Dual Naming of Sea Areas in Modern Atlases and Implications for the East Sea/Sea of Japan Case

Dual naming of sea areas in modern atlases and implications for the East Sea/Sea of Japan case

Rainer DORMELS^*

Dual naming is, to varying extents, present in nearly all atlases. The empirical research in this paper deals with the dual naming of sea areas in about 20 atlases from different nations in the years from 2006 to 2017. Objective, quality, and size of the atlases and the country where the atlases originated from play a key role. All these characteristics of the atlases will be taken into account in the paper. In the cases of dual naming of sea areas, we can, in general, differentiate between: cases where both names are exonyms, cases where both names are endonyms, and cases where one name is an endonym, while the other is an exonym.

The goal of this paper is to suggest a typology of dual names of sea areas in different atlases. As it turns out, dual names of sea areas in atlases have different functions, and in many atlases, dual naming is not a singular exception. Dual naming may help the users of atlases to orientate themselves better. Additionally, dual naming allows for providing valuable information to the users. Regarding the naming of the sea between Korea and Japan present study has achieved the following results: the East Sea/Sea of Japan is the sea area, which by far showed the most use of dual naming in the atlases examined, in all cases of dual naming two exonyms were used, even in atlases, which allow dual naming just in very few cases, the East Sea/Sea of Japan is presented with dual naming.

RESEARCH GOAL AND METHODS

The goal of this research is to examine to which extent and in which mode dual naming is used in modern atlases. On this basis, the study aims to conclude the individual reasons of the use of dual naming when it comes to sea names. The selection of the atlases does not raise a claim of representativeness. Therefore, the aim of the research is not to gather statistical results. For this purpose, one would have to conduct a considerably larger investigation of all the available modern atlases. Therefore, the objective here is, to introduce examples, which might be helpful to hypothesize about the extent, mode, and motifs of the use of dual naming of sea names.

First, it is necessary to present the individual atlases. In the first line of the tables below,

*

Professor, University of Vienna, Austria.

Rainer DORMELS

147

we have the following information:



the name of the atlas, the land of origin and the year, the size of the book, the number of pages.
In the third line you can see:



the number of cases of dual naming of sea names and quantitative information about whether the used toponyms are endonyms or exonyms;



information about how toponyms are usually specified, in this case by the example of city names, e.g., “Köln (Cologne)” is shown in the table as “endonym (exonym)”, etc.;



the way the East Sea/Sea of Japan is included in the atlas. In cases of nonEnglish atlases the toponym will not be stated in the respective national language, but in English translation, e.g., “Marea de Est (M. Japoniei)” is shown in the table as “East Sea (Sea of Japan)”.

The presentation of the atlases will be carried out in three steps. First, the atlases with none to two cases of dual naming of sea areas will be introduced. Afterward, the atlases with three to five cases of dual naming of sea areas will be presented, and finally, those atlases with ten or more cases of dual naming of sea areas will be introduced. After each step, there will be a short analysis.

Maps and atlases can have different functions and foci respectively. This shall also apply to the designation of toponyms. Some atlases aim to standardize toponyms or support the standardization of toponyms respectively. Other maps and atlases strive to provide as much information as possible when designating a toponym. This may result in different numbers of dual naming of sea areas in the specific atlases.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE INVESTIGATED ATLAS

Atlases with none to two cases of dual naming of sea areas

Jaunais pasaules •eogr•fijas atlantes

Latvia (2016)

31.8cm x 22.5cm

168p.

Dual naming (sea bodies) 0

Cities (Cologne, Milano)

Sea between Korea and Japan

[Sea of Japan]

exonym

Kosmos Weltatlas – kompakt Dual naming (sea bodies) 0

Germany (2016)

30.6cm x 22.7cm

23.5cm x 13.3cm
240p.
Cities (Cologne, Milano) exonyms
Sea between Korea and Japan [Sea of Japan]

• •••• • • ••••• (Datamap)

Bulgaria (2012a)

96p.

Dual naming (sea bodies)

148

SESSION V

1

exonyms

[Sea of Japan/East Sea]

exonym (exonym) 1

CBETOBEH AT• AC (DK) Dual naming (sea bodies) 1

Bulgaria (2012b)

21.2cm x 15cm

34cm x 25cm
256p.

[Sea of Japan/East Sea]

exonyms

exonym (exonym) 1

ATLAS ACTUAL DE

GEOGRAFÍA

Spain (2015)

208p.

UNIVERSAL Dual naming (sea bodies) 2exonym / exonym 1 exonym exonym 1
Cities (Cologne, Milano) exonyms
Sea between Korea and Japan [East Sea/Sea of Japan]

Unsere Welt Aktuell (Kunth)

Germany (2005)

21cm x 15.5cm

256p.

