Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: CHAT: Czechia rears its head again

Expand Messages
  • coilinoc
    Sorry, here s the text in it s entirety: Don´t be afraid of CZECHIA, it needs your help! Pavel Krejèí, PhD pkrejci@phil.muni.cz Masaryk University, Faculty
    Message 1 of 62 , Sep 2, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Sorry, here's the text in it's entirety:

      Don´t be afraid of CZECHIA, it needs your help!
      Pavel Krejèí, PhD
      pkrejci@...

      Masaryk University, Faculty of Arts
      Department of Slavonic Studies, Section of South Slavonic and Balkan
      Studies
      Brno, Czechia


      (Written for the Internet journal for historical geography and
      environmental history Klaudyan (www.klaudyan.cz)


      "Combining the political name of a state with geographical
      names of other states appears communicatively unsuitable,
      stylistically clumsy, mannered, and undiplomatic."
      (From the "Opinion of geographers, linguists, historians,
      and other experts in science and humanities on the problem of the
      official one-word geographical name for the Czech Republic", Prague,
      Albertov, January 1998)

      Introduction
      Almost every state in the world has two denominations which,
      as a rule, are based on the name of the majority nation. (As a
      matter of course, this does not often apply to post-colonial states,
      or those considerably influenced by European nations in Africa,
      Asia, and Latin America; the present paper is concerned with the
      area of Europe which, in the past is decisive to us.) One of these
      denominations, the political name, renders the state´s structure and
      is used mainly on formal, official occasions. It has one essential
      disadvantage: a change of the state´s system of government implies a
      change of its political name. At present, for example, France is a
      republic but it used to be an empire and a kingdom; Serbia is also a
      republic today but, in the past, it was also a principality, a
      kingdom, a people´s republic, and a socialist republic. In a
      majority of the world´s countries, the political name contains in
      itself what is called the geographical name (or, in other words,
      the "short name"), that is, the other name of the state.1 This name
      usually originates in usage, derives from the name of the majority
      nation2 and is mainly used in commonly spoken language but also in
      social intercourse when it is more suitable and more natural than
      the political name (non-formal communication in politics, the fields
      of business, advertising, journalism, culture, sports, juristic
      texts [if the system of government of the state that they mention is
      irrelevant] etc.). It is short, most often monosyllabic and
      therefore easier to remember. Not least, the geopolitical,
      international, cultural importance of a state´s geographical name,
      which plays a unique role in the citizens´ historical identity, is
      based on the fact that, contrary to the political name, it implies
      the historical continuity of the territory concerned, its permanence
      and anchorage in time and space (even if it may be liable to
      changes). While the subject called the Czech (Socialist) Republic
      has existed since 1969 when the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic
      changed to the Federation of the Czech and the Slovak Socialist
      Republics, that is, for as few as 39 years (the last 15 of them
      since 1993 as an independent state after the peaceful split-up of
      the Federation in 31. 12. 1992), the history of Czechia has been in
      progress for more than a thousand years and includes the history of
      its three parts, i.e., the historical lands Bohemia, Moravia &
      Silesia.
      At the beginning of the year 2008 the Czech media adopted –
      in addition to the usual commemoration of the February events of
      1948 – one more subject: the 10th anniversary of the Czech ice-
      hockey team´s winning the gold medal at the Winter Olympic Games in
      Nagano, Japan. Thanks to television recordings and photos in the
      press we could also recall, apart from the excellent success of our
      representatives, a considerable disgrace which admittedly does not
      impair the sporting performance of the Czech team but, alas, will be
      involved in it for ever. It was the inscription on the bottom back
      part of our team´s sporting costumes, which announced in huge
      letters who was playing the match… And who was it? CZECH! The
      leaders of our ice-hockey union and of the Czech Olympic Committee
      were not able to supply our ice-hockey players (and not only them!)
      with uniforms carrying the adequate name, that is, the official one-
      word English denomination of the country which the sportsmen
      represented. Also ten years ago, by coincidence almost simulaneously
      with the Winter Olympics in Japan, another noteworthy event took
      place in Prague on 29 January. Experts in several branches of
      science and humanities as well as some representatives of the mass
      media were invited to come together at the Faculty of Science of the
      Charles University in Prague-Albertov. The session was organized by
      the Czech Geographical Society in collaboration with the Civic
