Dual naming of areas in modern atlases and implications for the East Sea/Sea of 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 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/ 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 , .

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 , 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 (2016) 31.8cm x 22.5cm 168p. • eogrāfijas atlantes Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 0 exonym [Sea of Japan]

Kosmos Weltatlas – (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 (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 ATЛ 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 (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 świata (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 świata 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 •eogrāfijas 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 , 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 świata” (2006) officially shows six cases of dual naming of sea areas but since all of them are related to the sea around 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 świata” (2006) uses these names for the sea around Cyprus, the “Geografia Atlas świata” (2012) specifies both the Polish and the German endonym “Zalew Szczeciń ski (Oderhaff)” for the 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 světa (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 SVĚ 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 (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 (2012) 30cm x 21cm 144p. (Furtună) Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 3 exonym (exonym) 2 exonym; endonym (exonym) [East Sea (M. Sea of Japan)] hybrid / hybrid 1

GROSSER KOZENN- Austria (2011) 32.5cm x 23.5cm 205p. ATLAS Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 4 exonym / exonym 1 exonym (endonym) [Sea of Japan / East Sea] exonym (exonym) 3

öbv-freitag&berndt Austria (2014) 30.5cm x 23cm 176p. Schulatlas Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 4 exonym / exonym 2 exonym (endonym) [Sea of Japan / East Sea] exonym (exonym) 1 exonym(endonym/endonym) 1

Diercke Weltatlas Austria (2017) 29.7cm x 23.5cm 228p. Österreich Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 3 exonym (endonym) [Sea of Japan (East Sea)] exonym (exonym) 3

Атлас MNPA (2009) 29cm x 22cm 96p. Dual naming (sea bodies) Cities (Cologne, Milano) Sea between Korea and Japan 5 exonym (exonym) 2 exonym [Sea of Japan] hybrid (exonym) 2 endonym (exonym) 1 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 (Vídeň )１. As for sea names, exonyms are generally used. When examining the “Atlas Školni atlas SVĚ 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 , 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, )” 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 is sometimes called the “Bay of Biscay," whereas other maps name it “Golf de Gascogne” and “Golfo de Vizcaya”. Similarly, the 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 ,  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:  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) Японско/Източно море exonym/exonym Bulgaria (2012b) Японско море (• •••••• море) exonym (exonym) Spain (2015) Mar del Este/Mar del Japón exonym/exonym JAPONSKÉ MOŘ E Czech Republic (2011a) exonym (exonym) (VÝCHODNI MOŘ E) VÝCHODNI MOŘ E exonym exonym Czech Republic (2011b) JAPONSKÉ MOŘ E Romania (2012) Marea de Est (M. Japoniei) exonym (exonym) MORZE JAPOŃ SKIE Poland (2012) exonym (exonym) (WSCHODNIE) Österreich 2011 Japanisches Meer/Ostmeer exonym/exonym Austria (2017) Japanisches Meer (Ostmeer) exonym (exonym) Austria (2014) Japanisches Meer/Ostmeer exonym/exonym Japanisches Meer exonym Germany 2009 Ostmeer exonym Sea of Japan exonym Germany (2017) East Sea exonym USA 2015 Sea of Japan (East Sea) exonym (exonym) UK (2017) Sea of Japan (East Sea) 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 alternatives Persischer Golf (Arabischer Österreich 2011 exonym (exonym) Golf) Austria (2014) Persischer Golf/Arabischer Golf exonym/exonym Germany (2005) Persisch / Arabischer Golf 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 . “Sea of Japan/East Sea” and “/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 Spain (2015) exonym exonym Paso de Calais Czech Republic (2011a) Calaiská/ Doverská úžina exonym / exonym Czech Republic (2011b) Doverská (Calaiská) úžina exonym (exonym) Romania (2012) Golful Biscaya (Gasconiei) 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. exonym exonym endonym endonym hybrid sea area sum endonym exonym endonym exonym exonym endonym English Channel (La 5 2 2 1 Manche) Strait of Dover (Pas 6 3 2 1 de Calais) Bay of Biscay (Golf 2 1 1 de Gascogne)

