Spelling of European city names

When I am in Europe, especially in the countries where the specific cities are located, I do my best to spell and pronounce the city names as they do there. Saves confusion when you are asking a native about that place.

Otherwise, I use the American English spelling and pronunciation. While I am sure that most people here on this web site would understand the European spelling, many people I chat with elsewhere would not. Over all, I feel that people who insist on calling any location in the world by the name the local natives use, when not there or not conversing with one of those natives, are just trying to show off.

I think people only use them if they expect their audience to be familiar with the reference (or when talking about which train station to disembark). Communication seeks to bring people closer together with common understanding - it's not meant to create an in group and out group, so to speak. If I said "Warszawa" (my birthplace), I doubt that would foster closer communication with anyone other than native Poles or history buffs or a cohort of people whose travels bring them to that part of the world; so with other city/country names, I use them selectively if I think the other person will know what I'm talking about. There is one poster who almost always refers to several Polish cities by German names which I find interesting and amusing considering the boundaries were redrawn post WWII and the German populations were expelled (e.g. Breslau and Wrocław).

This is obvious but also worth noting that we use keyboards that don't have certain letters, accents, umlauts, etc. so that also makes "native" spelling a bit less likely (it requires a little extra effort).

For me it is very unnatural to write Dutch and Flemish place names the English way. »Ghent« with an »h« is in my eyes ridiculous, while »Gent« will be understood. I make an exception for »The Hague«, because no foreigner knows it in its original form »Den Haag«. (It's interesting to see it's mostly Flemish place names which have a different English spelling, possibly they became known in their Frenchified form.)
I agree with Agnes that in some situations it is downright practical to use the original form. You won't find a train if you insist on using »Rome« and »Florence« on the Trenitalia website. And that station is called »München Hauptbahnhof« and not »Munich Central«.

By the way: it's Brugge ;)

Ton... Check the forums! I've seen Bruge a lot! :)

I don't doubt you! I've seen a lot of interesting spellings of place names. Some people are just blind for it, or not really interested.

I think travelers to Europe should be ready to know/use the local name. I also don't consider English a particularly beautiful language, so the local names often sound much nicer.

I've always had the opposite curiosity. Why did English speakers decide they had to have a different name for cities in other countries rather than just using the local name? Of course, the Spanish don't call Germany Deutschland, they call it Alemania - so it's not just an English thing.

I tend to use the city names in the local language (if I know the local name) because, well, that's the name of the city. I also think it's helpful for trip planning to become familiar with local place names. And because local languages tend to be prettier. I use Roma but rarely Italia (although I may begin to now).

Belgium uses two different spellings and pronunciations for most places. I go with Brugge and Gent.

Yes, sometimes on this board the local names are misspelled - my favorite is "Sienna" (the color in the Crayola box) instead of Siena (the city in Toscana).

Why did English speakers decide they had to have a different name for cities in other countries rather than just using the local name?

English is the universal international language - the official language in many countries around the world and the language of business. International agencies - e.g. the UN, World Bank - conduct their business in English and it's the most practical way to communicate across so many different nationalities. If every national member used his/her own reference for a given country and all had to be included, imagine what those Meeting Minutes would look like...

I don't think its a collective decision - its following historical customs from days when literacy was uncommon and communication among the masses was all verbal (and sometimes Latin). Its hard for English-speakers to pronounce Muenchen as a German would so it was simplified and spelled accordingly. What is the native language spelling of Beijing? Or is it Peking? Its neither. Those are just transliterations into Roman alphabet of approximate verbal pronounciations.

Because if you are going to a place you need to know what the real name is.
You need to know in order to look up timetables, tourist information, hotels etc. And you need to know because that is what the signs will say when you get there.
There are many "dumb tourist" stories about people who did not get off the train at Firenze Santa Maria or Köln Hauptbahnhof because they didn't realise that was the name of the place they wanted to get to.

If I want to catch a train to Milan, I need to know it will be listed on the departure board as "Milano", but the announcements (in German) will say "Mailand".

And it helps to know that Genève-Aéroport and Zürich Flughafen are the names of the stations at the airports.
Country names are less of a problem, they rarely appear on signs.

