No, I disagree - same with countries names. Would be good to not anglicize or Latinize anything anymore. It’s ok if people expand their boundaries and pronunciation skills.
Everyone else continues to call it Turkey, especially newspapers. It’s why the Wikipedia article continues to be called “Turkey”. Neither me nor you are a country or international organization.
Same with Ivory Coast and its official name “Côte d’Ivoire”.
But it’s so cringe when English speakers suddenly switch to a foreign accent to pronounce one word. And would you want to force speakers of other languages to do the same instead of using their own versions of English names?
I even find it weird when people who do have that heritage do it. It just rings fake.
Theres a celebrity chef who is terrible for it. When 99% of the time on camera you have perfect American “non regional media diction” but pronounce “cilantro” or “Jalapeno” like someones abuela it comes across like someone putting on an act.
I think its jarring in that case because the english is so forced into that absolutely accent free state that doesnt exist outside of network television, that the switch up to a very spanish pronunciation of a single word then back into tv presenter is so abrupt. Its like skipping gears. Media voice, normal voice, normal spanish, exaggerated spanish. Skipping two gears is not going to be a smooth transition. Its not like a regular person having a regular conversation.
Curious as to where you’re from? I can see it seeming false if you’re used to english speakers mangling everything non-english, but if you’re not it doesn’t seem cringe at all.
i was with you until turkey, that shit is just propaganda.
Countries are not people, we shouldn’t treat them as people. Individuals deserve to have their actual names used because individuals deserve respect, but nations are an arbitrary modern invention that makes the world worse.
How do you decide which is the “correct” native name for countries with multiple cultures and languages? Using all of them is exhausting and confusing, but only using one of them is oppressing the other ones.
Was more pointing to the fact that country/geographic names are often Anglicized because that’s how western maps would label them (incorrect translations or pronunciations).
There’s a pacific island nation changing their name to their original because for decades they were known as the colonizer name. Is that wrong or oppressive?
So I guess deciding what to be called would be up to that nation.
No, I disagree - same with countries names. Would be good to not anglicize or Latinize anything anymore. It’s ok if people expand their boundaries and pronunciation skills.
Call the person or thing by what they go/went by.
We recently did it with “Türkiye”.
We did not do it with “Türkiye”. Also note that ü is a different letter from u, not just a u with decoration.
The Turkish government requested international organizations to refer to Turkey that way:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkey
Everyone else continues to call it Turkey, especially newspapers. It’s why the Wikipedia article continues to be called “Turkey”. Neither me nor you are a country or international organization.
Same with Ivory Coast and its official name “Côte d’Ivoire”.
That’s simply restating something that I said we should do differently.
A country requested to be called differently, and people still call it what they know it as. I’m saying it’s fine if we try to learn it.
Yes, u and ü are pronounced differently - more to my point.
The US prefers to be called “America” yet I still don’t call them by that name either.
I don’t need to abide by what some fascist Turk says you should call their country or not.
Maybe once Turkey stops trying to wipe out the Kurds I’ll respect what far-right Turkish nationalists want that country to be called.
Lol - That’s just deviating from the entire context of the discussion, but ok.
Guilty as accused.
Türkiye
Thanks for the correction, edited it. Not so hard.
But it’s so cringe when English speakers suddenly switch to a foreign accent to pronounce one word. And would you want to force speakers of other languages to do the same instead of using their own versions of English names?
I even find it weird when people who do have that heritage do it. It just rings fake.
Theres a celebrity chef who is terrible for it. When 99% of the time on camera you have perfect American “non regional media diction” but pronounce “cilantro” or “Jalapeno” like someones abuela it comes across like someone putting on an act.
I guess you only speak one language?
This is how it happens when you speak several languages, and IMO there is not a one-fit-all rule to what to do.
Also pronouncing the word like it’s intended to? Well yes.
I only speak one fluently.
I think its jarring in that case because the english is so forced into that absolutely accent free state that doesnt exist outside of network television, that the switch up to a very spanish pronunciation of a single word then back into tv presenter is so abrupt. Its like skipping gears. Media voice, normal voice, normal spanish, exaggerated spanish. Skipping two gears is not going to be a smooth transition. Its not like a regular person having a regular conversation.
Well, it is absolutely like two regular polyglots having a conversation.
As I hinted, you’re just not used to it! Lean into it, those are the true words, and languages and cultures are fascinating.
Or so I think 😌!
Why is it cringe?
I guess because it seems fake? Maybe like it’s pandering.
Curious as to where you’re from? I can see it seeming false if you’re used to english speakers mangling everything non-english, but if you’re not it doesn’t seem cringe at all.
Nobody is forcing anyone. It’s more about the purposeful latinization of something, i.e. the context of the OG post.
i was with you until turkey, that shit is just propaganda.
Countries are not people, we shouldn’t treat them as people. Individuals deserve to have their actual names used because individuals deserve respect, but nations are an arbitrary modern invention that makes the world worse.
How do you decide which is the “correct” native name for countries with multiple cultures and languages? Using all of them is exhausting and confusing, but only using one of them is oppressing the other ones.
Was more pointing to the fact that country/geographic names are often Anglicized because that’s how western maps would label them (incorrect translations or pronunciations).
There’s a pacific island nation changing their name to their original because for decades they were known as the colonizer name. Is that wrong or oppressive?
So I guess deciding what to be called would be up to that nation.