Rainer DORMELS 155

d) Others

Atlas Dual naming ŽLUTÉ (ZÁPADNI) MOŘ E Czech Republic (2011b) exonym (exonym) [Yellow (West) Sea] Austria (2011) Westkoreagolf (Koreabucht) exonym (exonym) Austria (2011) Ostkoreagolf (Koreagolf) exonym (exonym) Gábeský zál. (Malá Syrta) Czech Republic (2011a) exonym (exonym) [Gulf of Gabès (Lesser Syrtis)] Austria (2017) Golf von Gabès (Kleine Syrte) exonym (exonym) залив Russia (2009) exonym (exonym) (Great Syrtis) Cиамский ( Russia (2009) exonym (exonym) [Gulf of Siam ()] Karib (Antilla) – tenger Hungary (2010) exonym (exonym) [ (Antillean) Sea] Austria (2017) Dardanellen (Hellespont) exonym (exonym) Thermaischer Golf (Golf von Austria (2014) Saloniki) [Thermaic Gulf (Gulf of exonym (exonym) Salonika)] Germany (2005) Scotia Meer (Südantillenmeer) Exonym (exonym) In the other eleven cases of using two exonyms, it becomes evident that seas, which border Korea, are involved three times. The term “West Sea” refers to an old Korean name for the Yellow Sea. In Korea the term “Yellow Sea” (황해) is officially used, the name “West Sea” (서해) still is sometimes designated in Korean atlases. Whatever led the Czech mapmakers to use the term “West Sea” is speculative but maybe it is some sort of over- correctness, and one wanted to show the parallels to the “East Sea”. “Westkoreagolf” and “Ostkoreagolf” are translations of the Korean endonym into German. Instead of using “Westkoreagolf”, “Ostkoreagolf” one could also say “Westkoreabucht” or “Ostkoreabucht”. The “Westkoreabucht” is also called “Koreabucht” in German. The reason behind this particular case of dual naming could be insecurities about the correct and clear designation. The “Empfehlungen zur Schreibung geographischer Namen in österreichischen Bildungsmedien” (2012) of the Austrian “Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Kartographische Ortsnamenkunde (AKO)” suggests the names “Östlicher Koreagolf” and “Westlicher Koreagolf”. In the other cases of dual naming of the list mentioned above, it is more or less an additional reference of alternative or historical names. For example, the Dardanelles, a narrow, internationally significant waterway that separates Asian- from European- Turkey is also known from Classical Antiquity as the “Hellespont (Sea of Helle)”. Vjg"fwcn"pco kpi "qh"ÙE

156 SESSION V

Dual naming of sea areas with the exclusive use of endonyms

In general, we differentiate between  two endonyms of two , where a sea area borders on a country with at least two official languages (see a and b) and  two endonyms, where a sea area borders on at least two countries and the endonyms of both countries are listed (see c and d).

a) Sea areas round Cyprus

Atlas Dual naming alternatives Gazimağ usa Körfezi / Kólpos Turkish endonym/Greek Poland (2006) Ammochóstos endonym Kólpos Lárnakos / Larnaka Greek endonym/ Turkish Poland (2006) Körfezi endonym Kólpos Ákrō tīriou /Ağ rotur Greek endonym/ Turkish Poland (2006) Körfezi endonym Kólpos Épıskopīs / Piskobu Greek endonym/ Turkish Poland (2006) Körfezi endonym Kólpos Chrysochoús /Hrisohu Greek endonym/ Turkish Poland (2006) Körfezi endonym Güzelyurt Körfezi /Kólpos Turkish endonym/Greek Poland (2006) Mórfou endonym Gazimağ usa Körfezi (Kólpos Turkish endonym (Greek USA (2015) Ammóchostos) endonym) Güzelyurt Körfezi (Kólpos Turkisch endonym (Greek USA (2015) Mórfoú) endonym) Since these sea areas are relatively small, most maps do not call them by their names. Anyway, whenever their names are mentioned, the atlases examined use dual naming. (s. also Chapter III.4.c). Cyprus has been divided since 1974. The Republic of Cyprus governs the southern part (60% of the island). The north (36% of the island) is since November 1983 administered by the proclaimed Turkish Republic of , which is only recognized by Turkey. In 1974, this part of Cyprus was occupied by Turkish military forces, after a coup aimed at the annexation of Cyprus to . The buffer zone between both areas, around 4% of the island, is also called “the green line” and divides also the capital . Peacekeeping forces of the supervise and manage the zone. Until now, all Cyprus reunification plans failed. The use of both Turkish and Greek endonyms takes into account the existence of Greek-Cypriot and Turkish-Cypriot areas, whereby the first-mentioned endonym shows the sphere where the sea area is situated.