Historically there were lots more "English" names for places, Leghorn (Livorno), Brunswick (Braunschweig), Flushing (Vlissingen) etc. As people travel more many of the "English" names have fallen out of use.

P.S. It is "Brugge" in Flemish (the local language), and "Bruges" in French and English.

If you're going to be traveling it's a good idea to know what the place will be called on the signboards ... otherwise you risk missing your stop or heading in the wrong direction. Also useful to know what your destination is called in the place you are traveling FROM -- when driving from Amsterdam to Paris we learned that the city is 'Pariji" on the road signs in the Netherlands.

And sometimes writing "Firenze" just brings back good memories.

There is a legacy in the place names of when French was the sole language of Western diplomacy. English language names of places in Italy, Germany, Belgium, Austria, Switzerland etc, tend to follow the French name very closely, Italy especially, just with a few adjustments for the general rules of English pronunciation. It was not long ago that the English name for Aachen was Aix-la-Chapelle.

Though the number of times I have seen Edinburgh lose its 'h' on here... ;-)

Of the two choices, I choose Brugge. If you know the history, then the historical name of the place will be familiar. The present city of Regensburg/Ger. was the site of a battle in 1809 but that battle in anglophone historiography (you can check any history book, scholarly or popular, dealing with or mentioning that event in 1809, ) is not called the "battle of Regensburg" as one would expect but the"battle of Ratisbon."

Nor will you find Austerlitz on any Czech map, though it is the site of Napoleon's most spectacular victory and namesake of a railway station in Paris.
I recall standing on the train platform in Colmar and noting that the next train was going to Bale (with the little upside down "v" over the "a" that I don't know how to type). Never heard of it. Much later it dawned on me that it was Basel.

Belgium is a paradise for place name confusion. On the other side of Brussel/Bruxelles/Brussels nice Mons is known as »Bergen«, which is a literal translation (or the other way around). And in Flemish speaking Belgium, 20 kilometres away, the not so small city of Lille in northern France is known as »Rijssel«.
Why did English speakers decide they had to have a different name for cities in other countries?
It is an almost universal phenomenon to adapt complicated foreign words and names to the more familiar sounds of one's own language. And sometimes it is just a spelling adaptation.
We learned that the city is 'Pariji" on the road signs in the Netherlands
Actually it is a little bit more like the French original: Parijs.

Belgium is a paradise for place name confusion

One of my abiding memories of Belgium is driving to Ypres and going through a village where the language boundary ran along the main street. Approaching the junction the signs said 'Ypres' in French. At the junction.. no sign of Ypres just 'Ieper'. To add another level of confusion British and Commonwealth servicemen called it Wipers in WWI.

Regarding Belgium I tend to use the French 'Bruges' for the Flemish city, due to historic custom in the UK, but also to differentiate Bruges from its port at Zeebrugge.

Belgium is a paradise for place name confusion.

I give this my vote for best quote of the month!

Language is fascinating when you dig deep into it and this topic hits on many language issues. I find it understandable when a foreign city is spelled and pronounced in a way that is almost incomprehensible that it be changed to a more standard local name. And English doesn't use all those fancy little symbols over letters that so many other languages do.

But when a city is essentially spelled and pronounced the same way, I often use the local version. I can't comprehend why Brits decided to name Sevilla Seville. Perhaps that is the French pronunciation as "ville" is a common French usage and the Brits took it from the French.

To frustrate some even more, I often pronounce cities/countries the local way.

My punishment is that I cringe every time I hear (or have to say) places in the US like Versailles (Ver-sales) or Cairo (Cay-ro).

You have to pronounce the name so that the person that you are speaking to will understand you. It's that simple.

If you're in Paris and want to see the most famous tower in the world, you should use your French pronunciation of Tour Eiffel, rather than ask where the Eye-full Tower is. But if you tell people back home that you saw the Tour Eiffel, they'll say, that's nice, and did you also see the Eye-full Tower? And even if you are fluent in French, you probably won't give the full, accurate pronunciation of le Marais to another American. You'll say you stayed in the Muh-ray.

