Debate: Names for places

to honest why does anyone really want to learn another language i already have learnt french and i am also learning spanish. to me it is the worst thing to and the most useless. really you can only get one job from it-translating. if you took physics or maths you will have a wider range of job opertunities and they are much more interesting.

Why do we have to say ‘Mumbai’ all of a sudden? Or 'Beijing'? Or 'Gdansk'? We don't say 'Paree' or 'Roma'. The Spanish don't say London, they say Londres. In fact, hardly anybody says ‘London’ outside the English speaking world.

As in all things now, society seems to be driven by the media which, in turn, responds, in its ever-so-anxious way, to the political sensibilities of every ethnic group. The media wants to be seen as being up with the vanguard of cultural and linguistic etiquette. It does affect ordinary folks' behaviour too. I went to Budapest, came back and still called it Budapest. My friends decided to call it what the locals did: "Budapeshed" Same with Flores - the far island of the Azores - my friend calls it 'Floresh' like the Portuguese do. No harm when you're out there but amongst British people it just sounds ever so slightly affected, does it not?

As with so many linguistic practices, there are no rules; just practices which change continually... and sometimes to personal irritation.
	    

I sympathise. Having been born there, Calcutta shall always, to me, remain not-Kolkata - a name even I, as a cricket fan, have to look at twice before recognising.

Little Richardjohn, in Hebrew you say London, but pronounced lohndohn, that's simply the way 'o' is.

The common thread to many name changes is new-born national pride, and the need to establish a national identity free of the cultural influence of the former colonial or occupying power.

For the most part this type of relationship has never existed between the UK and European nations, so there is no 'guilt complex' involved by Britons in using long established anglicised names of places in continental Europe (and vice-versa).

Using a newly adopted name respects the desire of the people of the renamed city to erase their own shame or embarrassment in having been occupied or colonised. When this wish is realised, no matter how unnecessary or short-sighted it may be, many outsiders feel it is better to drop the old 'tarnished' name in favour of the new.

Peking is the phonetic spelling of the Cantonese pronunciation that the first English traders to China heard. The city is in an area where Mandarin is the spoken language and Beijing is the phonetic equivalent. The Chinese government want to render transliteration of place names throughout the country more accurately, hence the official changes to many names of cities best known to Europeans (most of which are, for historical reasons, sea ports).

The Bombay/Mumbai change has occurred for very similar reasons. The English variant of Gdansk disappeared after WW1, being replaced by the German Danzig. When Poland acquired the city after WW2 the English variant failed to catch on again.

The probable reason for the almost universal change in usage in the UK media is that people who work as journalists in the national media are in general relatively young, highly educated, well paid and well travelled and are mentally open to change. It is this group in any society who are always at the leading edge of change, and a result of their jobs, they are able to influence society as a whole. There is also the logical position that when travelling lack of uniformity of names would lead to confusion and missed flights/trains etc. (Note: I do not work in the media!)

It is also noteworthy that the spelling of many place names in the UK were only fixed in the 19th century, when the country was first mapped by the OS, and many local variants of pronunciation still exist today.

A few years back, when Peking was being replaced by Beijing as the preferred form for the Chinese capital, I seem to remember reading an explanation from the someone high up at the Independent as to why they retained Peking: The change was coming about at the request of the Chinese government, and his newspaper wasn't minded to bend to the will of the Chinese government.

My local Asda store was previously a Gateway and originally a Carrefour. My local Somerfield was previously a Morrisons and originally a Safeway. My local pub, the King Rufus, was previously Hanrahans, and originally The Mount. I still refer, in speech, to all these businesses by their original names at times; but this habit isn't helpful to anyone who needs directions via, or to, any of these to use the defunct name. The same logic applies to renamed countries, regions and cities.

I shall no doubt go on referring to Mumbai as Bombay for years to come in casual speech - and think of the many citizens of that city who continued to use the old colonial street names rather the "new" local names decades after the changes were made!

Personally, I think saying Mumbai is silly, because it doesn't mean a thing. Bombay had been the name, ever since the Portuguese founded the place.
I do like saying Lunnon, I also like saying place names as properly as possible. Call it an affectation if you will.