      Initiative Èesko/Czechia (founded in Brno in autumn 1997). The
      results of the session are included in the Opinion of geographers,
      linguists, historians, and other experts in science and humanities
      on the problem of the official one-word geographical name for the
      Czech Republic. Since that time, the awkward and world-unique
      inability of calling ourselves by the correct name has finally been
      dealt with, to some extent at least. Thanks to the more open-minded
      among Czech journalists, the name Èesko was admitted to daily papers
      (the sports editors of the MF DNES and some journalists at the
      Lidové noviny were its pioneers; the Mediažurnál of the Syndicate of
      Czech Journalists also played an important role) and in the
      following decade the one-word name of this country brought itself to
      the citizens´ notice so much that it is quite in common usage today.
      An essential help in achieving this positive result was offered by
      the members of the CGS, the volunteers from the Civic Initiative
      Èesko/Czechia, and many other persons, both professionals and
      amateurs.
      And what has changed since the "Nagano" and the "Albertov"
      events in terms of the most imortant foreign-language equivalent?
      After a long and exhausting process of explaining, the ill-famed
      word CZECH finally disappeared from the uniforms of the ice-hockey
      players. During the negotiations, one could not help wondering at
      the enormous ignorance showed by the officials from the Ministry of
      Education and by the "big shots" in sports who were arrogant enough
      to decide what the country´s name should be, although they did not
      know much about language, history, and geography. However, what
      should have been on the uniforms of all our sportsmen from the very
      beginning of the modern Czech statehood has in fact never occurred
      there (except hockeyball players and boxers). The geographical name
      CZECHIA, approved fifteen years ago, codified, more and more
      frequent in social intercourse, is hindered from working on formal
      occasions. It is still surrounded by an impenetrable web of
      misinformation ("But in English we are only known as the Czech
      Republic!"), misunderstanding ("And why this particular name,
      Czechia?"), uncertainty ("Is this country really Czechia?"), fear
      ("I would agree, but what about my superiors?"), misconceptions
      ("Nobody knows that name." – "They will mix it up with Chechnya!" –
      "Only underdeveloped countries have the suffix -ia."), resistance
      ("Not Czechia, I don´t like it!"), refusal ("Nobody shall force
      anything on ME!"). While the domestic expression ÈESKO has caught on
      without essential problems, has become common usage, and has
      gradually ceased to be perceived unfavourably by the public or to be
      assessed inadequately from subjective, aesthetically biased
      viewpoints, its most important foreign-language equivalent – the
      English term CZECHIA – still contends with considerable difficulties
      in asserting itself.
      The roots of this unique situation, which is hard to
      understand beyond the country´s border, can be found in the period
      of death throes of the post-communist Czechoslovakia and the
      subsequent events. Insensitivity and inability of perceiving the
      socio-political reality of two equal nations allied in one state,
      which would also be expressed in adequate terms, was shown by the
      Czech political leaders during the so-called "hyphen war" as early
      as the first half of 1990. After the split-up of the Czechoslovak
      Federation, the independent Slovakia was a formation whose
      independence the Slovak citizens mostly welcomed or at least had no
      problems accepting. (Slovakia was one of the states which actually
      initiated the dismemberment of the three Slavonic communist
      federations [USSR, CSSR, SFRY=Yugoslavia] and therefore understood
      the achieved independence as a positive fact.) Unlike Slovakia, the
      independent (or, more adequately, forsaken and lonely) Czechia
      joined the opposite group – Russia and Serbia, the countries which
      felt the split-up of (their) federations as a territorial loss, as
      their own geo-political failure. Here we must seek the origin of the
      negative attitude to a name for a new state: almost nobody was
      preparing for the state´s birth, almost nobody wished it and,
      consequently, nobody was engaged in essential and responsible
      reflection on its name (see also Item 1).
      In the following items I will try to sum up and briefly to
      clarify the errors and misconceptions which have still survived in
      our society and startle us whenever we try to motivate the hesitant
      journalists, politicians, state officials, businessmen, trade
      corporations, sports unions, etc. and to make them contribute to a
      change in the surviving abnormal situation, i.e., that the majority
      of the population cannot call their own country by its name in the
      world´s most important language. Moreover, in some items, I come
      back to the social-political events which were connected with the
      boycott of the noun Èesko and thereby, in my opinion, immediately
      influenced the attitude to the English equivalent Czechia

