5 ms·

Warning: this post is an off-topic nitpick. > The border between Panama and Columbia is where the dream faltered. Spelling Colombia as Columbia is a very infu

Warning: this post is an off-topic nitpick. > The border between Panama and Columbia is where the dream faltered. Spelling Colombia as Columbia is a very infuriating error to many (not all, but many) people who speak Spanish, particularly Colombians, obviously. It's as jarring to read as "Englend" or "Onited States". I urge the author, if around, to fix it, and any readers who are around to be very mindful of not making it as it can be disrespectful.

finite_depth 3y ago
For the curious: both "Columbia" and "Colombia" arise from Christopher Columbus' name, spelled with a 'u' in English and in Latin but with an 'o' both in Spanish and Columbus' own native Italian. Hence, in English-speaking usage, "Columbia" (with a u) is more common, as in the Columbia River or District of Columbia. But the (Spanish-speaking) South American country uses the 'o' spelling.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
schoen 3y ago
Since English "Columbia" has the same meaning as Spanish "Colombia" (namely something like "Columbian (land)"/"(land) of Columbus"), I'm curious why the former didn't ultimately end up being considered "the English version" of the latter. In some other cases we have English names that are considered correct ways to refer to foreign locations (e.g. Deutschland → Germany, Köln → Cologne, Roma → Rome, Warszawa → Warsaw, Italia → Italy, España → Spain, Lisboa → Lisbon, México → Mexico, Perú → Peru, Brasil → Brazil), which are considered perfectly normal, although some are contested (Türkiye → Turkey, Côte d'Ivoire → Ivory Coast). I agree that this didn't happen in the case of the English name of Colombia, and that the English name of Colombia is "Colombia", not "Columbia", but again I wonder why this didn't end up being regarded as a "translation" of the country's name.
- OfSanguineFire 3y ago
  Similarly, one could wonder why Ecuador is Ecuador in English, and was never anglicized to Equator. The insistence of the leadership of the “Ivory Coast” that the country be called “Côte d’Ivoire” even in English, does seem to have been broadly successful. I rarely see “Ivory Coast” in English-language scholarship or in travel resources these days. I’m a bit surprised that Wikipedia still uses the English version throughout its article on the country.
  - smcl 3y ago
    I don't know if there's been that much success in pushing Côte d’Ivoire. I imagine if it is used at all in English-language countries, it's copy-pasted due to the "ô" not being easily accessible on English keyboard layouts. In spoken English I haven't heard anyone I know say "Côte d’Ivoire" and, being into football and having football-loving friends from Ghana and Gambia (countries in the same region who cannot be accused of being ignorant Brits or Americans), there's been plenty of opportunities. Same goes for Türkiye/Turkey - those umlauts and the "toor-kee-ye" pronunciation will scare off most users of English, who will fall back to the more familiar "Turkey". "Czechia" doesn't even have the problem of diacritics and it's still not that widespread. I find it a bit awkward and don't use it even though I live here. Old habits die hard and, whether they like it or not, Ivory Coast, Turkey, Czechia etc are gonna be around for a while.
    - ben_w 3y ago
      > "Czechia" doesn't even have the problem of diacritics and it's still not that widespread. Not too long ago a British politician was unironically suggesting a post-Brexit trade deal with "Czechoslovakia". I don't know how much of that was mere incompetence in his case, but in general at least some of it will be old habits dying hard.
      - smcl 3y ago
        Incompetence during the Brexit negotiations?! Surely not!
    - TylerE 3y ago
- ben_w 3y ago
  > Warszawa → Warsaw It took years of living in Berlin to realise that "Warschau" was the German for Warsaw. https://maps.app.goo.gl/4epDsvkKf42jXhG47?g_st=ic https://maps.app.goo.gl/4epDsvkKf42jXhG47?g_st=ic
  - tgaj 3y ago
    Other tricky one - Polish "Gdańsk" is "Danzig" in German
    - PeterisP 3y ago
      Those sound much more similar than their spelling looks.
      - tgaj 3y ago
        Yeah, if someone would pronounce "Gdańsk" with silent "G" then that would be true. But someone fluent in Polish would pronounce "G-dańsk" with clear "gh".
- toyg 3y ago
  Anglicised names are historically grandfathered. The post-colonial consensus, pushed by emerging powers (China etc), is that all topological names should be equally maintained in the source language. The classic example is Peking, which is now called Beijing everywhere. As such, progress should mean even historical names are reverted to what current inhabitants call them, i.e. we should all visit Firenze, not Florence.
  - zirgs 3y ago
    > The classic example is Peking, which is now called Beijing everywhere. It's still called Peking in many other languages.
Symbiote 3y ago
It would only be as jarring as writing Washington, District of Colombia. I don't think many American would be offended by that.

