The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-07-31

New York Tribune
Not the least OF the vexatons which
the average reader. as well as the editor
and printer. viii suffer in case OF a pro-
lcnged conflict in China will arise from
the outlandish names of the places and
persons concerned and the divers ways
or spelling them. Such a vexation has
indeed for some time existed in the or
binary literature of the day. There are
some OF US who can remember when
there was in common use only one style
Of writing or printing each weil-known
chinese name. In recent years, how
ever, fad has arisen for changing them
into strange and often scarcely recog-
nizahie forms, Thus our old friend Kew
Loon has by some been metamorRhosed
into Kauiun Such fantastic freakishness
was bad enough when only a dozen or so
names were Involved. and they were used
In such connection that one could hook
them mp in variorum gazetteer and
make sure OF their identity. But with
scores OF new and almost unheard-of
places daily cropping up. each in multi
form guise. and all to be dealt with hot
from the wires. the traditional Chinese
puzzle" Is more than realized.
Apart from the different spellings of
the same name. such as Kow-Isoon and
kauiun, Moukden and Mukden. Heo-Pe
and Hupe, there are other scarcely less
perriexing variations I'm the dividing and
capitalization OF names. Thus. one will
write Tien-Tsin and another Tientsin.
Hope and HOPPE and Hope. Tsung-
Li-famen and Tsung-ii-Yamen and
Isangii- famen, and 80 on. Again. the
same writer or printer will In the same
article employ one style for one name
and another for another. For example.
there may be observed in the same print
Pekins and Marking. Pei-Ho and
Hoang-ho. Che-Foo and Shantung Wet
Hai-wsi and Shanhaikwan II would be
interesting to know by what mental pro-
cesses such results were reached One
may argue that either Of the forms in
each OF the couples cited Is correct Yes,
put the same argument must make the
other wrong. II one writes Picking he
should surely also write Marking not
Marking. IL the III is capt. allied In Pei
Ho. IL should also be In Hoang-Ho. IL
che-Foo Is hyphenated. Shan-Tung should
be II Wei-Hai-wei is to he divided into
three parts. hyphenated, the same treat
tnent should be accorded to Shan-Hai-
Kwan
II would probably not be practicable 10
enforce invariahle and consistent rules in
all cases. But there are certain general
principles which might be adopted which
would go far toward Iessening the per-
plexities OF the amateur geographer and
historian and of the public at large We
may say that. In the first place, we'll
nhuWh Hhfiies snoulu retain the forms In
which they have long appeared, even
though those forms he not scientifically
most accurate. Strictly speaking. A
mfght be right to change Picking 10 Pc
King and Canton to Canton and Shang-
hal to Shanghai But little would he
gained by 1t and much would be lost.
II IL best to let them stand a. they have
so long stood. in their Anglicized forms.
In the second place. the other names.
not so well known nor with forms so
long established by custom should be
made TO conform as far as possible with
a general rule. We may write Lanafane.
or Lang Fang. or Laughing, or Lang
rang But whichever form we adopt
should also be used In the cases OF ali
similarly-formed names To write Lang
Fang and Lang-hai. and Langson Is mad
ness. The exceptions to this rule are.
OBVIOUSLY, those very well-known and
iong-known names first mentioned And
in the third place we should make the
spelling conform with English orthog-
raphy, and not with French or German
Thus. Kow-I.oon expresses the correct
pronunciation of the name according 10
English custom. the syllables respectively
rhyming with how" and moon IN
some foreign languages Kaulun may rep
resent precisely the same pronunciation.
"kau' rhyming with our how and
''lun" with moon But that Ia not
English usage. And we happen to be
using the English language.