Giuseppe Verdi = Joe Green? Bruxelles = Brussels?

[Abraham]

Perhaps, some of you more linguistically capable can explain why foreign language words are somehow supposedly transformed into the equivalent of English words.

As an example: Guillermo supposedly (magically) is the equivalent of William. Giuseppe is the same as Joe. Juan is John. Place names like Munchen supposedly equal Munich. Huh? Why can't Munchen remain Munchen? And why is Firenze in English transformed into Florence. Why can't the actual names of these people and places be known for their actual names?

This nonsense caused me no end of confusion when in foreign lands. The above is only a small sample of confusion created by so-called foreign into English words. Guillermo is not William - it's for crying out loud: Guillermo

Some foreign places retain their actual names and aren't re-jiggered into some dopey, synthetic English equivalency, like Paris. Paris remains...Paris.

So, why is it necessary for other foreign places and names to be converted?

One time, while in Belgium, I asked for directions to Brussels and the native I was speaking to looked at me like I was insane. He responded that there was no place in Belgium called Brussels. Only later did I realize I should have been inquiring about directions to Bruxelles...

[oohrah]

Colonial arrogance?

[Vol Texan]

Now, I don't want to get off on a rant here, but...

I am no linguist, but I think it has to do with the evolution of language. Many languages evolved over time from similar ancestor languages. Just like the word for water is Acaua in Italian, Agua, in Spanish, and Agua in Portuguese, it can be determined that all three derived from the same ancestral language family: Latin. However, Wasser in German, Vand in Danish, Voda in Russian, Woda in Polish, and Voda in Czech all evolved from the Indo-European language family. Note that even within this family, there are branches, such as the Germanic branch and the Slavic branch - but all came from the same family.

So...names can have similar evolution. Joseph is NOT a colonial interpretation of another word, rather it is an evolution of the Hebrew name Yossef. As time went on, and words are passed from one people to another (see the telephone game as an example), there are different evolutions: Guisseppe in Italian, Yusif in Azerbaijani, and Jozef in Dutch. Our evolution of this word as Joseph is just one of many interpretations over time.

Now...Bombay suddenly became Mumbai...that's silly. Of course, it's a way of a new generation or culture shunning a previous culture, or honoring a new one, but I still call it Bombay with my Indian friends (and they, for the most part, do the same). Same as how Saigon became Ho Chi Minh City, and Constantinopolis became Istanbul.

...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

[yerasimos]

What Vol Texan wrote above matches some of my observations.

Another thing I have observed here-and-there is that some sounds in non-English languages simply do not exist in English, especially those languages that do not use the Latin alphabet (as used here), so a roughly-similar substitute may be found for use in English.

Conversely, some sounds that native English speakers (or native speakers of any given language) take for granted may not exist in a different language (language Q), so an approximation is devised for use in language Q.

[KLB]

Joseph is NOT a colonial interpretation of another word, rather it is an evolution of the Hebrew name Yossef. As time went on, and words are passed from one people to another (see the telephone game as an example), there are different evolutions: Guisseppe in Italian, Yusif in Azerbaijani, and Jozef in Dutch. Our evolution of this word as Joseph is just one of many interpretations over time.

Yes, and Jose in Spanish. So Guillermo is an evolution of the same name as is William or, in French, Guilluame. Roberto is an evolution of the same name as Robert. Charles, Karl, Carl, and Carlos are all evolutions of the same name.

As for place names, I am sure there are similar historical reasons. Why do the Spanish refer to London as Londres? I don't know the historical basis, but I'll bet there is one.

[KLB]

My high school world history teacher got the class to laugh by referring to Guisseppe Verdi as Joe Green.

[RoyGBiv]

Colonial arrogance?

/Thread

[Jusme]

Vol Texan is correct, language evolves as groups are isolated from each other develop their own linguistic pronunciation, and then again as they assimilate with others, words change pronunciation, and with the advent of written language, spelling. English is by it's very nature a complete muddling of various languages throughout the world, Greek, Latin, Spanish, French, and German, just to name a few. This is even evident throughout this country, with not only different accents, but completely different pronunciations in different parts of the country. Since global communication is so fast now, this lends itself to a more general form of language,dialects, and accents. But there will still be disconnects with languages that are only spoken in isolated pockets of the globe.

I learned first hand how certain consonant sound differ from language to language, when I worked with some Cambodians, and the SCR words like screwdriver, they were unable to say. Of course I never did come close to speaking their language.

[Abraham]

I don't think Joe can even remotely be an equivalent to Giuseppe or William somehow equates to Guillermo.

Too, too bizarre.

Giuseppe is Giuseppe and Guillermo is Guillermo and never the Joe or William will meet.

I could see an approximation if they were like Joesef becoming Joe, but Giuseppe and Guillermo, nah...

Let's see: In bizarro world the name Plumbulious is the same as Bob. Crustolineous is the same as Billy Bob.