b) Nations with more than one

Atlas Dual naming UK (2017) Deep Bay (Shenzen Wan) endonym (endonym) UK (2017) Mirs Bay (Dapeng Wan) endonym (endonym) Gulf of Lawrence (Golfe du St- UK (2017) endonym (endonym) Laurent) The “Deep Bay (Shenzen Wan)” and the “Mirs Bay (Dapeng Wan)” lie in Hongkong,

Rainer DORMELS 157 where English and Chinese are the official languages. The Gulf of Saint Lawrence is a semi-enclosed sea. Half of the ten provinces of Canada adjoin the Gulf: New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Québec. In Canada, both English and French are the official languages. Québec, where a big part of the Gulf borders, is the only Canadian province with French as the only official language.

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 English Channel endonym Germany (2017) La Manche endonym UK (2017) English Channel (La Manche) endonym (endonym) Strait of Dover endonym Germany (2017) Pas de Calais endonym UK (2017) Strait of Dover (Pas de Calais) endonym (endonym) Golf de Gascogne endonym Germany (2017) Golfo de Vizcaya endonym [Bay of Biscay] In the case of the English Channel (La Manche) and Strait of Dover (Pas de Calais) the selection of names used in the atlases “Germany (2017)” and “UK (2017)” is similar to the suggestions of the IHO. For the Bay of Biscay (Golf de Gascogne) “Germany (2017)” uses the French endonym and the Spanish endonym, since said area borders on and Spain.

d) Endonyms of various nations

Atlas Dual naming Zalew Szczeciń ski (Oderhaff) Polish endonym/ German Poland (2012) [Szczecin Lagoon (Oder endonym Lagoon)] Pommersche Bucht endonym Germany (2017) Zatoka Pomorska endonym Stettiner Haff endonym Germany (2017) Zalew Szczeciń ski endonym Liivi Laht endonym Germany (2017) Rīgas līcis endonym [Gulf of ] Kura kurk endonym Germany (2017) Irbes šaurums endonym [Irbe Strait] Bottenviken endonym Germany (2017) Perämeri endonym [] Bottenhavet endonym Germany (2017) Selkämeri endonym [] Jadransko More endonym Germany (2017) Mare Adriatico endonym [Adriatic Sea] Germany (2017) Canale di Sicilia endonym