Cities (Cologne, Milano) exonym
Sea between Korea and Japan [Sea of Japan] exonym / exonym 2

Die Welt Atlas Kompakt (Kunth) Dual naming (sea bodies) 1

Germany (2009)

16.6cm x 11.5cm

256p.

Cities (Cologne, Milano) endonym (exonym)
Sea between Korea and Japan [Sea of Japan East Sea] exonym exonym 1

Wielki Atlas •wiata (Denmart)

Poland (2006)

34.5cm x 24.5cm

356p.

Dual naming (sea bodies) 6endonym / endoym 6
Sea between Korea and Japan [Sea of Japan]

Geografia Atlas •wiata (Denmart)

Poland (2012)

29cm x 20.1cm

104p.

Dual naming (sea bodies) 2exonym / exonym 1 endonym / endonym 1
Sea between Korea and Japan [SEA OF JAPAN (EAST SEA)]

In general, the atlases with none to two cases of dual naming are



smaller atlases, atlases, which place particular emphasis on standardization, atlases, which preferably use exonyms, even for other geographical names like city names.

Two atlases do not show dual naming of sea areas. One of these atlases is the Latvian atlas “Jaunais pasaules •eogr•fijas atlantes (2016)”, which exclusively uses exonyms, even when it comes to other toponyms. Latvia has been independent since 1991. When considering the use of exonyms, one has to take Latvia's rigid language policy, which was

Rainer DORMELS

149

established to support the Latvian language, into account. A standardization of exonyms in the national language remains a high priority.

Also in Germany, the standardization of geographic names is of high importance. Thus, in the category of none to two cases of dual naming three out of nine atlases are German. The “Welt Atlas Kompakt” (2009) only uses dual naming when specifying the East Sea/Sea of Japan, similar to the two Bulgarian atlases.

The “ATLAS ACTUAL DE GEOGRAFÍA UNIVERSAL” (2015) from Spain shows two cases of dual naming of sea areas. The names “Estrecho de Dover” and “Paso de Calais” are arranged one below the other without any punctuation. The names “Mar del Este” and “Mar del Japón” are also arranged one below the other, whereby “Mar del Este” is on top, and both names are separated with a slash (/).

The “Wielki Atlas •wiata” (2006) officially shows six cases of dual naming of sea areas but since all of them are related to the sea around Cyprus and therefore are part of the same category of sea names, they will be grouped with atlases with none to two cases of dual naming.

When considering the atlases, the two books from Poland are the only ones that use endonyms for dual naming of sea names among the atlases with none to two cases of dual naming of sea areas. Whereas the “Wielki Atlas •wiata” (2006) uses these names for the sea around Cyprus, the “Geografia Atlas •wiata” (2012) specifies both the Polish and the German endonym “Zalew Szczeci•ski (Oderhaff)” for the Szczecin Lagoon, which lies between Poland and Germany (s. Chapter III.3 d).

The two atlases mentioned above as well as the “Die Welt Atlas Kompakt (Kunth)” (2009) state not only exonyms but also endonyms when naming cities.

Overall, in five out of seven atlases that show one to two cases of dual naming, dual naming is used for the sea between Korea and Japan. This demonstrates how even those atlases, which, in general, tend not to include dual naming, still make an exception for the East Sea/Sea of Japan.

Atlases with three to five cases of dual naming of sea areas

Školni ATLAS sv•ta
Czech Republic
(KARTOGRAFIE

PRAHA)
32cm x 23cm
Cities (Cologne, Milano) exonym (endonym)
230p.
(2011a)

Dual naming (sea bodies) 3exonym (exonym) 2 exonym / exonym) 1
Sea between Korea and Japan [Sea of Japan (East Sea)]

Školni atlas SV• TA (SHOcart) Dual naming (sea bodies)
Czech Republic (2011b) 29.7cm x 21cm
112p.
3exonym (exonym) 2 exonym exonym) 1

exonym (endonym)

[Sea of Japan East Sea]

FÖLDRAJZI ATLASZ (TOPOGRÁF)

Hungary (2010)

28.5cm x 20cm 144p.

150

SESSION V

Dual naming (sea bodies) 3exonym(endonym, endonym) 1 exonym (hybrid) 1 exonym (exonym) 1

[Sea of Japan]

endonym; exonym (endonym)

ATLASUL LUMII (Furtun•)

Romania (2012)

30cm x 21cm

144p.

3exonym (exonym) 2 hybrid / hybrid 1

exonym; endonym (exonym)

[East Sea (M. Sea of Japan)]

GROSSER KOZENN- ATLAS

Austria (2011)

32.5cm x 23.5cm

205p.

