Dual Naming of Sea Areas in Modern Atlases and Implications for the East Sea/Sea of Japan Case
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
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 non- English 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 Latvia (2016) 31.8cm x 22.5cm 168p. • eogr•fijas atlantes Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 0 exonym [Sea of Japan] Kosmos Weltatlas – Germany (2016) 30.6cm x 22.7cm 240p. kompakt Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 0 exonyms [Sea of Japan] Атлас на света Bulgaria (2012a) 23.5cm x 13.3cm 96p. (Datamap) Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 148 SESSION V 1 exonyms [Sea of Japan/East Sea] exonym (exonym) 1 CBETOBEH AT• AC Bulgaria (2012b) 21.2cm x 15cm 256p. (DK) Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 1 exonyms [Sea of Japan/East Sea] exonym (exonym) 1 ATLAS ACTUAL DE GEOGRAFÍA Spain (2015) 34cm x 25cm 208p. UNIVERSAL Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 2 exonym / exonym 1 exonyms [East Sea/Sea of Japan] exonym exonym 1 Unsere Welt Aktuell Germany (2005) 21cm x 15.5cm 256p. (Kunth) Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 2 exonym [Sea of Japan] exonym / exonym 2 Die Welt Atlas Germany (2009) 16.6cm x 11.5cm 256p. Kompakt (Kunth) Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 1 endonym (exonym) [Sea of Japan East Sea] exonym exonym 1 Wielki Atlas •wiata Poland (2006) 34.5cm x 24.5cm 356p. (Denmart) Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 6 endonym (exonym) [Sea of Japan] endonym / endoym 6 Geografia Atlas •wiata Poland (2012) 29cm x 20.1cm 104p. (Denmart) Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 2 exonym / exonym 1 endonym (exonym) [SEA OF JAPAN (EAST SEA)] endonym / endonym 1 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 32cm x 23cm 230p. (2011a) PRAHA) Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 3 exonym (exonym) 2 exonym (endonym) [Sea of Japan (East Sea)] exonym / exonym) 1 Školni atlas SV• TA Czech Republic (2011b) 29.7cm x 21cm 112p. (SHOcart) Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 3 exonym (exonym) 2 exonym (endonym) [Sea of Japan East Sea] exonym exonym) 1 FÖLDRAJZI ATLASZ Hungary (2010) 28.5cm x 20cm 144p. (TOPOGRÁF) 150 SESSION V Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 3 exonym(endonym, endonym) 1 endonym; exonym (endonym) [Sea of Japan] exonym (hybrid) 1 exonym (exonym) 1 ATLASUL LUMII Romania (2012) 30cm x 21cm 144p.