      Item 1 – CZECH INDEPENDENCE
      Czech independence was not expected after 1989, was not
      wished by the Czechs because the desire for a (national) state of
      their own had been fulfilled as early as 1918 (and again in 1945) by
      the formation of Czechoslovakia. Therefore, the Czechs were
      absolutely unready for Czech independence, which also made them
      indifferent to the new state´s name (an unprecedented phenomenon in
      the world). The spleen for the end of Czechoslovakia, caused by
      Slovakia´s departure, transformed itself (among other things) into
      hatred for the one-word name of the new Czech state and clinging to
      the officially cold and formal political name Èeská republika (The
      Czech Republic).

      Item 2 – FOREIGN-LANGUAGE EQUIVALENTS OF THE NAME ÈESKO
      There was no problem with translating the name Èeská
      republika, as every language has its forms for the noun republika as
      well as for the adjective èeský (èeská in the feminine). As for the
      one-word (geographical) name for the new Czech state, things were
      different. After the initial very short and promising start
      (particularly in some mass media) Èesko, for hardly understandable
      reasons, soon fell into disfavour (shared also by ex-president
      Václav Havel) and its use was interrupted. The same applies to its
      equivalents in foreign languages. It should be pointed out that
      these had existed from 1993. They were approved by the
      Terminological Board of the Czech Office for Surveying, Mapping and
      Cadastre after consultations with other experts (such as
      geographers, linguists, historians, political scientists) and state
      authorities including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (whose
      representatives were among the members of the Board). Afterward the
      equivalents were published in the UNO Gazetteers of Geographical
      Names – Names of States and Their Territorial Parts (Prague 1993).
      In the same year, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs recommended all
      Czech diplomatic corps abroad to use the one-word names in everyday
      contacts. (Unfortunately, adherence to this guideline was left to
      the individual person´s discretion.) The above-mentioned publication
      includes the following names: Czechia (English), Tschechien
      (German), Tchéquie (French), Chequia (Spanish) and Чехия [Chekhiya]
      (Russian). Naturally, every European language has its own term for
      Èesko, the UNO Gazetteers only cite the most important European
      languages.

      Item 3 – WHERE AND WHY "CZECH" HAS COME INTO BEING
      Practical experience shows that those who insist that no one-
      word name is necessary are wrong. The unprecedented expansion of the
      absurd form Czech as a "substitute" for the officially approved
      geographical name Czechia or, on the other hand, the regional name
      Èechy (Bohemia) instead of Èesko, proves the absolute necessity of a
      one-word name for non-formal communication. Among those who are to
      blame for the expansion of the childish nonsense Czech3 we can cite,
      in particular, the Czech Olympic Committee, various sports unions
      (such as ice hockey, cycling, skiing, volleyball, handball,
      athletics, triathlon, etc.) and even such companies as Pilsner
      Urquell (see its label Brewed in Pilsen.Czech).4 They were soon
      followed by producers of caps and sports jackets decorated with the
      ill-famed CZECH. This is a unique phenomenon: nobody has ever seen
      caps or jackets with the inscriptions ENGLISH, FRENCH, GERMAN, or
      DUTCH. We, however, are foolish enough to proudly exhibit these
      goods on our own bodies whenever we travel abroad to attend
      important sporting events.