Yep, that makes sense.

[Dadtodabone]

Paris while spelled the same is pronounced differently. And pronunciation of the written word is where the drift has occurred.
As an example lets use Roma/Rome. English is Germanic at its roots though heavily influenced by the (roma)nce languages particularly French. When Chaucer first scribed his tales, his spelling of Roma was rendered Rome. Why? Because that was how it was spelled at the time in, you guessed it, French.
Fast forward two and a half centuries and we find the Bard of Avon maintaining the spelling from Chaucer, Rome, while the spoken language had undergone a change. The use of modifiers to allow the conversion of Goedelic Celtic into Roman characters had robbed English vowel ending words of their former end sounds
Welsh, Scots, and Irish influence on English, it's many "borrowings" and the continuous evolution of written and spoken forms over centuries has created the mish mash of spellings and pronunciation rules that is modern English.

[Abraham]

Dadtodabone,

Thanks, my head just exploded!

[G26ster]

So, why is it necessary for other foreign places and names to be converted?

I think Abraham's question/point is being missed. It's not a question of HOW we got to this point, rather a question of WHY we cannot respect another country's language to call it what THEY call/pronounce it. In what we call Germany for example, they call it Deutchland. It doesn't matter if others call it Germany or not, and it's NOT a question of pronunciation. It's a question of failure to respect another country's language/culture to call it what THEY call it in the present day, in THEIR language. Why can't we? Is it too difficult? Too inconvenient? In Italy, THEY call it Italia, why can't everyone else just call it Italia? We made the switch with Chinese provinces and cities, and we don't change the pronunciation of foreign given and family names, so why can't we do the same for counties? Just MHO, which is worth what you paid for it.

[Abraham]

G26ster,

BINGO!

[The Annoyed Man]

The capitol city of (communist) China was originally known as "Peiping", and later as "Beiping". When I was a boy, it was called "Peking"......which later became "Beijing". "Mao Tse-tung" became "Mao Zedong". "Gay" (happy) became "gay" (homosexual). "Good" became "bad", and "neato" became "awesome".

I could go on, but it would serve nothing. My greatest regret with the changes that occur in the language is not that there are changes......that has always been the case (we no longer speak Elizabethan English either).....it is that people have forgotten how to command the language, how to write, how to bend words to their will, how to express themselves eloquently, how to use the hidden entendre. I go on and on in many of my posts, and I guess it comes off as windy sometimes; but I love the language, and I like to use it like a paintbrush or a guitar. I regret the coarsening of the language, and the general loss of fluency that prevails.

[yerasimos]

I think Abraham's question/point is being missed. It's not a question of HOW we got to this point, rather a question of WHY we cannot respect another country's language to call it what THEY call/pronounce it. In what we call Germany for example, they call it Deutchland. It doesn't matter if others call it Germany or not, and it's NOT a question of pronunciation. It's a question of failure to respect another country's language/culture to call it what THEY call it in the present day, in THEIR language. Why can't we? Is it too difficult? Too inconvenient? In Italy, THEY call it Italia, why can't everyone else just call it Italia? We made the switch with Chinese provinces and cities, and we don't change the pronunciation of foreign given and family names, so why can't we do the same for counties? Just MHO, which is worth what you paid for it.

G26ster has a point here. But after giving this some thought, I can see how this is sometimes more complex than we expect.

Take Abraham's experience in Belgium, with some key modifications.

If Abraham asks a non-Belgian English-speaker, in English, about directions to get to Brussels (and he refers to Belgium's capital city as Brussels), I expect it would be a generally straightforward conversation, and possibly forgotten as soon as he arrived in Brussels.

Another scenario: If Abraham asks the native in Belgium about directions to Brussels, and he asks the question in French/Walloon to a known French speaker in a Francophone region of that linguistically-divided country, and Abraham refers to the city as Bruxelles, then I expect he would receive a positive reaction and experience a generally straightforward conversation.

Yet another scenario: if Abraham asks the native in Belgium about directions to Brussels, and he asks the question in Flemish/Dutch to a known Flemish speaker in a Flemish-speaking region of that linguistically-divided country, but refers to the city as Bruxelles and not Brussel (that is not a typo), then I expect Abraham would not receive a positive reaction at all.

If, hypothetically, I began to post on this board in Off Topic about whatever I thought was great about contemporary China, but instead of typing the word China, I repeatedly copied and pasted the same country's name in Chinese pictograms, some readers would be annoyed or confused. If, alternatively/hypothetically, I copied and pasted the same country's same in Arabic script, I reckon that whatever I wrote could acquire yet another interpretation---at least until it was clarified by someone familiar with Arabic or adept with Google Translate.

The key takeaway that I see is to tailor my message to my intended audience, as best as I can, while realizing that some audiences may be more flexible and forgiving than others, and not to always expect applause at the end.