Dual naming (sea bodies) 4exonym / exonym 1 exonym (exonym) 3
Sea between Korea and Japan [Sea of Japan / East Sea]

öbv-freitag&berndt Schulatlas

Austria (2014)

30.5cm x 23cm

176p.

exonym / exonym 2 exonym (exonym) 1 exonym(endonym/endonym) 1

exonym (endonym)

[Sea of Japan / East Sea]

Diercke Weltatlas Österreich

Austria (2017)

29.7cm x 23.5cm 228p.

Sea between Korea and Japan [Sea of Japan (East Sea)] exonym (exonym) 3

• •••• MNPA

Russia (2009)

29cm x 22cm

96p.

5exonym (exonym) 2 hybrid (exonym) 2 endonym (exonym) 1

exonym

[Sea of Japan]

The majority of the atlases with three to five cases of dual naming of sea areas use both, exonyms and endonyms (stated in brackets), for city names. Regarding dual naming of sea areas, the cases where two exonyms are used are predominant.

Czech atlases usually use endonyms. Whenever a geographical entity has a known exonym, it is additionally stated in brackets, e.g., Köln (Kolín n. R.), München (Mnichov), Wien (Víde•)^１. As for sea names, exonyms are generally used. When examining the “Atlas Školni atlas SV• TA (SHOcart)” the following becomes evident: In case of the

１

Regarding the atlas Školni ATLAS světa (KARTOGRAFIE PRAHA) it is interesting to note that, when it comes to Korean city names, the atlas states toponyms in brackets, which are based on

a Czech Romanization of the original city names: Taegu (Tegu); Ch’ǒngjin (Čchongdžin); PYŎNGYANG (Pchjongjang), Cheju (Čedžu), Inch’ǒn (Inčchon); Taejǒn (Tedžon).

Rainer DORMELS

151

naming of the East Sea/Sea of Japan the equivalents of the names, “East Sea” and “Sea of Japan”, are treated equally: the “East Sea” lies in the western and the “Sea of Japan” in the eastern part of the sea area. A peculiarity is the naming of the Yellow Sea, where an equivalent designation to the “Yellow (Western) Sea” is used.

The atlases with three to five cases of dual naming of sea areas use endonyms in the case of dual naming of sea areas only three times:



“Csatorna (La Manche, English Channel)” in the Hungarian atlas “FÖLDRAJZI ATLASZ” (2012), where both the English and French endonyms are stated in brackets and follow the Hungarian exonym (“csatorna” means “channel”),



in parallel, the Austrian "öbv-freitag&berndt Schulatlas” (2014) states the name “Der Kanal (La Manche/English Channel)”,

vj g " T wuukc p " $Y g nvc vnc uÈ" *4 2 2 ; +" r t g ug p vu" Ù

152

SESSION V

Whereas those atlases with none to five cases of dual naming of sea areas only use endonyms for sea areas as an exception, it becomes apparent how the three atlases with ten or more cases of dual naming of sea bodies use endonyms regularly. The use of endonyms is the reason for the relatively high number of cases of dual naming of sea areas.

Regarding atlases with fewer cases of dual naming of sea areas, the cases where only two exonyms are used are in the majority. However, considering the three atlases examined, with ten or more cases of dual naming, it becomes evident that there is in each atlas only one case where two exonyms are used. It is the same for all three atlases: they state both names for the sea between Korea and Japan, “Sea of Japan” and “East Sea”.

In atlases with ten or more cases of dual naming of sea areas endonyms are also used for other geographical names.

A distinctive feature of the German “Die Welt Atlas mit Länderlexikon” (2017) is the fact that international sea areas, when there is an exonym, are designated with an English and not with a German name, e.g., “Sea of Japan”/“East Sea”. Also, even when more than one country surrounds a specific sea area, endonyms of two neighboring countries in some cases are used. For example, the Strait of Bonifacio is designated with the French endonym “Bouches de Bonifacio” and additionally the Italian endonym “Bocche di Bonifacio”. Not all maps of this atlas show the same toponyms for a specific sea area in all maps. For example, the Bay of Biscay is sometimes called the “Bay of Biscay," whereas other maps name it “Golf de Gascogne” and “Golfo de Vizcaya”. Similarly, the Adriatic Sea sometimes is called “Adriatic Sea”, while other maps name it “Jadransko More” and “Mare Adriatico”.

In the "DK World ATLAS. Compact” (2015) and in “The Times Reference ATLAS of the World” (2017) the cases, in which two endonyms are used, are the exception and reference to



sea areas around Cyprus, sea areas in Hongkong, the Gulf of Lawrence (Golfe du St-Laurent) in Canada, the English Channel and the Strait of Dover (see Chapter III.3).