      Item 4 – WHERE DID CZECHIA "GET STUCK"?
      The English version Czechia was hindered in its "journey to
      the world" by the indifference of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
      Why? From 1993 on, its officials did not see to it that the
      Gazetteer of geographical (or "short") names, published by the UNO
      mapping service on their websites, included the name Czechia. The
      UNO service waited until 1995 but the Minister at that time, Josef
      Zieleniec from the Civic Democratic Party, who was authorized to
      take this step, did not sent any relevant information and,
      consequently, the column short name was completed with this
      country´s political name – Czech Republic…! An overwhelming majority
      of states are listed under correct geographical names, and so the
      Czech politicians´ indolence brought their own country in the
      company of such states as the Democratic People´s Republic of Korea,
      Laos People´s Democratic Republic, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Central
      African Republic, and Democratic Republic of the Congo, which –
      often for political reasons – also prefer the full name to the short
      one. The whole unfortunate affair managed to enter the highest
      circles of Czech politics in the first half of 2004: on May 11, the
      Senate of the Parliament held its 7th Public Hearing on Functional
      differentiation between the standard names `Èeská republika'
      and `Èesko', and their respective equivalents in foreign languages.
      The participants of the Hearing carried a final Memorandum which
      includes, among other things, the following:
      "We recommend
      1. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs to insist on observing
      the present terminological standards as well as its own internal
      memoranda and to introduce similar one-word labels (Czechia in
      English) for our delegations. It is recommended to adequately adapt
      the text of the Treaty underlying the Constitution for Europe and to
      inform the respective UNO bodies of the official English "short"
      name Czechia. The Ministry´s unambiguous approach will encourage
      other state authorities to take similar steps.
      2. The Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports to see that
      its own announcement which was published in the Ministry´s gazette
      No 11/1999 is observed, particularly in the texts of schoolbooks and
      also in the activities of national teams, because it is a custom all
      over the world to use geographical names in sports events (such as
      Austria, Canada, Slovakia, etc.)
      3. The Ministry of Industry and Commerce to see that the one-
      word name Czechia (Tschechien, Tchéquie, …) is used in order to
      consolidate a uniform visual style representing the state (in
      particular, to introduce the trade mark Made in Czechia for domestic
      products).
      4. The Ministry of Local Development not to admit any
      uncertainty in the uniform visual style of the Czech Republic in the
      field of tourism (i.e., to use the one-word name Èesko and its
      equivalents in foreign languages)."5

      Item 5 – WHY CZECHIA HAS NO OFFICIAL PROMOTION – Part 1
      The above-mentioned facts allow us to draw the following
      conclusion: if the state authorities had taken care of promotion of
      their own country from the very beginning, similar to other
      countries which arouse from disintegration of former communist
      federations, the public would have soon taken into account that the
      well established "trade mark" Czechoslovakia continues as Czechia,
      and there would be nothing to discuss today. Who knew the name
      Czechoslovakia before 1918? And did anybody know such names as
      Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, before 1990? Did the names Ukraine,
      Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania have any meaning to anybody beyond
      those countries? Let alone a Moldova? No. The difference (see also
      Item 1) lies in the approach to the problem. While the
      representatives of the above-mentioned countries took all necessary
      steps to make the new state formations known to the public, the
      Czechs did not do anything. To make matters worse, they even started
      to mislead the world by saying that the one-word name of the Czech
      state "does not exist", and that it "was invented by Hitler", it "is
      a Slovak word", it "is not official", etc. Howlers like these
      swarmed about particularly in the 1990s.6 Another typical
      misconception is what we call "the Chechnya fallacy".