158 SESSION V

Canal de Túnis endonym Bouches de Bonifacio endonym Germany (2017) Bocche di Bonifacio endonym [Strait of Bonifacio] Mar Ionio endonym Germany (2017) Ionio Pelagos endonym [] Stating the Polish and German endonym for "Zalew Szczeciń ski (Oderhaff)” in the Polish atlas catches the eye specifically. In this regard it should be mentioned that in the area bordering the Polish People’s Republic the “Pommersche Bucht” and “Stettiner Haff” were renamed after 1945, the new names being “Oderbucht” and “Oderhaff”. Background is border conflicts between German and Polish communists arose around already in 1945 in the area to the west of the Oder river situated city of Szczecin (in German: Stettin) which finally became a part of Poland. Originally, the city of Szczecin was administered by German and Polish communists together. The “Szczecin Lagoon” (in German: Stettiner Haff, in Polish: Zalew Szczeciń ski) was renamed as a result in the GDR of that to “Oder Lagoon” (in German: Oderhaff). In the second half of the 80s a quarrel around the sea border within the Pomeranian Bay stepped up between the GDR and Poland. had considerably expanded its territory in the Pomeranian Bay before Szczecin unilaterally in 1977. East reacted with sharp protest. The reasons for this quarrel are varied and complicated. It was about the free access for Polish ships through the Pomeranian Bay to the open sea and fishing rights. Then in 1989, a compromise that flowed into a contract between the GDR and Poland came up. The Federal Republic of Germany also recognized this contract after the reunion. It may be stated that the GDR gave up the names “Pomeranian Bay” and “Szczecin Lagoon” in favor of “Oder Bay” and “Oder Lagoon” after 1945. Nevertheless, after the reunion of Germany the old names are officially used again (Dormels 2008, 120-123). The reason behind the dual naming of “Zalew Szczeciń ski (Oderhaff)” maybe to stress the German endonym in contrast to the older endonym (“Stettiner Haff”). It is a characteristic of the “Die Welt. Atlas mit Länderlexikon (2017)” to use two endonyms for international waters. It is unusual but also a distinctive feature of the atlas and distinguishes it from others. Regarding the above-described sea areas between Poland and Germany, the atlas declares the German endonym “Pommersche Bucht” and “Stettiner Haff” instead of “Oderbucht” and “Oderhaff”, in addition to the Polish endonym.

Dual naming of sea areas with the use of endonyms and exonyms

 In general, one has to differentiate between  cases, where two different names are stated, one as an endonym and the other (or two) as an exonym (a) and  cases, where the exonym gives a translation of the endonym (b and c).

Rainer DORMELS 159

a) Cases, where to different names are stated, one as an endonym and the other (or two) as exonym

Atlas Dual naming Csatorna (La Manche, English Hungary (2010) Channel) exonym (endonym, endonym) [Channnel] Der Kanal (La Manche/Englisch Austria (2014) exonym (endonym/endonym) Channel) Russia (2009)

160 SESSION V

USA (2015) Kritikó Pélagos (Sea of ) endonym (exonym) USA (2015) Khalīj Surt (Gulf of ) endonym (exonym) USA (2015) Khalij as Suways (Gulf of ) endonym (exonym) Marmara Denizi (Sea of USA (2015) endonym (exonym) Marmara) USA (2015) Beloye More () endonym (exonym) USA (2015) Dodekánsia (Dodecánese) endonym (exonym) USA (2015) Çanakkale Boğ azi (Dardanelles) endonym (exonym) UK (2017) Laut Maluku () endonym (exonym) UK (2017) Laut Sawu () endonym (exonym) UK (2017) Laut Seram (Ceram Sea) endonym (exonym) UK (2017) Laut Flores () endonym (exonym) UK (2017) Laut Jawa () endonym (exonym) UK (2017) Laut Banda () endonym (exonym) UK (2017) Selat Makassar () endonym (exonym) UK (2017) Laut Bali () endonym (exonym) Č orne more endonym Germany (2017) exonym Black Sea exonym Germany (2017) Kara Deniz endonym