@ Sam...point well made. Unless one knows that famous event on Dec 2, 1805 is now called Slavkov, you are not gong to find the site on the map. What about the immediate diplomatic result of Austerlitz by which the Austrians withdrew from further hostilities against France? The Peace of Pressburg as it is known in anglophone historiography, using the German name. Now, we call that town Bratislava. Click on to Deutsche Bahn to see both names used Pressburg and Bratislava. Americans would say Bratislava; in German both names may be used, but I wonder if the Hungarians would use "Bratislava" instead of calling the place by their own historical name.

@ tonfromleiden...."...not really interested." From the conversations (two) I had with Europeans on last June's trip, I would say "not interested" is accurate. Of course, two persons independently of each other arriving at the same conclusion is not very representative. One young woman I talked on the train from Budapest to Wien Westbahnhof, a Bulgarian living in Romania, spoke fluent and effective English and German plus three more languages fluently, grew up in Romania as part of the Bulgarian minority. That's the Dobruja area. So, with that linguistic asset on her part, we spoke in German. I asked specifically about names of places that went by the historical German, such as Hermannstadt, Kronstadt, etc compared to the present Romanian name, that if a tourist said either one, would anyone be offended? She said no, wondered what the big deal was, ie whether you used Hermannstadt or Sibiu, no one really cares. That's good to know.

To take off on Karen's comment, if you are looking for info on train tickets and other information, then best to know the local place names. If inquiring of locals in their local language, then of course use the local place names, if inquiring in English, then either may be understood, but the English name more proper, unless you are mixing other English/local language words as well I suppose. Posting on an English travel board, using the English name would be standard (ditto with German, Dutch, or any language). To use the local name, especially if significantly different than the English name is superfluous, possibly confusing, at worst coming across as "snobbish".

As an example of a completely different situation, when in Mexico and introducing myself to natives, I am still Paul, not Pablo. To say Rome in English is more correct than Roma in conjunction with English.

when in Mexico and introducing myself to natives, I am still Paul, not Pablo.

Great analogy! But don't they still want to call you Pablo once you become friends or more familiar :-) This made me laugh because I took several different language classes and the teacher called me by either an Italian, Spanish, or French version of my name in class (depending on what course it was). I rather enjoyed it (definitely didn't mind it), I felt almost like an alter ego who was on a journey to connect with another nationality using their language.

Great analogy! But don't they still want to call you Pablo :-)

Well, possibly, but to be honest, nearly 100% of the time, they then refer to me as "Paul", Just as I would refer to "Jose" as Jose, and not as "Joe" or "Joseph". I actually have been scolded by native speakers in Mexico if I use "Pablo", even if just trying to explain my name to the native ear. The example of a language class is valid, but it is also a bit of an artificial world (refer to the teacher as Senora (forgive the lack of accents), not as "Mrs." even though the moment she walks out the door it is "Mrs.")While this example may not be perfect, it does show that use is contextual and to a degree sensitive to the intended recipient.

the Italian word for Munich is Monaco! I asked some Italians how they tell the two Monacos apart and they shrugged their shoulders and said, "context." But there's no context in a train station....

I've seen it on maps as "Monaco di Baviera".

Someone mentioned English place names no longer in use, one I always liked was Ratisbon (Regensburg). It's actually closer to the original Celtic name of Radasbona whereas the German name comes from the Latin name of the city.

DJ

Because I'm pretentious, that's why. There, I said it.

But in all seriousness... I use Gent, Brugge, Brussel, Ieper and Antwerpen simply because Dutch is my second language and I got accustomed to using those spellings. I don't, however, use Luik, Bergen or Doornik for Liege, Mons and Tournai on this website, simply because the Dutch names are much less well understood in English.

I usually spell German city names with the umlaut, simply because my keyboard has an umlaut and it's easier to type than to add an "e" after the vowel. As far as I can tell, of all German cities, only Munich and Cologne have significantly different names in English. Technically Mainz is "Mayence" in English, but that's become rather obsolete.