      Item 6 – THE CHECHNYA FALLACY
      The "Chechnya fallacy" emerged for the first time in 2000 in
      connection with EXPO 2000 in Hannover. I do not remember all the
      details, but the point was that the letter h in the word Czechia
      which occurred somewhere (maybe in the map of the exhibition
      premises) was changed into n – either through a typing error (in a
      printed text) or by physical breaking off (in three-dimensional
      letters) and the word could be read as Czecnia. A journalist blew up
      this triviality to mean that the Germans mistake us for Èeèna (as it
      is spelled in Czech language). In the medial turmoil which followed,
      nobody took notice of the fact that the name is quite different in
      English (Chechnya) and that the discussed region is not an
      independent state and cannot have its own exhibition hall at EXPO.
      A "problem" emerged and a new pseudo-argument against Czechia was
      born. But it is a mere fallacy for several reasons:
      1. Names of states are anchored in history; in most cases –
      including ours – they come from the name of the majority nation who
      founded the state, who wanted it and worked on its formation (it is
      not essential whether its territory is also inhabited by members of
      other nations and ethnic groups). In our own language the attribute
      for the nation is èeský (Czech in English), the inhabitant is a
      Èech/Czech, we are Èeši/Czechs, and so we can only form a èeský
      stát/Czech state, that is, Èesko/Czechia.7 The root èech-
      (pronounced [t∫ek] in English) must logically, in various types of
      spelling, occur in other languages, and it really does (see Item 2).
      There is no other possibility. The fact that there are nations in
      the world whose names can sound similar, and accordingly also states
      whose names can – to somebody – sound similar, is only a secondary
      consideration. We have no choice but to teach ourselves not to
      confuse Austria with Australia, Thailand with Taiwan, Serbia with
      Siberia, Georgia (USA) with Georgia (a state in Transcaucasia), two
      Congos, two Koreas, three African Guineas (plus Papua-New Guinea),
      Iran with Irak (and Ireland), Prussia with Russia, Niger with
      Nigeria, Antigua with Anguilla, Gambia with Zambia, Zambia with
      Zimbabwe, Mali with Malawi, Columbia with British Columbia (Canada)
      and the US District of Columbia, Slovakia with Slovenia, Latvia with
      Lithuania, Libya with Liberia, various "Sans" – San Antonio, San
      Diego, San Francisco, San Marino, all the Central Asian "-stans",
      and God knows what else could anybody confuse. However, none of
      these countries applies the "directions for use" conceived by our
      propagators of the Chechnya fallacy! It would be an unprecedented
      sign of weakness, uncertainty and, above all, political immaturity,
      which could even raise doubts about such a country´s right to its
      own independent existence.
      2. True, somebody may confuse Chechnya with Czechia, but
      this rather demonstrates the person´s complete ignorance of
      geography than the "impropriety" of the name Czechia. If such an
      error occurs (e.g., in business negotiations, various presentations,
      etc.) it is quite easy to tell the ill-informed individual in one or
      two sentences where Czechia is situated. No matter how exotic the
      foreigner is, you do not need any extraordinary knowledge: most
      people have an idea of Europe and the European Union; or, at least,
      you can tell the foreigner that Czechia is the eastern neighbour of
      Germany. If this visitor does not even know where Germany is, keep
      calm, it is not your fault and certainly no reason for rearranging
      the geographical terminology. Should we perhaps insist on the
      political name with the word Republic? It would not help. Czech
      Republic and Chechen Republic are in a similar relation to each
      other as Czechia and Chechnya. If we took the Chechnya fallacy very
      seriously, it would, in the end, necessitate changing our nation´s
      name.
      3. An argument in the style of the Chechnya fallacy could
      never occur to any clear-headed person as it is absolutely erroneous
      and, in fact, unique. It actually says the following: if nation A
      finds out that a few individuals – foreigners – confused the state
      of nation A with another geographical formation B (not necessarily
      an independent state), nation A should change the name of its own
      state or choose another solution which will finally be less
      convenient. In my opinion such a passive and even dangerous method
      of thinking is really absurd.