c) Exonym and additional use of an endonym for the same name

Atlas Dual naming UK (2017) White Sea (Belyoye More) exonym (endonym) UK (2017) (Karskoye More) exonym (endonym) UK (2017) (More Laptevykh) exonym (endonym) (Vostochno- UK (2017) exonym (endonym) Sibirskoye More) (Okhotskoye UK (2017) exonym (endonym) More) UK (2017) Yellow Sea (Huang Hai) exonym (endonym) (Marmara UK (2017) exonym (endonym) Denizi) UK (2017) Bosporus (İstanbul Boğ azi) exonym (endonym) Hainan Strait (Qiongzhou UK (2017) exonym (endonym) Haixia) Gulf of Gascony (Golfe de UK (2017) exonym (endonym) Gascogne) Oroszlán (Lion)öböl [Gulf of Hungary (2010) exonym (hybrid) Lion, Golfe du Lion] Romania (2012) G. / Gazımağ usa exonym/ hybrid With two exceptions, one can only find examples of dual naming of sea areas with an endonym and an exonym in the three atlases, which show ten or more cases of dual naming of sea areas: USA (2015), UK (2017) and Germany (2017). When it comes to “Oroszlán (Lion)öböl [, Golfe du Lion]”, “Oroszlán öböl” would be considered an endonym (“Oroszlán” means lion in Hungarian). “Lion öböl” is a hybrid form (or composed endonym) of the specific part (“Lion”) of the French exonym (“Golfe de Lion”) and the Hungarian generic part “öböl” (gulf). The Gulf of Famagusta de facto lies in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. The Rumanian atlas adds the Turkish name for Famagusta in addition to the exonym. Other

Rainer DORMELS 161 atlases stated the Turkish as well as the Greek endonym (see Chapter III.3.a). In the case of the Black Sea, the “Die Welt. Atlas mit Länderlexikon (Germany 2017)” introduces a map, which uses the English exonym “Black Sea” and also the Russian endonym “Č orne more”. Besides, it also presents another map, on which the Turkish endonym “Kara Deniz” and “Black Sea” stand next to each other. All three atlases with ten or more cases of dual naming of sea areas use for “İstanbul Boğ azi (Bosporus)” the exonym and the endonym as well. In some cases, the exonym is used first, and the endonym is meant to be an explanation stated in brackets, in other cases (especially in UK 2017) the endonym is used first, and the exonym should be considered additional information in parentheses. Whether the order has some special significance or not, is speculative. In general, endonyms are used for sea areas, which are surrounded by only one country. However, this is not the case when it comes to the “Yellow Sea (Huang Hai)” (UK 2017), which lies between and Korea. In “Limits of and Seas” “Huang Hai” is stated in addition to the “Yellow Sea”: 1928: „Yellow Sea or Hung Hai“, 1937: Yellow Sea or Hwang Hai“, 1953: Yellow Sea (Hwang Hai)“, draft 1986 and 2002 „YELLOW SEA“ (Kim Shin 2005, 274-287). “UK (2017)” differentiates principally regarding the use of endonyms from the draft of the 4th Edition of the IHO S-23 (2002). The Introduction of the draft explains: “For the generic naming of sea areas, with limited exceptions, English has been used for ‘’ and ‘Seas’ to conform to the title. For other areas, such as ‘Straights’, ‘Bays’, ‘Channels’ and ‘Gulfs’ English has been used when the areas are surrounded by more than one country and the national language has been used when the area is surrounded by only one country …”. In concrete terms this means, that the IHO publication uses the endonym “Selat Makasar” with the footnote “Makasar Straits (English)”, while on the other side the exonym “Flores Sea” is used in the IHO draft, whereas UK (2017) uses “Laut Seram (Ceram Sea)”, the endonym (and the exonym in brackets), even for “seas”.

Evaluation

 As shown in III.2. to III.4, there are various modes and different reasons for the use of dual naming of sea areas:  sea areas with controversial names (the sea between Korea and Japan, “The Gulf”),  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),  sea areas used to have a different name historically, e.g., “Dardanelles (Hellespont)”,  sea areas with more than one exonym in the same language, e.g., “Thermaischer Golf (Golf von Saloniki)”,  mapmakers' insecurities in regards to the name, e.g., “Westkoreagolf (Koreabucht)”,