Though the number of times I have seen Edinburgh lose its 'h' on here... ;-)

So it does with Pittsburgh too! :)

Douglas - your response really resonated with me. Don't you love when people say Illinoize :-) And Cay-ro is a dinky town in that state, though surely named after the Egyptian town for some obscure reason. Others that make me grit my teeth are Eye-talian and Eye-rack.

When I write, I sometimes use the name that's in my head, but I often use the English name to avoid confusion. When I was planning a trip to Bourgogne, I switched to Burgundy because that seemed to be the familiar one on the forum. With my friends here, we often use the "native" name, because it's the one we hear most in Hebrew. . . . especially for Western Europe - though there are odd exceptions (Pah-reez for Paris and Veena for Vienna). Den Haag comes naturally, The Hague sounds awkward when I type it. I use Ghent and Bruges, probably because I first heard them listening to Jacques Brel.

As for Rick, since he always mangles the pronunciation, I'd just as soon he stick with the English names entirely.

I feel that people who insist on calling any location in the world by the name the local natives use, when not there or not conversing with one of those natives, are just trying to show off.

I disagree with that poster.

I almost always use the local spelling because I specialise in transportation and if somebody is trying to go somewhere they need to know the local spelling in many cases to buy a train ticket, to know where to get off a train or if they are driving, where to get off the highway. I already know most of them or I wouldn't be writing about them, and if I save somebody the hassle of missing their station or exit then that is a service.

I almost always include the specific train station name if there is more than one option. Why would I write Venice train station when is no such building? I can write Venezia Mestre or Venezia Santa Lucia with no great effort and then perhaps somebody will go to the right place.

Why is that showing off, or "trying to show off"?

@Fred: ... not really interested
I meant tourists not being interested in how things are called in the places they want to visit. I find it common decency for guests to adapt to the customs of their hosts, including the small effort of at least trying to master a few words and pronunciation. It's the decency of the locals to understand that visitors will fail in that, but they are fully entitled to ignore the visitor who obviously doesn't want to conform to these basics of normal, civilised interaction.

In a few cases in English the 'traditional' pronunciation of some place names has drifted back more towards the locals'.

There are few people today that still pronounce Marseilles as Mar-sales; although the 's' is retained the pronunciation is today closer to the French.

I can recall a few years ago being in Lyon and a local guide there when speaking in English used the old pronunciation of 'Lions', which I presume she had been taught was the English way of saying it, even though today something like 'Lee-on' is far more likely.

Even though the post is based on personal observation and hasn't been shown to be correct, here's a guess.

If this phenomena exists, it's really a question of simplification rather than pretension. When both the speaker and listener know both words, speakers will choose the word with fewer oral syllables over the longer one: Wien (1 syllable) / Vienna (3) or Bourgogne (2) / Burgundy (3). It's no different from using a contraction orally.

Let's venture another supposition: most questions that use Firenze are about trains, whereas hotel questions use Florence. Anybody want to do a study of posts and count the Florence/Firenze usage?

Finally, it takes the same energy to type Sevilla and Seville, but it's faster to say Seville when speaking in English, eliminating the third syllable. Our little brains go faster than our big mouths, so that may explain the short cuts.

Bets, thanks for putting it in perspective!

To add to Douglas' annoyance with US (actually, Illinois) pronunciation of European cities, there are also Athens (AY-thens), Vienna (Vy-en-a), and San Jose (San Joes).

@tonfromleiden....a bit of give and take by both parties, the tourist guests and the locals...mutual deference. In second conversation I had on the use of place names, it was with a woman living in/working in what she called Bolzen, ie Bolzano en route from Salzburg to Vienna. I asked about that usage since Americans never refer to that city as Bolzen but rather Bolzano. Can both names be used without causing offense even though the official name is Bolzano? In her view both can be used since it was no big deal, no one is going to feel slighted with either name when used by tourists. It was basically the same conclusion held by the Bulgarian woman mentioned in my above post. I find that similar to cities like Liege or Ypres where the Dutch and the Germans use a different name from what we Americans call them, and these names are mentioned in the train announcements given in those languages .