      Item 7 – WHY CZECHIA HAS NO OFFICIAL PROMOTION – Part 2
      The promotion of our state under its one-word name was
      successfully launched as early (or rather as late) as the turn of
      the century, but when Mr. Gladiš took up the post as head of the
      governmental agency CzechTourism, all materials with the logo
      Czechia and other one-word equivalents in various languages were
      withdrawn due to hypocritical reasoning based on the Chechnya
      fallacy. The website visitczechia.com was cancelled; the slogan
      Czechia – Heart of Europe (where only an extraterrestrial might seek
      Chechnya) was withdrawn. Somebody´s personal aversion to Czechia,
      the official, objectively correct, linguistically accurate English
      term, resulted in a true censor´s intervention: Czechia was
      expurgated while the absurd Czech happily goes on raging and does
      not surprise anybody. Moreover, it is used in the address of the
      official websites of our state which are run – believe it or not –
      by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (www.czech.cz)! No further
      comment is necessary; the mind reels at the notion.8
      By the way, I often ask myself how it is possible that none
      of the Czech experts in publicity, advertising, public relations,
      etc., who attended various courses and workshops and are proud of
      their diplomas, certificates and qualifications, have ever hit upon
      the idea of exploiting the evident similarity of Czechia and
      Czechoslovakia in spoken and written form?!? It could easily
      demonstrate the continuity of Czechoslovak and Czech statehood. Both
      words include the root czech- and the suffix -ia, which is also
      present in the names of the Czech historical lands (Bohemia,
      Moravia, Silesia). In addition, there is the unique diagraph CZ
      which does not occur in any other name of a state or a geographical
      area in the entire world (certainly not in Chechnya!). I am saying
      all this in order to demonstrate that the Chechnya fallacy is a
      stupid, false and empty argument used by some persons who have done
      nothing for the promotion of our country although they get their
      salaries from public resources, that is, from our taxes. Worse than
      nothing: they have filled the whole affair with confusion,
      ignorance, arrogance, and incompetence.

      Item 8 – CESKO NEEDS ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
      Thanks to essential help of the mass media the one-word name
      has finally established itself in the Czech area: Cesko has a life
      of its own and – speaking in medical terms – it only needs to come
      for a checkup once a year. Czechia, on the other hand, is lying in
      the intensive care unit connected to medical devices, but no help is
      provided – the "doctors" don´t care a fig for this patient, and so
      he survives only because a kind nurse or another good soul brings
      him an orange from time to time. Czechia needs help however small it
      may be! Some help has been offered for a few years by producers of
      road maps: the East Moravian publishing house SHOCart&GeoClub was a
      pioneer. It would also help if the publishers of English versions of
      Czech internet papers decided to use the official one-word name of
      this country next to the others (e.g., Poland, Slovakia, Hungary ---
      Czechia.) At first, it would be enough to use the name occasionally
      so that the readers can get accustomed. It is wrong to argue that
      international agencies do not use Czechia – this is a confusion of
      cause and effect. If Czechia were used more often in the Czech area,
      it would certainly soon be adopted by international agencies. An
      important argument in favour of Czechia is the following: English is
      apparently the only language in Europe which "is not able" to
      translate the geographical name Èesko. Should we really believe that
      the English language – the lingua franca of today´s world – is so
      incompetent while, for example, Faeroese, spoken by about forty
      thousand islanders in the North Atlantic, or Icelandic, spoken by
      three hundred thousand inhabitants of a remote country of volcanos,
      geysers and icebergs, do have their own terms for Èesko (Tekkia and
      Tékkland, respectively)?

      Conclusion
      As the Chechnya fallacy is still one of the most
      frequent "counterarguments" which are used instead of a direct and
      reasonable answer whenever the question is asked "why not Czechia?",
      I would like to emphasize that it is wrong to adopt arguments based
      on the Chechnya fallacy and to believe them. This error is, however,
      easy to correct: relevant sources for names of states in general and
      for our state in particular are included in respectable
      publications; in this case they are geographical and linguistic
      publications. It is important to know that CZECHIA has been the
      official English equivalent of ÈESKO since the very beginning of
      modern Czech statehood and it is appropriate to use this term just
      as the one-word equivalents of Èesko are used in other languages.
      Insufficient dissemination (particularly) of the English one-word
      term for Èesko has been caused by the representatives and
      professional promoters of the new Czech state (often neither
      professional nor promoters), who badly underestimated the importance
      of the English one-word name in the international field. The
      allegation that Czechia "has not caught on" in the world and so "let
      us forget it and accept the widespread Czech" (such talk can
      sometimes be heard in political and economic circles) is again
      nothing but confusion of cause and effect. Those who are in a
      position to do something have done nothing; they only try to hide
      their own incompetence and shift the blame on "adverse
      circumstances".