162 SESSION V

 over-correctness, e.g., „ŽLUTÉ (ZÁPADNI) MOŘ E [Yellow (West) Sea]“,  there are two endonyms of two languages, where a sea area borders on a country with at least two official languages,  there are two endonyms stated for the sea area, while the sea area borders on at least two countries and the endonyms of both countries are stated, e.g., “Bouches de Bonifacio”; “Bocche di Bonifacio” (Germany 2017),  the endonym and the exonym for the same name are stated, e.g., “Laut Seram (Ceram Sea)”,  political considerations, e.g., “Zalew Szczeciń ski (Oderhaff)”. This list is not complete. One can also achieve other interpretations when it comes to dual naming of sea areas. Other reasons are plausible, but those were not to be found regarding sea names in the atlases examined. City names, however, showed how various Romanization systems could lead to dual naming, for example, the atlas “Školni ATLAS světa (KARTOGRAFIE PRAHA)” stated the names of Korean cities using the McCune- Reischauer Romanization system. Still, it included another name, which was based on a Czech Romanization system, in parentheses: Taegu (Tegu); Ch’ǒ ngjin (Č chongdžin) etc. The “Atlas of China”, published by National Geographic (2007), also used the McCune- Reischauer Romanization system for some South Korean cities in brackets additionally to the official Romanization as used by the Government of , e.g., (Kwangju) Gwangju; (Pusan) etc. Similar ways of dual naming would also be theoretically possible regarding sea names.

CONCLUSION

Dual naming and standardization

The aim of the consistent use of geographic names is the avoidance of confusion and misunderstandings in many areas of life. Confusion and misunderstandings come about because:  some places carry more than one name,  a name is valid for several sites,  the reproduction of a name from other languages raises questions of the “right” manner of writing (StAGN).２ Therefore, the standardization of geographic names aims to provide only one single version of the spelling of the name (in every character font system of every geographic

２ Standardizing geographical names mean for example, that with more names for one and the same geographical object one of them has to be made officially recognizable and its orthography needs to be defined through effective regulations. Basically, it is the goal to reach uniformity in public for geographical names. The standardization is therefore not only here for administrational purposes but also for the ministerial topographical cartography, the science, national education, the media, and every citizen who tries to orientate himself geographically. (StAGN, without year) (http://141.74.33.52/stagn/WassindgeographischeNamen/tabid/68/Default.aspx)

Rainer DORMELS 163 property (Ormeling 2009, 5). “The existence of more than one name for a given place raises uncertainty and can lead to confusion”３. From the view of the supporters of standardization, the positive aspects are in the majority, as long as the cases of dual naming are reduced to a minimum (s. Dormels 2011, 235-237). On the other hand, there are examples in the present study, which showed how giving more than one name provides additional information and proves to be interesting to the reader.

Implications of dual naming for the East Sea/Sea of Japan case

The present studies, concerning the naming of the sea between Korea and Japan, have achieved the following:  The East Sea/Sea of Japan is the sea area, which by far showed the most use of dual naming in the 20 atlases examined: - East Sea/Sea of Japan 14 times dual naming, - Strait of Dover (Pas de Calais) 6 times dual naming, - English Channel (La Manche) 5 times dual naming, - Persian Gulf/Arabian Gulf 3 times dual naming.  In all 14 cases of dual naming two exonyms were used. This differentiates this sea area from the Strait of Dover (Pas de Calais) and the English Channel (La Manche), which are presented in various modes through dual naming.  Even in the atlases, which tend to avoid dual naming of sea names and only allow for it in very few cases, in most cases the East Sea/Sea of Japan is being presented with dual naming. This means that dual naming for the East Sea/Sea of Japan using two exonyms is widely accepted, not only in atlases, which include many cases of dual naming anyhow but also in many books, which feel connected to standardization to geographic names. The standardization of geographical names has not only technical but also political implications. A brochure of the UNGEGN (2005) states that, a correct use of local name favors the reduction of political tensions and contributes to the peace between nations. Ormeling (2009, 6) thus speaks of a principal purpose and a secondary goal of the standardization of geographic names. He designates therefore as a principal purpose the avoidance of ambiguity and confusion; it is a matter of winning time. Nevertheless, as a secondary goal, he also names the avoidance of political conflicts, and he states Macedonia, the Arabian-Persian Gulf and the East Sea/Sea of Japan as examples. Dual naming could play a part in avoidance of political conflicts but also in the promotion of peaceful cooperation. The present study showed many examples of dual naming of sea names in modern atlases. Among them were interesting, informative, useful and curious

３ http://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/UNGEGN/mediakit.html

164 SESSION V examples. Not all of the cases presented may seem helpful or valuable to everybody and all maps. However, in the case of the East Sea/Sea of Japan, the reasons for the use of dual naming seem to have prevailed as far as many mapmakers are concerned.

