Diskussion:Österbotten

Die Name des Artikels

Ich schreibe jetzt auf Englisch weil es geht schneller so. Sie können aber gern auch auf Deutsch antworten. Ich lese Deutsch sehr gut aber schreibe nicht so gut.

So, as far as I can understand, the name of the historical province should be in german "Pohjanmaa", because the vast majority of the area as well as the population of the historical province is finnish-speaking. (As well as there are Uusimaa and not "Nyland]], and Varsinais-Suomi and not "Egentliga Finland" and Åland and not "Ahvenanmaa" - Every province of course has as well finnish and swedish name, and some also have german.)

While, however of course, the name of the present day province in german should be "Österbotten", because the vast majority of the population and the area of the present day province is swedish-speaking.

But if you wish to handle the both in the same article, I don't know how it is possible. - For of course the present day province and the historical province at least in this case are two completely different things, allthough they happen to have the same name. - While however the areas of these two are totally different, as can be seen from the maps in the article.

And also in Finnish and Swedish in Wikipedia these two are called with different names and handled in two different articles, as they - of course - are two totally different things: fi:Pohjanmaan maakunta vs. fi:Pohjanmaa and sv:Österbotten (historiskt landskap) vs. sv:Österbotten. - That is, in Swedish language speech community the name "Österbotten" means primarily the present day province, and the naming of the the historical province needs further explanation (allthough everyone, of course, knows the both two); while in Finnish language speech community the name "Pohjanmaa" means primarily the historical province, and the naming of the present day province needs further explanation (allthough everyone, of course, knows the both two). (As well as, for example, "Satakunta" or "Satakunda" and "Uusimaa" or "Nyland" in both languages tend to mean the present day province, and the historical province needs further explanation; while however "Häme" or "Tavastland" in both languages tend to mean the historical province, because there is no present day province with exactly that name, etc.)

And in the same manner, of course there should (or should there?) be something with Pohjanmaa or pohjanmaa and not Nordösterbotten and Südösterbotten because in these provinces there are no Swedish speaking areas; as well as you do not have "Ahvenanmaa" but Åland, because in Åland there are no Finnish speaking areas. And you have Varsinais-Suomi and Uusimaa but not "Egentliga Finlad" or "Nyland" because the majority language of these bilingual provinces is Finnish. And you have Österbotten (the present day province) and not "Pohjanmaan maakunta", because the majority language of this bilingual province is Swedish. As well as there should (or should there?) be something with pohjanmaa or Pohjanmaa and not "Mittelösterbotten", because the majority language of this bilingual province is Finnish (if I remember right).

So, was meinen Sie? Is this argument right or wrong? --Urjanhai (Diskussion) 22:13, 16. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

But of course, if in german language sources outside the Wikipedia the names are used in this manner, then of course the german language wikipedia must follow the practice of the german language speech community in general. But how it is, I dont know. --Urjanhai (Diskussion) 22:16, 16. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

And finally, when searching with google, this slightly seems to be the case, allthough there are some hits for both. But if you travel by train in Finland, they will say in english, finnish and swedish: "Seuraavana Karjaa, Nästa Karis, The next stop Karis", according the majority language. But maybe the situation in this case is so hard to figure out that the german language speech community has adopted a practice that is against this general international rule regarding the use of place names of bilingual areas or bilingual countries in a foreign-language context. --Urjanhai (Diskussion) 22:29, 16. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

(Maybe this is due to historical reasons: in older times it really was common to prefer the swedish language names to finnish in any foreign language context. This really seems to be the most probable explanation, ie. that this is some kind of exonym, that differs from a situation whre there is no exonym.) --Urjanhai (Diskussion) 23:21, 16. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

(Or then it would, perhaps, be confusing to use names in different languages of the different parts of the same province.)--Urjanhai (Diskussion) 09:03, 17. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

Your argument is sound. One problem is that we actually should rather have two articles on Pohjanmaa / Österbotten, one on the present-day administrative region and one on the historical province / macro-region (as our article mentions, the Institute for the Languages of Finland actually recommended Kustösterbotten / Rannikko-Pohjanmaa as the name of the present-day region, which would have avoided the ambiguity – but we can't change that). Then there is the problem of the article titles: The present-day region should be listed under its Swedish name because it has a Swedish-speaking majority, but this does not hold true for the other regions having Pohjanmaa / Österbotten as a part of their name. So basically we should have Österbotten, but Nordpohjanmaa, Mittelpohjanmaa, and Südpohjanmaa as article titles. That's not very consistent, though. And, going a step further, if had separate articles on the historical province and the present-day region, in theory the former's title should be Pohjanmaa (because it has a Finnish-speaking majority) and the latter's Österbotten (because it has a Swedish-speaking majority), although both the historical province and the present-day region in fact have the same name. This would be quite weird, too.