@Fred a bit of give and take by both parties
It's indeed all about being considerate. It would be silly to use »Firenze« in an English conversation with an Italian, but stupid to use »Florence« at the ticket counter at some small station and downright rude to get angry for not being understood. But I do realise that some people can't imagine things being named differently from what they've learned, especially when one hardly comes into contact with other languages. (I still remember, being in Paris as a small boy, someone asking me the way to the Champs Elysées in an American accent which was - at least for my ears - almost a caricature. I don't think it would have been any use explaining him how it was to be pronounced.)

I can't say Magyarország. I doubt they can either. They just pretend.

Anybody else remember being annoyed in 2006 when the U.S. media referred to the winter Olympics host city as 'Torino' almost exclusively? As a result most people didn't realize it was the same place as Turin, which they had at least heard of in reference to the Shroud.

It makes you wonder whether the journalists made the connection...

I imagine a lot of it is context, with a writer's occasional whim, and may not always be consistent. In Iceland (a land with its fair share of ice), I had to frequently remind myself when saw "Island" that it was referring to the name of the country (which also happens to be surrounded by water).

I wonder if there's a French-language counterpart Website to Rick Steves' Travel Forum, where people have been debating the merits of using "London" vs. "Londres?"

Cyn, In the old days, before they built the Channel Tunnel, boat trains to London were listed on the departure board at Paris Gare du Nord as "Londres". That used to cause confusion.
P.S. Should it be "Paris Gare du Nord" or "Paris North Station"? I have seen the latter on some websites, but I would consider that as confusing, as there is no "North Station" on a map of Paris.

I also think travelers should get familiar with the local spelling of city names as the road signs or timetables will not use the Wnglish equivalent.

Florence is actually closer to the original than the Italian Firenze. The city was founded by the Romans in the 5th century AD and named it FLORENTIA (the city of flowers). The Italian vernacular changed it to FIORENZA, which is indeed the proper translation if the Latin FLORENTIA. Still today the inhabitants of Florence are called FIORENTINI. The name FIORENZA survived through the Middle Ages but somehow it became FIRENZE. Don't know how it happened but FIORENZA was certainly prettier. I bet it was some English speaking chap who thought the city was somewhat FRENZY and the Italians liked it.

It depends by which website one goes by. If you go by Deutsche Bahn, the DB website uses "Paris Nord" and "Paris Est"

I always use the geographic name in the/one official local language. Even in everyday conversation here in Germany (Warszawa, Praha, Ticino, Roma, Krung Thep, Nihon, Suomi etc.)

As a Dane, I would not expect foreigners to know the correct spelling af place names in Danish and I think it's perfectly ok to just use the English names when writing everything else in English. Besides, it's not like most foreginers have the letter 'ø' right there on their keyboard. However what bothers me is when someone does try and fails, spells names wrong or even worse, use the German names, like Kopenhagen or Dänemark. That would be frowned upon.

when I was staying on the island of Crete the local road signs for the town I stayed in varied a lot, Chania ,Kania ,Xania and that was just the English versions.
I think it is important to use local names when in situ,a common error folk make in Prague is looking for Republic Square or Wenselas Square .Namesti Republicky and Vaclavske namesti

MrsEB I did not know that, but I still would not expect foreigners to know the correct usage og the letters æ ø å and when to use Aa instead of Å. A lot of people on this site give up on the letters in Ærø and Ærøskøping and simply spell it Aero and Aeroskoping, even though there is no English name for the place.

Somewhat off topic but.....thanks, MrsEB! I didn't know that either. I also have an elderly MacBook.

Unclegus reminds me that here in Israel place names in English are a nightmare. Using GPS or Google maps can be anywhere from awkward to difficult to frustrating to literally impossible. Not only are there no standard English spellings (sometimes you'll even see 3 or 4 variants on the road signs as you approach a place) but sometimes names are translated into English, instead of transliterated. So if you're trying to find your hotel or the car rental office on King David Street and don't know that in Hebrew it's Rehov Hamelech David (and Rehov and Hamelech have variant spellings too), you may never get there. Many times I've used the exact spelling that appears on a Google map and Google can't find it. I think Tel Aviv is the only city in Israel that is always spelled the same way and sounds the same in Hebrew and in English.