History questions not worth their own thread III

[Dachs]

What's the difference between Ozymandias and Ramesses? Which is more appropriate?

Ozymandias is what the Greeks (namely, Herodotos) called him; it's a corruption of his throne name. It is not appropriate for common discourse re: Ramesses II and would probably get a lot of people confused with the Shelley poem.

In a marvel of consistency, people do, however, use the Greek-corrupted names of Iranian Great Kings like Xsayarsa and Darayavahush.

 

[LightSpectra]

I don't know why you would say it's a "corruption." The three aforementioned languages use different alphabets, so how to render their equivalent words/names in the Latin alphabet is a matter of whether the translator values phonetic accuracy higher than other things.

 

[Dachs]

Where does Latin come into this?

And you know very well why I'm using the word "corruption": I find the practice distasteful and wish to assign it as much of a negative connotation as I reasonably can.

 

[LightSpectra]

"Ozymandias" and "Ramesses" are both translations to English, which uses the Latin alphabet. Ozymandias would have been Οζυμάνδιος in Greek. Not sure how to render it in Egyptian using Google Chrome, but Wikipedia says the other way to transcribe it into English would be Riʻmīsisu.

 

[spryllino]

In a marvel of consistency, people do, however, use the Greek-corrupted names of Iranian Great Kings like Xsayarsa and Darayavahush.

Where specifically do you get these more faithful forms from? Is there some book with a comprehensive appendix on the subject, or have you just learnt all the names and spellings individually from different sources?

 

[Lord Baal]

Where specifically do you get these more faithful forms from? Is there some book with a comprehensive appendix on the subject, or have you just learnt all the names and spellings individually from different sources?

Dachs was there when they reigned.

 

[Terrance888]

Dachs is a timelord.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Dachs was there when they reigned.

Was he around when Jesus Christ had his moment of doubt and pain?

 

[Huayna Capac357]

Xerxes is actually called Xsayarsa? Why would we choose not to say such an epic name?

 

[Dachs]

Xerxes is actually called Xsayarsa? Why would we choose not to say such an epic name?

Because the world hates Iranians.

Also, you try saying that word, see how far you get.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Ozymandias is what the Greeks (namely, Herodotos) called him; it's a corruption of his throne name. It is not appropriate for common discourse re: Ramesses II and would probably get a lot of people confused with the Shelley poem.

In a marvel of consistency, people do, however, use the Greek-corrupted names of Iranian Great Kings like Xsayarsa and Darayavahush.

Well, Egypt was just cooler.

And, while I think I'm being tongue in cheek, I'm not entirely positive. I think that is the reason, actually.

 

[W|M]

Also, you try saying that word, see how far you get.

Xsayarsa isn't exactly impossible to pronounce

 

[Linkman226]

Where does Latin come into this?

And you know very well why I'm using the word "corruption": I find the practice distasteful and wish to assign it as much of a negative connotation as I reasonably can.

You do realize you're speaking a corrupted Germano-Franco-Latinate-everything-else-that-goes-into-English-stew? All language is corrupted so to claim there's something bad about it is, frankly, silly. Corruption is natural.

Not to mention the fact that I'm 99.8% sure you don't pronounces Xerxes (regardless of how you spell it) the way the Persians did, ergo you're a corruptor?

In short I think to believe that any one spelling/ pronunciation system is better just because "that's how it was originally done" is arrogant reactionaryism. Languages are inherently dynamic.

 

[Dachs]

You do realize you're speaking a corrupted Germano-Franco-Latinate-everything-else-that-goes-into-English-stew? All language is corrupted so to claim there's something bad about it is, frankly, silly. Corruption is natural.

Not to mention the fact that I'm 99.8% sure you don't pronounces Xerxes (regardless of how you spell it) the way the Persians did, ergo you're a corruptor?

In short I think to believe that any one spelling/ pronunciation system is better just because "that's how it was originally done" is arrogant reactionaryism. Languages are inherently dynamic.

You seem to be under the misapprehension that I'm some sort of linguistic prescriptivist, which is about as far from the truth as you can get; long ago the prophet Billdo did preach to me, and lo mine eyes were open'd. I can't really figure out any other explanation for it, since I've repeatedly said (hell, the post you quoted implied as much) that I like the way I do things because it's the way I do things, not because it is some sort of immutable law of transliteration.

So I'll just write this post off as uninformed and poorly aimed overreaction.

 

[Leoreth]

However, I wouldn't write off for example the Iranian monarchs' Greek names as a simple mutation of language. It's not as if the name Xsayarsa entered our language in exactly this form a long time ago and was then corrupted by the process of oral tradition.

If anything, it was the Greeks who were prescriptive about this (unintentionally, perhaps, or out of necessity). And personally I'd also prefer the indigenous names because they don't imply that the whole ancient world spoke languages suspiciously similar to Greek.

 

[spryllino]

That wasn't a rhetorical question. Is there an answer, Dachs?

 

[Lone Wolf]

We Russians slightly mutilate ancient and medieval Greek names, too!

 

[Phrossack]

We Russians slightly mutilate ancient and medieval Greek names, too!

They deserve mutilation. One can only see "-os", "-es", and "-as" so many times before gaining a violent attitude towards Greek names.

 

[Lone Wolf]

We Russians slightly mutilate ancient and medieval Greek names, too!
They deserve mutilation. One can only see "-os", "-es", and "-as" so many times before gaining a violent attitude towards Greek names.

True, and an additional benefit of Russian-style treatment is emphasis on the links between Byzantine and Russian culture. The negative side is that some names end up sounding weirdly rustic to a Russian ear (Cosmas = Kuz'ma, Nikeforos Phokas = Nikifor Foka).

The history behind that is the following. In 18th and 19th centuries Russian nobility, intelligentsia, and the more educated or pretentious tradesmen named their children as they wished. Some names were fashionable, others less so.

Meanwhile, simple village people named their children after the Greek Orthodox saints remembered on their children's birthdays. Thus, some names, scorned by the city people, were still popular in the villages. And names like Fyokla (greek Thekla), Nikifor or Kuz'ma (ugly soft "z" sound) were included among them.

 

[Dachs]

That wasn't a rhetorical question. Is there an answer, Dachs?

The second one.