      Notes
      In some states – including Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary, Albania,
      France – the ethnonymic or toponymic component of the political name
      is transformed in an adjective.
      2 Not always; to stay in the area of Europe, we can mention the
      opposite causative relation in such pairs as Nederland>Nederlander,
      Bosna>Bosanac/Bošnjak.
      3 Nonsense because it is no geographical name, and the meaning of
      the adjective Czech can easily be found in any English-Czech
      dictionary, childish because it reminds me of a similar method of
      thinking which I applied as a nine-year-old boy when I believed that
      the names of France, Italy and Hungary were Française, Italiana, and
      Magyar. I simply "cut off" the non-geographical components of the
      political names République Française, Repubblica Italiana, Magyar
      Népköztársaság, and the remaining words were the countries´
      geographical names! Unlike many adult present-day Czech VIPs, I
      corrected my error at an early age.
      4 Surprisingly enough, the Pilsen people have shown that they do
      know how to print the name of their country correctly: the limited
      series of their products distributed on the occasion of the Summer
      Olympic Games in Athens (2004) was labeled in Greek ΤΣΕΧΙΑ. Lo and
      behold! If it is possible in Greek, why not in English?
      5 See the Record on Proceedings of the 7th Public Hearing of the
      Senate on Functional differentiation between the standard names
      Èeská republika and Èesko, and their respective equivalents in
      foreign languages held on 11 May 2004 from 1:30 p.m. in the
      conference room of the Wallenstein palace. See also
      http://www.senat.cz/xqw/xervlet/pssenat/htmlhled?
      action=doc&value=27462>.
      6 Cf, among others, JELEÈEK, Leoš – RUBÍN, Josef (1998): Èechy jako
      synonymum pojmù Èeská republika, Èesko, èeské zemì, zemì Koruny
      èeské, aneb ztrácejí se nám Morava a Slezsko. Geografické rozhledy,
      7, 1997/ 98, No 4, p. 100-102; CHROMÝ, Pavel (1998): Èechy,
      Èechrava, Èesko. Geografické rozhledy, 7, 1997/98, No 4, p 98-99.
      7 Or, hypothetically, Èechy but the double meaning of the adjective
      èeský need not worry the English-speaking reader: Èechy + Morava +
      Slezsko (the 3 historical lands) make up the present-day Èesko. That
      is, in English, Bohemia + Moravia + Silesia = Czechia.
      8 One of the Ministry´s officials even declared in Olympian manner
      that we were too small a state to afford two names… ("Gems" like
      this are among the arguments mentioned in Item 5.)
      Translated by Eva Horová



