Talk:List of Russian exonyms

What is a Russian exonym?

Grammatically, many country and territory names end in -ия (-iya). This does not constitue an exonym. Translated parts of endonyms, corresponding to geographic directions (Southern/Northern/Eastern/Western) do not constitue an exonym either, but translated parts for Old/New and the like do. "H" transcribed as Г ("G") from most languages, English "TH" as Т ("T") or Greek θ as Ф ("F") is not a reason to consider the Russian exonym to be different from the endonym. --Vicky Ng (talk) 20:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

United States

There is no exonym for the United States or America on this page. Timothy Andux-Jones (talk) 00:04, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to add some, if you have something. Originally it was only meant for European countries. Later I added non-Roman based languages where exonyms and endonyms are significantly different. Please note that many American names are transliterated/pronounced quite close to the original (adjusting to the Russian phonetics and changing word stress at times): Нью-Йорк, Вашингтон, Лос-Анджелес, Сан-Франциско. A notable exception I can think of right now would be New Orleans - Новый Орлеан (Novyy Orle-an). --Atitarev (talk) 23:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Not sure why SF has been added. --Vicky Ng (talk) 06:26, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Texas in Russian is based on its old (Spanish) pronounciation, which differs from the current (English). --Vicky Ng (talk) 18:17, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Ukraine & Belarus

I can see how almost all Ukrainian and Belorussian endonyms could qualify, but a comment will have to suffice, as listing most Ukrainian cities and villages in this article is not practical. However, list them when the Russian exonym deviates from the general pattern of forming them (or vice versa, as Mykolayiv was derived from Nikolayev, and Odesa from Odessa). --Vicky Ng (talk) 20:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

The preface to Ukraine part was a big surprise to me. "Many of the differences are expected due to phonetic and spelling differences between Russian and Ukrainian." This preface is much more applicable to ALL other parts than to this. — Figure19 (talk) 17:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

The meaning of the preface was that since many roots are common between Russian and Ukrainian, many of the toponyms derived from these roots in Russian will follow Russian spelling rules rather than Ukrainian. Typically, however, the difference is too minor to consider the Russian version an exonym. I've included Николаев and Одесса for a different reason. Their Ukrainian ENDONYMS were derived from the preceeding Russian versions. --Vicky Ng (talk) 18:21, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Romania & Moldova

Standard transformations of endings -eni (-yen') into -яны (-yany) or -аны (-any), -eşti (-yesht') into -ешты (-yeshty), -ţi (-ts') as -цы (tsy), -a into -о, and general transcription of ă as а is not sufficient. Less typical transformation (e.g. ă into е in Бельцы or -şi into -ссы in Яссы) do qualify. --Vicky Ng (talk) 20:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Why do such pages exist?

Why do such pages exist, contrary to WP:DICT? Who refers to them, for what? If I wanted the Russian name for Flanders, why wouldn't I open Flanders and mouse over to the translations column? —Tamfang (talk) 06:50, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

This is a list and should be renamed. See WP:Stand-alone lists#Lists of words. --Vicky Ng (talk) 04:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Most of readers wouldn't "mouse over" because they can't read cyrillic. We see a kind of transliteration here, it gives some help. Anyway, I agree with WP:DICT collision, and taking in account a lot of mistakes and personal observations contrary to classic dictionaries I would add WP:NOR and WP:IRS. Although, the article could be useful to someone and might move to more deep and factual research. — Figure19 (talk) 16:54, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'm embarrassed that I didn't think of the alphabet issue. On another hand, if you can't read a word of Russian, how often will you want to know the transliterated Russian spelling of 'Thessaly'? —Tamfang (talk) 03:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Native names

For the inconvenience of people reading the article in English, the list shows native names rather than English names – except for sovereign states, whose native names are shown as if they were alternative transliterations of the Russian names. I'm removing them all; this isn't an article about the differences between English and native names. —Tamfang (talk) 03:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Please discuss prior to removing. Many of the country names that you removed were themselves exonyms. It is the difference between Russian names and native names that makes something an exonym. Hence, native names are relevant. To an English speaker, of course, English transcription of the native name is even more relevant. It would be great if you could add it. --Vicky Ng (talk) 18:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I conjecture that you mean "Most of the names that you left in are themselves exonyms" — but they're not, you know; they're about as near as an English word can get to the native form. You seem to agree, as you removed a bunch of Russian forms under that criterion.

Anyway — if there is some utility for someone who can't read Russian to know the (romanized) Russian spelling of Vienna, why on earth should we show ONLY the native form? The only presumption we ought to make is that the reader understands English. —Tamfang (talk) 03:42, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't follow your logic. Of course, we should not show only the native form. English transcription of both native and Russian forms should be provided in order to show the difference (for the reasons you've outlined above). Occasionally, though, it is the spelling difference that is significant (e.g. Odesa vs. Odessa). --Vicky Ng (talk) 19:10, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Country names

After giving it some more thought, I am inclined to remove country names from the list altogether. While formally these may be exonyms, country names almost always differ from native names in other languages. Mixing them with other exonyms is not practical. Or should we keep those that diviate from a 'standard' pattern? --Vicky Ng (talk) 01:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Here's a wild and crazy idea: assume that every language adapts foreign names to its own phonology (and orthography), and show only those exonyms whose difference from the native form cannot be accounted for by such adaptations. —Tamfang (talk) 23:27, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Hm, maybe not so controversial? —Tamfang (talk) 01:29, 29 April 2019 (UTC)