51–60 of 262 posts
Why can't we just write names as "Smith, John" when it's in the Asian order and "John Smith" or "John·Smith" if its in the Western order? It would remove all the ambiguity using already existing conventions.
Because the comma breaks English grammar when it’s in the middle of a sentence.
Why can't we just write names as "Smith, John" when it's in the Asian order and "John Smith" or "John·Smith" if its in the Western order? It would remove all the ambiguity using already existing conventions.
It disregards the cultural history of names to suit what’s easiest for Western Europeans to understand.
FirstWestern Family FirstChinese
Such as Andrew LEUNG Kwan-yue, Tommy CHEUNG Yu-yan, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really don't see how it "It disregards the cultural history of names". As far as I'm concerned the order of the names is just a minor grammatical difference.
One person cannot speak for an entire gamut of people. There will be people for whom the way one says their name is not a simple matter of grammar but of identity, pride, family history, etc. The Japanese respect the rest of the world enough not to reverse our names — Brad Pitt doesn't become Pitt Brad — so there's no reason why we cannot accord the same back. There may also be great personal meaning or even simple w…
For example, Stephen Paul Jobs is rendered from Roman to Kana as スティーブン・ポール・“スティーブ”・ジョブズ Suteibun Pouru Jobuzu
In Chinese as 史蒂夫·喬布斯 Shidifu Qiaobusi
Personally I think this is a matter of translation. In English the personal name comes first followed by the surname. In Japanese honorifics come after the name but it would be quite silly to ask foreign media to call Abe Shinzo "Abe Shinzo Mr." instead of "Mr. Abe Shinzo" or for an American to ask British media to not refer to American mothers as "mum". Sometimes localizing a name means altering it.
When Chinese or Japanese concert Roman names to Hanzi/Kana, they try to observe the FIRSTNAME LASTNAME convention if preferred by that culture. Such as スティーブン・ポール・“スティーブ”・ジョブズ (Steven Paul “Steve” Jobs)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the comma breaks English grammar when it’s in the middle of a sentence.
That's a good point. Perhaps we could use Smith`John since the grave character is rarely used.
Either way let’s just agree to start using the ` from here out and the internet will catch on.
This is fantastic. Living in both the English and Japanese-speaking worlds, it'll be nice not having to go through mental gymnastics to remember how to call somebody in whichever language. I think consistency is preferable; it's surely not impossible for people to be educated on name order.
If I'm not mistaken, his suggestion would make the Japanese convention less consistent with the English convention (while making it more consistent with the Chinese convention).
Did this article put his given name first, despite being about him asking that the media put the family name first? I wonder if he finds that as frustrating as I do.
I doubt this individual example frustrates Kono any more than the general rule. He'll understand outlets don't vary such things case-by-case, according to individual news-subjects' preference, which is why he's making a formal request that norms change.
The headline would be clearer, both here and where it originally appeared, if it specified "international media", and used "respect order" rather than "switch order" – to avoid the interpretation that he was asking domestic media to switch to the English-speaking-world's more typical ordering.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a good point. Perhaps we could use Smith`John since the grave character is rarely used.
Inventing things like this is needless. We don't put commas or grave characters in Chinese and Korean names.
>Foreign Minister 河野 太郎 (Kōno Tarō) said Tuesday he plans to ask overseas media outlets to write Japanese names with the family name first, as is customary in the country.
Implicitly that would be a declaration that the English isn't authoritative.