And The Ivory Coast to Ivory Coast.
Makes me wonder why this hasn’t happened with The Netherlands.
- OTOH, Kolkata, and Mumbai are pretty much close to how the places were pronounced*, even when they were called Calcutta or Mumbai. The brits mangled the pronunciation a bit and wrote it down accordingly. So not much difference there, you can argue that it is basically simplifying/rectifying the transliteration of an existing pronunciation
*If you use the local accents
- Now Munich/Muenchen, Benares/Varanasi are clearly related derivatives, even if they weren’t different pronunciations
- Chennai/Madras**, Myanmar/Burma etc OTOH are alternate forms.
** There were 2 original fishing hamlets/towns - chennaipattinam and madras pattinam (loosely translated as chennai town, & madras town) As the place grew, they merged and the british picked madras & much later the local politicians decided that they preferred chennai.
In Burmese or Myanmar language, Burma is known as either Myanma or Bama. Myanma is the written, literary name of the country, while Bama is the spoken name of the country. In terms of meaning, there is no difference. Both names still refer to the majority group of people in the country, who are also referred to as Burmans
I think thy prefer Côte d’Ivoire.
That is perfectly normal British English usage, so I guess it is normal German usage as well for an entity comprising several distinct units such as a country, a team, a government, a police force etc.
I’m sure they do, and that’s the French term. But the English-language press in Thailand always uses Ivory Coast – and yes, we do have the odd story out of there from time to time – which is the standard English term. I believe it’s used in media elsewhere too, and my point is it’s never “The Ivory Coast” anymore.
Another along this line I can think of is The Bronx. I’m not sure “The Philippines” counts, since that’s really just short for “The Philippine Islands.”
My history professor said that before the Civil War people in America usually said “the United States are…” and treated it as a plural
Have just noticed this thread.
Spectre of Pithecanthropus mentions (post #38) the English version “Turin” of this city, having been arrived at via the French language. It would appear that over the centuries the English have mangled for their own use, the names of a number of cities on the European continent – sometimes, as “Turin”, with French assistance, sometimes otherwise. (Of course, different Continental tongues do the same with foreign places, too.) Something that I’ve always found a particularly over-the-top bit of mangling, is what English managed to do with the Italian port of Livorno: i.e., making it into “Leghorn”.
I’d figure that “Ghent” is just an oddity: as with some other cities on the continent of Europe, a slightly strange version of the name, which English-speakers hit on long ago “for whatever reason or non-reason”.
English-speakers using the French version of a Flemish-Belgian city, such as Bruges: this happens in some other cases too. Ypres of World War I fame, is in Flemish-speaking territory – the locals call it (I believe) Ieper, but to all English-speakers, it’s the French version, “Ypres”. I would suspect that this phenomenon has to do with the fact that in times past – a century ago, say – the French language was the dominant one in use in Belgium, for “official discourse” generally; including the names of cities: so the English-speaking world often adopted the French names of places in the non-French part of the country. Back then, Flemish was officially disdained, as a language for benighted hicks – leading to strong resentment on the part of Flemish-speakers; this is much in evidence nowadays.
Interestingly, the Flemish part of Belgium has enjoyed a revenge vis-a-vis the French-speaking part; in contrast to the situation a century ago, the Flemish area is now the country’s industrial and economic powerhouse, while the French-speaking south suffers, in comparison, depression and decline.
I’ve assumed that’s because Livorno is on the Ligurian Sea.
Also, is it a case of mangling, or the English keeping an older version of the name that has since changed in Italian?
In a thread last month on a similar issue (Why is Munchen Munich?), it turned out that the reason English uses “Munich” for “Munchen” is that “Munich” is close to the original German term for the village, “Munichen”.
Presumably, the word first entered English, a long time ago, as “Munichen,” and then began evolving. In English, “Munichen” shifted over time to “Munich”, keeping the “i” but dropping the “-en”.
