Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gulf of America name change in the U.S.

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–66 of 66 posts

Re: Gulf of America name change in the U.S.

#61

Post by marcusverus »

inejge wrote: post #48
marcusverus wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Denali is just the word for 'tall' in some local dialect. It is not exactly pregnant with meaning. > It seems like a reduction in politics, not a continuation. That's an odd take given that there was far less political discussion around the mountain's name prior to its renaming under Obama.

> Denali is just the word for 'tall' in some local dialect. It is not exactly pregnant with meaning. Look up the etymology of Mont Blanc or the Himalayas -- not especially pregnant with meaning either. The point is that using the local name, if it existed, was a pretty well established principle in cartography, made more conspicuous when overlooked, as with Mt. Everest. And Denali.

"Mont Blanc"? The descendants of the celtic peoples who originally populated the area would take issue with that moniker. They didn't have a true written language back in the daye, but they did have a rune-like symbol for that mountain that looks just like unicode character U+1F4A9. Hopefully in time we will all refer to the mountain in a more respectful way.

Re: Gulf of America name change in the U.S.

#62

Post by Schiendelman »

marcusverus wrote: post #60
Schiendelman wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you lack empathy for others, and it's leading you to discount things that matter to people.

Empathy is telling 300,000,000 people to call the mountain "Denali" just because it matters to some 2,000 extant members of a tribe? Are you sure that's empathy? Because to me it seems empty and performative. I could be wrong though. Do you suggest that we use native terms for every landmark that matters to the erstwhile locals, given that their feelings about place names mean so much? Now that I think about it, of c…

Wow. Yes, I hope you inspect your relationships with people.

Re: Gulf of America name change in the U.S.

#63

Post by CogitoCogito »

diegof79 wrote: post #33
TriangleEdge wrote: post #10

Are there other instances of differing names by country? I don't mean language differences. I found it strange that for the rest of the world, they'll see both.

It's pretty standard when there is a territory in dispute. For example, Islas Malvinas (for Argentina) / Falkland Islands (for the UK).

But this isn't a territory dispute this is just an internal US name change.

Here in the Czech Republic it now shows up as "Mexický záliv (Americký záliv)". Why are they adding "Americký záliv" in a parenthetical? It's not like the executive order has any effect outside the US. Why would they change the name in any way anywhere but in the US? By what reasoning would they change the name in the Czech Republic but not in Mexico? US official naming means nothing to Mexico just as it means nothing to Czech Republic.

Re: Gulf of America name change in the U.S.

#64

Post by CogitoCogito »

nostrademons wrote: post #26
nticompass wrote: post #3

Since myself and everyone I know refuses to acknowledge this "name change"... what map apps do you guys recommend?

VPN to Mexico, or just set your device location outside of the U.S.

In the Czech Republic at least, Google Maps now shows "Mexický záliv (Americký záliv)". I'm not sure which countries still see the original name other than Mexico.

Re: Gulf of America name change in the U.S.

#65

Post by [deleted] »

exabrial wrote: post #37

I found the whole "renaming things war" the first time stupid; as it peaked with renaming "master" to "main", highlighting both an ignorance and literacy problem. This time around, it's just as stupid, it's just coming from the other side. I'm hoping this exposes both sides to how ridiculous this crap is.

[deleted]

Re: Gulf of America name change in the U.S.

#66

Post by hitekker »

exabrial wrote: post #37

I found the whole "renaming things war" the first time stupid; as it peaked with renaming "master" to "main", highlighting both an ignorance and literacy problem. This time around, it's just as stupid, it's just coming from the other side. I'm hoping this exposes both sides to how ridiculous this crap is.

I'm interested in the names that stayed out of the war. Git Branches were an open field of conflict, but "Masters" programs somehow were not.

The reason I've heard is that contemporary Academics were simply comfortable with their terms, and unwilling to change them. It was inertia, which combined with their power as America's secular theologians, weighted the discourse away from their privilege.

Post reply on HN