finite_depth 3y ago

For the curious: both "Columbia" and "Colombia" arise from Christopher Columbus' name, spelled with a 'u' in English and in Latin but with an 'o' both in Spanish and Columbus' own native Italian. Hence, in English-speaking usage, "Columbia" (with a u) is more common, as in the Columbia River or District of Columbia. But the (Spanish-speaking) South American country uses the 'o' spelling.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

schoen 3y ago

Since English "Columbia" has the same meaning as Spanish "Colombia" (namely something like "Columbian (land)"/"(land) of Columbus"), I'm curious why the former didn't ultimately end up being considered "the English version" of the latter. In some other cases we have English names that are considered correct ways to refer to foreign locations (e.g. Deutschland → Germany, Köln → Cologne, Roma → Rome, Warszawa → Warsaw, Italia → Italy, España → Spain, Lisboa → Lisbon, México → Mexico, Perú → Peru, Brasil → Brazil), which are considered perfectly normal, although some are contested (Türkiye → Turkey, Côte d'Ivoire → Ivory Coast). I agree that this didn't happen in the case of the English name of Colombia, and that the English name of Colombia is "Colombia", not "Columbia", but again I wonder why this didn't end up being regarded as a "translation" of the country's name.

OfSanguineFire 3y ago
Similarly, one could wonder why Ecuador is Ecuador in English, and was never anglicized to Equator. The insistence of the leadership of the “Ivory Coast” that the country be called “Côte d’Ivoire” even in English, does seem to have been broadly successful. I rarely see “Ivory Coast” in English-language scholarship or in travel resources these days. I’m a bit surprised that Wikipedia still uses the English version throughout its article on the country.
- smcl 3y ago
  I don't know if there's been that much success in pushing Côte d’Ivoire. I imagine if it is used at all in English-language countries, it's copy-pasted due to the "ô" not being easily accessible on English keyboard layouts. In spoken English I haven't heard anyone I know say "Côte d’Ivoire" and, being into football and having football-loving friends from Ghana and Gambia (countries in the same region who cannot be accused of being ignorant Brits or Americans), there's been plenty of opportunities. Same goes for Türkiye/Turkey - those umlauts and the "toor-kee-ye" pronunciation will scare off most users of English, who will fall back to the more familiar "Turkey". "Czechia" doesn't even have the problem of diacritics and it's still not that widespread. I find it a bit awkward and don't use it even though I live here. Old habits die hard and, whether they like it or not, Ivory Coast, Turkey, Czechia etc are gonna be around for a while.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    > "Czechia" doesn't even have the problem of diacritics and it's still not that widespread. Not too long ago a British politician was unironically suggesting a post-Brexit trade deal with "Czechoslovakia". I don't know how much of that was mere incompetence in his case, but in general at least some of it will be old habits dying hard.
    - smcl 3y ago
      Incompetence during the Brexit negotiations?! Surely not!
  - TylerE 3y ago
ben_w 3y ago
> Warszawa → Warsaw It took years of living in Berlin to realise that "Warschau" was the German for Warsaw. https://maps.app.goo.gl/4epDsvkKf42jXhG47?g_st=ic https://maps.app.goo.gl/4epDsvkKf42jXhG47?g_st=ic
- tgaj 3y ago
  Other tricky one - Polish "Gdańsk" is "Danzig" in German
  - PeterisP 3y ago
    Those sound much more similar than their spelling looks.
    - tgaj 3y ago
      Yeah, if someone would pronounce "Gdańsk" with silent "G" then that would be true. But someone fluent in Polish would pronounce "G-dańsk" with clear "gh".
toyg 3y ago
Anglicised names are historically grandfathered. The post-colonial consensus, pushed by emerging powers (China etc), is that all topological names should be equally maintained in the source language. The classic example is Peking, which is now called Beijing everywhere. As such, progress should mean even historical names are reverted to what current inhabitants call them, i.e. we should all visit Firenze, not Florence.
- zirgs 3y ago
  > The classic example is Peking, which is now called Beijing everywhere. It's still called Peking in many other languages.

Symbiote 3y ago

It would only be as jarring as writing Washington, District of Colombia. I don't think many American would be offended by that.