      --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, "coilinoc" <coilinoc@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi there,
      > I get occasional emails from these people to my rozhlas address on
      > this subject. The latest one is below. I am posting it here,
      because
      > I reckon some of you might be interested:-)
      >
      >
      > Dear colleagues,
      > please find enclosed a text which responds to the inconsistent use
      > of the standardized English equivalent of the geographical name
      > Cesko. While the translation of this name does not cause any
      > difficulties in other languages, the situation in the English
      > language has been chaotic (and hence unsatisfactory) for as many
      as
      > fifteen years of independence of the Czech Republic. In our
      opinion
      > it is our professional duty to draw attention to this fact.
      > Therefore we contact you, too: considering your activities, we
      > believe that you cannot be indifferent to the present state of
      > affairs and that you can contribute efficiently to its
      rectification.
      >
      > Yours sincerely,
      >
      > PhDr. Libuse Cizmarova, CSc., Brno, linguist and translator
      > Doc. PhDr. Jiri Felix, CSc., Praha, linguist
      > PhDr. Eva Horova, Brno, linguist and translator
      > RNDr. Leos Jelecek, CSc., Praha, historical geographer
      > Karel Kopriva, Brno, representative of the Civic
      Initiative
      > Cesko/Czechia
      > Mgr. Pavel Krejcií, Ph.D., Brno, linguist and translator
      > Petr Schnur, M.A., Hannover, historian and sociologist
      >
      >
      > Don´t be afraid of CZECHIA, it needs your help!
      > Pavel Krejci, PhD
      > pkrejci@...
      >
      > Masaryk University, Faculty of Arts
      > Department of Slavonic Studies, Section of South Slavonic and
      Balkan
      > Studies
      > Brno, Czechia
      >
      >
      > (Written for the Internet journal for historical geography and
      > environmental history Klaudyan (www.klaudyan.cz)
      >
      >
      > "Combining the political name of a state with geographical
      > names of other states appears communicatively unsuitable,
      > stylistically clumsy, mannered, and undiplomatic."
      > (From the "Opinion of geographers, linguists, historians,
      > and other experts in science and humanities on the problem of the
      > official one-word geographical name for the Czech Republic",
      Prague,
      > Albertov, January 1998)
      >
      > Introduction
      > Almost every state in the world has two denominations which,
      > as a rule, are based on the name of the majority nation. (As a
      > matter of course, this does not often apply to post-colonial
      states,
      > or those considerably influenced by European nations in Africa,
      > Asia, and Latin America; the present paper is concerned with the
      > area of Europe which, in the past is decisive to us.) One of these
      > denominations, the political name, renders the state´s structure
      and
      > is used mainly on formal, official occasions. It has one essential
      > disadvantage: a change of the state´s system of government implies
      a
      > change of its political name. At present, for example, France is a
      > republic but it used to be an empire and a kingdom; Serbia is also
      a
      > republic today but, in the past, it was also a principality, a
      > kingdom, a people´s republic, and a socialist republic. In a
      > majority of the world´s countries, the political name contains in
      > itself what is called the geographical name (or, in other words,
      > the "short name"), that is, the other name of the state.1 This
      name
      > usually originates in usage, derives from the name of the majority
      > nation2 and is mainly used in commonly spoken language but also in
      > social intercourse when it is more suitable and more natural than
      > the political name (non-formal communication in politics, the
      fields
      > of business, advertising, journalism, culture, sports, juristic
      > texts [if the system of government of the state that they mention
      is
      > irrelevant] etc.). It is short, most often monosyllabic and
      > therefore easier to remember. Not least, the geopolitical,
      > international, cultural importance of a state´s geographical name,
      > which plays a unique role in the citizens´ historical identity, is
      > based on the fact that, contrary to the political name, it implies
      > the historical continuity of the territory concerned, its
      permanence
      > and anchorage in time and space (even if it may be liable to
      > changes). While the subject called the Czech (Socialist) Republic
      > has existed since 1969 when the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic
      > changed to the Federation of the Czech and the Slovak Socialist
      > Republics, that is, for as few as 39 years (the last 15 of them
      > since 1993 as an independent state after the peaceful split-up of
      > the Federation in 31. 12. 1992), the history of Czechia has been
      in
      > progress for more than a thousand years and includes the history
      of
      > its three parts, i.e., the historical lands Bohemia, Moravia &
      > Silesia.
      >
    • James Kirchner
      Thanks, Josef and Gerry. My hunch is now that this abbreviation is, in fact, document specific and doesn t call for translation. Jamie ... [Non-text portions
      Message 62 of 62 , Sep 6, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks, Josef and Gerry. My hunch is now that this abbreviation is,
        in fact, document specific and doesn't call for translation.

        Jamie

        On Sep 6, 2008, at 3:15 AM, Josef Hlavac wrote:

        > This is most likely a very specific jargon or a document-specific
        > abbreviation. Maybe even a brand/model designation. Certainly not a
        > commonly recognized abbreviation, not even in elec engineering.
        >
        > Josef
        >
        > James Kirchner wrote:
        > > Can anyone tell me what "DM" stands for in "DM ovladac" in an
        > > electrical appliance?
        > >
        > > Thanks.
        > >
        > > Jamie
        > >
        > >
        > > ------------------------------------
        > >
        > > Translators' tricks of the trade:
        > > http://czeng.wetpaint.com/
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.