There might be an easy solution, though: There is actually a German exonym, Ostbottnien. While I don't really think there is something like an established practice of the German language community (references to Pohjanmaa / Österbotten / Ostbottnien in German-speaking discourse are just too scarce for that), I would say Ostbottnien is sufficiently common to be used – and it would incidentally solve the Finnish/Swedish problem. --BishkekRocks (Diskussion) 15:47, 19. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

I just happened to find a recommendation on this:

http://www.kotus.fi/files/2137/toponymic_guidelines.pdf

But I don't know if there is anything about how the names should be used in german language if they are not used in an unchanged finnish or swedish form.

In any case, independently of what forms of the names are used, it would be clearer if present day regions (fi. maakunta, sv. landskap) and the historical provinces (fi. historiallinen maakunta, sv. historisk landskap) would have different articles, at least in the case of Pohjanmaa / Österbotten. - And in finnish language wikipedia there are besides that different articles of all historical provinces except for Åland / Ahvenanmaa, in case of which the territori of the present day region an the historical province are identical. But in the case of all others, the territories of the present day region and the historical province differ from each other more or less.

And if we did that, then the language used in in the name of each article could be defined easily and the names for the present day regions would be as you said Österbotten, but Nordpohjanmaa, Mittelpohjanmaa, and Südpohjanmaa according to the majority language. In these cases the inconsistence should only be accepted as the use of names would be based on the internatiol practices.

But after that the name for the article of the historical province of Pohjanmaa could be considered separately, and Ostbottnien would be one possibility. Because in any case the historical province, the name of which as such is not used officially but only as historical name, can be used more freely. But because also the historical province is even in present day commonly known in both language communities, then Pohjanmaa would, perhaps be more correct according to the UN principles if the choice would be made between the use of Finnish and Swedish form of the name.

While, however, the choice between forms like Ostbottnien (or derivatives of that with Süd- etc.) on the other hand and directly swedish or finnish forms (Pohjanmaa /Österbotten) and their derivatives (Süd- etc.) is an internal matter of the german language community. But in the choice, if swedish or finnish part is used, may be affected by the UN principles, even if this would lead to the use of different language names for the historical province and for some of its parts.But in case of the historical province the mistake would be not so bad, because the historical provinces of Finland are also a part of the history of Sweden. But because the name is still used also as common place name, also the UN principles do have effect on what language name should be preferred. - And in any case, because both the finnish and swedish names are given, the whole picture would be finally easy for the reader to understand. --Urjanhai (Diskussion) 16:21, 10. Okt. 2013 (CEST)

But in any case, a disclaimer: I am a lay person, and these are only guesses.--Urjanhai (Diskussion) 18:38, 10. Okt. 2013 (CEST)

Rekommendation gefunden

Now I found a recommendation: Mikkonen, Pirjo (ed.): Kielitoimiston nimiopas. Helsinki: Kotimaisten kielten tutkimuskeskus, 2008. ISBN 978-952-5446-29-6. (= a guidebook published by the institute for the languages of Finland.). In page 229-230 it says (my translation):

"[For the present day provinces of Finland] Finnish language names are used in Finnish language and in all other languages unless in some other language there is an established other name (for example Karjala is in Russian Karelija). For Åland and Österbotten [as present day province], in other languages than finnish, the swedish name is used according to the majority language of the areas."

"Swedish language names are used in swedish language. They can also be used in other scandinavian languages, unless there is an established other name, for example Lapland in Norwegian (cf. Lappland in Swedish)."

"In all other languages, for unilingual areas in Finland, the names used in the official language of the area concerned are used, for example Mariehamn, Iisalmi. In bilingual areas, the names in the majority languaguage of the area are used, for example Helsinki, Turku, Kirkkonummi, Vaasa; Jakobstad, Nykarleby, Pargas, Ekenäs."

"The recommendation applies only to public administrative names such as cities / towns, municipalities, streets and the current names of provinces (=Maakunta, Landschaft)."

(Sorry for writing in english. I do read and even write also german, but so slowly that it was easier to write in english.) --Urjanhai (Diskussion) 19:47, 17. Dez. 2013 (CET)

In addition to Finnish and Swedish names, there were also the recommended english names for the provinces, but, unfortunately, not the german. In english, no choice had to be made between Österbotten and Pohjanmaa, because the established english name Ostobothnia was used, but Ahvenanmaa, according to the general recommendation was "Åland".

But if we interprete the recommendation, for the present day provinces of Österbotten (bilingual, majority language swedish) and Åland (unilingually swedish), the swedish language names would be used, and for all the others (either unilingually finnish or bilingual with finnish as majority language), the finnish language name would be used, unless there is no established name in the third language (cf. "Ostrobothnia" in english).--Urjanhai (Diskussion) 20:00, 17. Dez. 2013 (CET)

Ich möchte diese Diskussion nochmal aufgreifen. Nicht viele verschiedene Benutzer haben sich bisher beteiligt. Aber Benutzer:BishkekRocks hat vor langer Zeit einmal Ostbottnien vorgeschlagen. Ich glaube auch, dass das eine bessere Lösung als der jetztige schwedische Name ist. Siehe auch das von mir soeben unter Literatur eingefügte Kulturlexikon Finnland. --Rießler (Diskussion) 14:58, 22. Jan. 2023 (CET)