linguoboy wrote:sokuban wrote:Take Japanese (or Korean, maybe even Vietnamese) as an example. They borrowed Chinese words from a long time ago, and still use somewhat archaic (and unorganized) pronunciations. Though lately in Japan it is the style to use the modern Chinese reading for things, but I don't like that either.
Korea as well. Nowadays, 베이징 /pey.i.cing/ is more common than the traditional Sino-Korean reading, 북경 /puk.kyeng/.
Wow. I guess in Korean that is easier to do, since people don't use hanja in everyday life, but in Japanese it confuses the heck out of you because you see the kanji and want to read it with its Japanese reading.
I still think it is crazy. With the sole exception of Seoul, which was only recently changed to 首爾, Chinese still use Chinese names for Korean cities. (Though I support the Chinese Seoul name change, mainly because the Korean name was changed too and Chinese were still calling it by the old Korean name since the new one wasn't Sino Korean.) So why does Korea use Chinese names?
Epp wrote:I think it's better to call a city/country/place by its up-to-date native name. It can be quite confusing sometimes - e.g. it took me a while to realize that the German "Mailand" is the Italian city Milano (which is called "Milan" in English ...).
I suppose it is best to call a place by its up-to-date name. But I still wish that the native names should be used over the foreign names as these up-to-date names.