I’m not into cocks, but you can call me a Zionist.
That’s not just a transliteration issue – and I’m not sure that “transliteration” is the right word anyway.
Peking is the Shanghai pronunciation. Pejing is the Mandarin pronunciation. The mandarins in Beijing prefer the Mandarin pronunciation because (a) they speak Mandarin, and (b) The English used the Shanghai pronunciation because they won a war against China.
(Romanisation is not transliteration because written Chinese “uses a logographic script”)
A nitpick, but it’s transliteration not translation. Transliteration is keeping the original word as intact as possible while expressing it under a different system. Translation is giving the meaning of a word in a different language.
The translation of Muslim into English would be “one who submits”. The translation of Quran would be “recitation”. (Muhammad, as a person’s name, doesn’t translate. But as a regular word it translates as “praiseworthy”.)
One related issue that confuses some people is the word Allah. It’s not the name of the Islamic God. It’s the Arabic word for God.
For me, “Moslem” is on a par with “Hindoo.” It’s outdated enough that it makes one appear a complete doofus by using it.
OK, about the Peking or Beijing thing- I remember Peiping being the spelling for a few years. Anyone else remember that?
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
(Do, however, avoid using Mohammedan or Musselman that are simply foreign words assigned to the believers of Islam and are not appropriate.)
[/QUOTE]
Say what? “Mussalman” is a perfectly acceptable word and indeed n Urdu the term is in Mussalman
In Urdu, yes. And possibly under the influence of Urdu it’s also a neutral term in Pakistani or Indian English - I don’t know. But I think in most other varieties of English it’s a bit iffy. The OED notes it as “archaic” and “historical”, which suggests that it’s a bit like Hindoo. At best, old-fashioned; at worst, intended to evoke British colonial attitudes towards the religion of a subject people.
There is no agreed upon transliteration method from Arabic to English so the broad answer to the OP is just a matter of style and popularity. However, I could see why transliterations favored in older orientalist scholarship would be consciously rejected by newer writers.
If Cristoph Luxemberg is right, then the Arabic in the Qur’an has actually been mixed with misread Syriac all this time, so this would throw even the “original” words in doubt. His work has gotten a lot of pushback, but in general traditional Islamic narratives of the Qur’an’s history are being viewed increasingly skeptically, so it’s an open question.
A tongue-in-cheek rule of thumb I’ve adopted when reading contemporary English language Muslim writing is that the number of double letters used in transliteration corresponds directly with radical extremism. Islaam, Qur’aan, Hijjab, Sharee’ah… all red flags 
ETA: I always thought the term musselman was derived from the Arabic plural term “muslimeen,” as I thought the Spanish Musulmano was too. Hmm.
Etymology’s a bit unclear, according to the OED. It comes into English (and similar words come into a variety of European languages) from Persian; it may have passed throughy Ottoman Turkish along the way. Persian probably got it from Arabic, but it’s not entirely clear how. Presumably Urdu got it from Persian as well. It may ultimately come from an Arabic word meaning a convert to Islam.
Interesting.
I consider myself to be well-read, and this is the first I’ve heard that there’s a difference in meaning, use or perception of the two terms. I simply assumed they were interchangeable multiple transliterations, like Osama/Usama or Khaddafi/Qadaffi/Gadaffi/whatever.
I recall a discussion a main road in Cairo on some other board, and the local (American) Cairo inhabitant said of the road “I’ve never heard of it spelled like that”; yet that was how Google Earth spelled it - presumably from some automated transliteration program.
IIRC, Arabic writing does not typically include the extra marks for vowels (they exist but frequently are skipped unless there’s ambiguity?), and pronunciation can vary depending on regional accents. So again, transliteration can be tricky.
And similarly, if I’m going to say Muslim, should I be careful to pronounce it as Musslim, and not as Muzzlim? In other words, am I correct that the o/u is not important, but the s/z is?
The actual proper word is Dhulm - as it is written and pronounced in formal Arabic, from the Quran. It is in eastern dialects and in the Persian influenced areas which the DHA transforms to Zh. For my dialect we do not say Zulm.
Perhaps the compliant is influenced by the Urdu speakers who are very prevalent in the anglophone world, because of how they pronounce the word DHulm as zulm. It would not occur to someone of my dialect or who knew the proper Quranic pronunciation.
I clarify to note that this only occurs if it is an eastern spoken dialect - from the Egypt east, but not usually the gulf, and among the Muslims in Asia who adopted the Persian pronciation of the character DHA, which is pronounced in the proper formal Arabic and in the western dialects like a very heavy TH as in the English.
I think the objections must in English come from the South Asians for who the moz-lem pronunciation must sound like how they pronounce the arabic. But it is not in proper arabic.
I will confirm that while most people will not care very much about moslem contra muslim, this term is actively and widely disliked and I would find it very annoying or even offensive depending on if the person seemed to use it deliberately or not. After the 19th century there is not a good excuse to use this.
the football club name is old from that era, it is like your redskins american football, it is a remnant.
You’re free to be offended by whatever you choose, and other people are free not to care.
“Muzz lim” is the correct Urdu for “criminal defendant”.
Why be insulting to some if it is easily avoided by not using the term ( which is quite archaic in any academic sense )? Literally the only times I’ve seen it used in the 21rst century to refer to actual Muslims is in a slightly sneering way by those with an axe to grind. And even in those contexts it is rare.
Another one for the dustbin of history IMHO.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard either spelling pronounced in north American accent as anything other than “Muzlum”, more of a “Z” than an “S”, and more of a “U” than an “O” or “I” in either syllable… because we tend to under-pronounce many un-emphasized vowels as “uh”.
This kind of reminds me of the discussion “Is ‘Squaw’ a derogatory Indian slang for ‘Vagina’?” Just because someone wants to find a pretext for saying others are being offensive does not make it so. I suspect 95% of North Americans would not know that there is (allegedly) a difference between the two words… we’re just used to variant spellings of the same Arabic words.
What do English-speaking Muslims in the U.S. use to refer to themselves? They use “Muslim” with an s-sound. There’s no reason at all for the rest of us not to follow suit.
The whole matter of how the word originally came to be transliterated as “Moslem” is linguistically interesting, but it doesn’t support the notion that the two do not have different usages and connotations in the English language in 2014. “Moslem” feels a bit archaic and a little creepy. I think the comparison to “Hindoo” is apt.
And anybody who insists on continuing to use “Moslem” in the face of this information is just being…well, something not very nice.
ETA: Replying to md2000
My point precisely.
I support the goal of not giving offense to other languages and cultures through ignorance or through petty passive-aggressiveness. “Neener neener, I just mispronounced a word important to you” is childish crap.
But so far I’m seeing a “just so” story purporting that “Moslem is offensive so we changed it to Muslim”, but without any recognition that Muslim is (probably) equally offensive. Thereby negating the very premise of the “just so” story.
Color me still confused.
I’d like somebody who really understands this stuff to explain how the spelling change actually has anything to do with reducing offense. Absent that I’m going to suspect everybody asserting so is repeating something they heard which wasn’t originally true and becomes no more so through repetition.
ETA: replying to Green Bean
Now we’re getting somewhere. I haven’t heard anyone use the [Muslim with an s] pronunciation, but I can’t recall having heard any one at all in a position to speak with knowledge saying the word at all. I don’t hang out on talking head TV shows.