But in German, it shifted over time to “München”, dropping the “i” and keeping the “-en”.
(See post 50 of that thread.)
Languages evolve. When a foreign term enters a language, it will gradually be “rounded off” by the normal pronunciation rules of that language. And, the same term may evolve in its original language.
Does anyone know if “Livorno” has similarly evolved? Was there once a “g” in it, related to the Ligurian Sea?
I can’t speak directly for the Italian, but in Spanish they’re both Ligurno, which I think bolsters your hipothesis.
This.
To use the OP’s example, there are at least three differences between the English and the French pronunciation of “Paris.”
-
the “a”. In English, we pronounce it like “pair”, but in French, it’s more like “pa”.
-
the “r”. In English, it’s voiced, but in French, it’s voiceless.
-
the “s”. In English, it’s pronounced, but in French, it’s silent.
Now, it’s easy to stop pronouncing the “s”, but to pronounce Paris like the locals do, English speakers also have to use a different pronunciation for the “a” and the “r”. That’s difficult. So to get English speakers to pronounce Paris like the French, we’d have to learn three different pronunciation rules, just for one word.
Now, try expecting English speakers to learn different pronunciation rules for all foreign towns, countries, rivers, etc., in all different languages. It’s just not possible nor practical.
When languages adopt foreign words, it’s inevitable that the speakers of that language will begin to pronounce it according to the pronunciation rules and sounds of their own language.
Thanks, Nava.
And, am I right in assuming that your spelling of “hipothesis” is another example of words evolving according to the pronunciation rules of the language?
“Hypothesis” comes from Latin and Greek, and in English has kept the “y” because that is consistent with English pronunciation, but has it changed in Spanish to “i” because that fits Spanish pronunciation rules better?
(Not playing “gotcha” or anything - just curious. I do the same thing when I’m writing in French; English spellings sometimes creep in.)
Aha! Here’s what the Online Etymology Dictionary says for “Leghorn”:
So, when the English likely first started to have regular communications with Italy, in the Renaissance, the city was called “Legorno” by the inhabitants, so the English would use that term.
That evolved into “Leghorn” in English, and into “Livorno” in modern Italian.
Often it seems that the various post-colonial name changes have given English-speaking people the impression that foreigners in general see English names for their places as at least somewhat negative or provincial.
At least in Germany that is absolutely not the case. Foreign names are embraced enthusiastically because they give even the most boring place an air of international relevance.
Thanks. Not so weird on the part of the English, after all, then…
Spanish hasn’t “changed the y” to anything: both the English spelling and the Spanish one originated as transliterations; transliterations follow the rules of the language into which they are being performed - the Spanish word is hipótesis. The only cases in which the letter “y” represents a vowel sound in Spanish are the word y (and) and, due to influence from English and in relatively recent years, at the end of diminutives; because of this rule, I often type “i” where English has a vocalic “y”, but that’s not Spanish changing anything (this time I simply didn’t catch the typo on time).
You ARE aware that French is one of the official languages of Canada?
And the “p” and the “i”.
Having said that, many British and Irish speakers of English pronounce the “a” in “Paris” much as the French do. So we have one “correct” sound out of 5, rather than zero.
The French spell “Paris” exactly the same way we do. However, the French just pronounce all “i’s” as “ee” and do not pronounce the last consonant of most words.
The Germans call themselves the “Deustch” because it comes from an ancient word meaning roughly “the people who right live here”. We call them Germans because the ancient Gaulish people of France called them that; when the Romans concurred Gaul, they inherited the word to describe the people living across the Rhine River.
Medieval French would pronounce the s, as would several modern dialects of French before standardization of education about 200 years ago.
Even Parisian dialect, which as the language of the capital became the standard, pronounces the s when the next word begins with a vowel.
The s is still there, it’s just (according to “proper” French rules) dropped in speech in many cases. The same goes for final e, or used to do. Parisian dialect is…a particular way of thinking about language. Cerebral, I guess.