is just not an accurate guide to how players may have actually spelled their names.
[Álex Rodríguez](Álex Rodríguez) (Baseball Reference)
Alex Rodriguez (Wikipedia)
Sean Rodriguez (Baseball Reference)
Sean Rodriguez (Wikipedia)
Since both of them were born in the US, I suspect neither A-Rod nor Sean habitually use the diacritic. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever seen A-Rod’s name with accents anywhere.
A-Rod’s family moved back to the Dominican Rupublic for a while when he was very young, though.
So how does the accent on the a change the pronunciation?
What’s your point? That would be a reason for him to use the diacritic, when apparently he doesn’t.
In Spanish, the stress is on the last syllable if the word ends in a consonant other than n or s, and on the next to last syllable of a word ends in a vowel or n or s. Exceptions to this rule are indicated by an accent mark on the stressed syllable.
In English: PA-na-ma
In Spanish: pa-na-MA
If Panama followed the rule it would be pronounced pa-NA-ma in Spanish. The diacritic on the final a indicates it doesn’t follow the normal rule.
There is no “normal rule” that Panamá is breaking, the rule is that words stressed in the last syllable (agudas, which is not an aguda) and ending in vowel, n or s get the diacritic.
A word stressed in the syllable before last (llanas, which is a llana) gets the diacritic if it does not end in either of those three.
And my mention before of the transliteration back to Spanish is because the English pronunciation would, if written according to Spanish rules, be “Pánama” in order to indicate that the stress is in the first syllable. The rule is that any word whose stress is before the penultimate syllable gets the diacritic, no matter its ending. Both esdrújulas (third-last syllable) and sobreesdrújulas (4th-last and above) are esdrújulas.