REFERENCES

Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Kartographische Ortsnamenkunde (AKO) (2012), (ed.) (pp. 125). Vienna: VÖAW. Dormels, R. (2008). Sea names in concurrence: examples from . In: The Society for East Sea & The Northeast Asian History Foundation (ed.), Proceedings of the 14th International Seminar on Sea Names, pp. 119-128. Dormels, R. (2011). Dual naming of oceans and seas: theory and praxis. In: The Society for East Sea & The Northeast Asian History Foundation (ed.), Proceedings of the 17th International Seminar on Sea Names, Vancouver, pp. 233–250. IHB (International Hydrographic Bureau). (1953). . 3rd Edition. . IHB (International Hydrographic Bureau). (2002). . 4th Edition June 2002. English Version. Final Draft. Monaco. Kim, Shin. (2005). (pp.396) : Jiyoungsa. MoFA/NAHF. (2014 "East Sea. The Name from the Past, of the Present and for the Future", Retrieved 2009-07-22: http://www.eastseakorea.com/east-sea-name-past-present-future/. Ormeling, F. (2009). "Standardization of Geographical Names". Paper presented at the 8th UNCSGN, Retrieved 2009-07-22: Laza-rus.elte.hu/hun/tanterv/ferjan/ormelingsgn1.ppt. StAGN (o.J.). (2009). "Was sind geographische Namen? Warum standardisierte geographische Namen? Wer beschäftigt sich mit der Standardisierung?", Retrieved 2009-07-20: http://141.74.33.52/stagn/WassindgeographischeNamen/tabid/68/Default.aspx UNGEGN. (2005). "Einheitlicher Gebrauch von Ortsnamen", Retrieved 2009-07- 20: http://141.74.33.52/stagn/Portals/0/050819_UNGEGN_Brochure_ger_small.pdf.

ATLASES

Datamap. (2009). . Russia, pp.96. Datamap. (2012). . Bulgaria, pp.96. Denmart. (2006). . Poland, pp.356. Denmart. (2012): . Poland, pp.104 Diercke. (2017). . Österreich, pp.228. Dumont. (2017). . Germany, pp.360. Ed. Hölzel. (2011). . Österreich, pp.205. Furtună, Constantin. (2012). . Romania, pp.144. Karšu izdevniecība Jāņ a seta. (2016). . Latvia, 168p. Kartografie Praha. (2011): . Czech Republic, pp.176. Kindersley, Dorling. (2012). . Bulgaria, pp.256. Kindersley, Dorling. (2015). 6th Edition 2015. New York, pp.192. Kosmos. (2016). . Redaktion: Irmgard Sigg; Kartografie: Liana Steinborn, Annette Wrobel. , Germany pp.240. National Geographic Soe kg v{ "*ƒ vc vu-Unis). (2008). , USA, pp.128. öbv – freytag & berndt. (2014). . Austria, pp.176. Rq p u. "Lq t f k"Kpf wt “ kp . "Go knk"N…r g | "k"Vq uuc u. "O c t kp c "D c vnng "D t wi c n. (2015).

Rainer DORMELS 165

. 4th edition. VOX., pp.208. SHOcart. (2011). . Czech Republic, pp.112. Times Atlases. (2015). . UK, pp.272. TOPOGRÁF Térképészeti Kft. (2010). . Hungary, pp.144. Verlag Wolfgang Kunth. (2005). . Germany, pp.256. Verlag Wolfgang Kunth. (2009). . Germany, pp.256.

166 SESSION V