CATEGORIZATION OF CASES OF DUAL NAMING OF SEA AREAS

Overview

First, the cases of dual naming of sea areas presented in the atlases examined will be analyzed concerning whether two exonyms, two endonyms or endonyms and exonyms are used in combination. Overall, the 20 atlases examined showed the following constellations of dual naming of sea areas:



exonyms only (32 cases), endonyms only (27 cases), endonyms and exonyms (32 cases).
In four additional cases, hybrid toponyms (composed endonyms) with a generic part of

Rainer DORMELS

153

the language of the atlas and a specific part of the endonym were used. The following arrangement treats these hybrid names like endonyms.

The study does not raise a claim of representativeness; its aim is to investigate various cases of dual naming of sea areas qualitatively – the number of cases is only secondary.

Dual naming of sea areas with the exclusive use of exonyms

When it comes to dual naming of sea areas with the exclusive use of exonyms, one has to differentiate between the following sea areas:



seas with controversial names (the sea between Korea and Japan, “The Gulf”) (see a and b),



sea areas, which enjoy dual naming in the 2002 draft of the IHO S-23 publication according to the IHO technical resolution A.4.2.6.: English Channel (La Manche), Strait of Dover (Pas de Calais), Bay of Biscay (Golf de Gascogne) (see c),



others (see d).

a) The sea between Korea and Japan

Atlas

Dual naming

Bulgaria (2012a) Bulgaria (2012b) Spain (2015)
• • •• •••/• ••••• • • •••
• • •• ••• • ••• (• ••••• • • •••) Mar del Este/Mar del Japón
JAPONSKÉ MO• E
(VÝCHODNI MO• E) VÝCHODNI MO• E JAPONSKÉ MO• E
Marea de Est (M. Japoniei) MORZE JAPO• SKIE
(WSCHODNIE) exonym/exonym exonym (exonym) exonym/exonym

Czech Republic (2011a)

exonym (exonym)

exonym exonym
Czech Republic (2011b)

Romania (2012)

exonym (exonym)

Poland (2012)

Österreich 2011 Austria (2017) Austria (2014)
Japanisches Meer/Ostmeer Japanisches Meer (Ostmeer) Japanisches Meer/Ostmeer
Japanisches Meer exonym/exonym exonym (exonym) exonym/exonym exonym
Germany 2009

Ostmeer

exonym

Sea of Japan East Sea exonym exonym
Germany (2017)
USA 2015 UK (2017)
Sea of Japan (East Sea) Sea of Japan (East Sea) exonym (exonym) exonym (exonym)

The characteristics of the dual names for the sea between Korea and Japan are:



this sea area is by far the area with the most cases of dual naming (14 cases) among the 20 atlases examined. Merely “Sea of Japan” or equivalent designations were found in the following six atlases: Latvia (2016), Germany (2005), Germany (2016), Poland (2006), Hungary (2010), Russia (2009),

154

SESSION V



in all cases of dual naming of the sea between Korea and Japan, there were two exonyms stated,

in nine cases, the name “Sea of Japan” was presented first, in two cases the name “East Sea”; in five cases both names were treated equally and presented next to each other.

b) The GulF

Atlas

Dual naming

Persischer Golf (Arabischer
Golf) alternatives

Österreich 2011

exonym (exonym)

Austria (2014) Germany (2005)
Persischer Golf/Arabischer Golf
Persisch / Arabischer Golf exonym/exonym exonym / exonym

When it comes to the dual naming of “The Gulf” there is, similar to the sea between Korea and Japan, only the form of using two exonyms. Concerning the examples examined, the use of dual naming is limited to atlases in German language.

“Sea of Japan/East Sea” and “Persian Gulf/Arabian Gulf” are the two sea areas, for which the “Empfehlungen zur Schreibung geographischer Namen in österreichischen Bildungsmedien“(2012) of the Austrian „Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Kartograpische Ortsnamenkunde (AKO)“ proposes dual naming.

c) Sea areas, which enjoy dual naming in the 2002 draft of the IHO S-23 publication according to the IHO technical resolution A.4.2.6.

Atlas

Dual naming

Estrecho de Dover Paso de Calais

Spain (2015)

exonym exonym

Czech Republic (2011a) Czech Republic (2011b)
Romania (2012)
Calaiská/ Doverská úžina Doverská (Calaiská) úžina Golful Biscaya (Gasconiei) exonym / exonym exonym (exonym) exonym (exonym)

In the 2002 draft of the IHO S-23 publication, the English name is used for those three sea areas, the French names are stated in brackets: English Channel (La Manche), Strait of Dover (Pas de Calais), Bay of Biscay (Golf de Gascogne). Different from the cases of dual naming of the sea between Korea and Japan and “The Gulf”, sometimes the atlases show two exonyms, sometimes two endonyms or one exonym followed by one or two endonyms.