Talk:Hungarian exonyms

Straight transliterations / transcriptions are not exonyms

I question whether we should really be including straight transliterations/transcriptions like Minsk -> Minszk. If we have that, then why not Brest -> Breszt, Orsha -> Orsa, Vitsebsk -> Vicebszk, and just about every other single place in Belarus? (The same, of course, goes for Russia, Bulgaria, Greece, etc.). That is why I have not added e.g. Pafós -> Pafosz in Cyprus, but have included e.g. Lemesós -> Limasszol as a true exonym. -- Picapica 12:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, and was about to complain about this myself. I think I'll just delete the transcriptions with the same pronunciation (or, what I think is the same) and if anyone doesn't agree, they can put the ones they want back. — Nicholas (reply) @ 17:40, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Are translations exonyms?

When a geographical name that has a meaning is translated into a different language, does it become an exonym? For example, is Fokváros for Cape Town an exonym? Or is Tűzföld for Tierra del Fuego an exonym? 147.91.173.31 08:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

What is an exonym

From the exonym article: "An exonym is a name for a place that is not used within that place by the local inhabitants" Many places listed here have significant Hungarian population or at least were part of Hungary for a long period of time. For example, Odorheiu Secuiesc is rather a Romanian exonym for Székelyudvarhely, since Hungarians make up more than 90% of the population. The Romanian name is a translation of the Hungarian and is practically never used by Hungarians. I suggest that Hungarian placenames for places on the territory of the pre-1918 Kingdom of Hungary be listed elswhere. Timur lenk 00:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, almost all Transylvanian settlement names listed are Hungarian endonyms. Whitepixels (talk) 12:58, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Structure of page

I think it'd be better to reconstruct this page by dividing the list. The first group should contain the Hungarian names for towns in Felvidék, Vajdaság, Erdély, Őrvidék, Kárpátalja the other group should contain the real exonyms for European towns (there are not many exonyms for places in the rest of the world). The transliterations should be also ignored! Drkazmer ^{Just tell me...} 09:51, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

How about moving?

Since we have this unresolved problem with the nature of exonyms, what about moving the page to something that does not contain the word "exonym", such as "List of Hungarian place names outside of (modern) Hungary"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mátyás (talk • contribs) 15:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

How about deleting? Does anyone look at such pages? If I wanted to know (for example) the Hungarian name for Geneva, it wouldn't even occur to me to hope that Hungarian exonyms exists; I'd open Geneva and look for Magyar in the interwiki column.

Exonym lists might be interesting if they said why a place has two names. (That each language has names for places of interest to its speakers, adapted to its phonology, is trivial.) See Arabic exonyms for examples. —Tamfang (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Russian

Why are Moszkva and 'Novoszibirszk exonyms? They are just transcripted forms into Hungarian. The transliteration is different in every language (e.g. Нижний Новгород in Hung: Nyiznyij Novgorod; in Engl: Nizhny Novgorod; in Germ: Nischni Nowgorod; in Fernch: Nijni Novgorod. So these all should be exonyms because they are just different from the English but may be more similar to the Russian? By the way the Russian word's "Москва" pronounciation is exactly equal with Moszkva (except the case of the unstressed "o"). In this case the English one is the exonym, not the Hungarian, it is just transcipted. If you could explain why the English one should be better, pls do it. How did "v" became on o and "a" a "w" (the correctly transcripted form should be: Moskva --> Moscow? Why?). I'm really sorry but I think in this case the Hungarian is most precise and correct and I thinks in this case it is not an exonym. But if you want to put here every Russian names just because they all are different from English in our language you should put here nearly everything. Szentpétervár is Ok as it is a translation (just as in English). Sincererly! Ferike333 (talk) 10:20, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

If there are no replies I'll make what I think good. --Ferike333 (talk) 17:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

You did good, but the basic concept of the page is flawed. The problem of official name vs. commonly used name in most of Pannonia is not yet solved. Without that, what is an exonym is hard to tell.Mátyás (talk) 12:46, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Please do not forget: AUSTRIA ~ =OSZTRAK and LOIPERSBACH im Burgenland ~ LEVESFELSÖ . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.17.87.8 (talk) 15:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Match title and content

I recommend to rename and reorganise this article to make it more consequent, informative and useful. In its current form it is a redundant, messy, incomplete and weakly sourced article.

• (1) I recommend this article to contain Hungarian toponyms with no former Hungarian administration. There are large areas outside present-day Hungary which once had Hungarian administration and therefore detailed and immense Hungarian toponymy. Many more-or-less developed articles exist for these, see: Hungarian toponyms in Burgenland, Hungarian toponyms in Vojvodina, Hungarian toponyms in the Zakarpattia Oblast, Hungarian toponyms in Slovakia, Hungarian toponyms in Prekmurje. Repeating their content here would be redundant and superfluous. Moreover, the origin of Hungarian toponyms outside these areas is different and they are significantly less numerous.
• (2) Reorganize tables. Since this article is about Hungarian linguistics (Hungarian vocabulary), it would make sense to make the first column the Hungarian name, then the endemic or official name(s), then the English name if it exists. Also, don't call words like Fürstenfeld or Valašské Meziříčí 'English'.
• (3) Rename the article Hungarian toponyms. An exonym is a toponym not used by local population of the region. However, composition of a population is a rather dynamic feature. Does 3000+ Hungarian population of Bucharest make Bukarest or the 7000+ Hungarian residents of Vienna make Bécs a Hungarian endonym? Therefore, I recommend to rename the article to "Hungarian toponyms". It would contain the lists of toponyms with no former or current Hungarian administration, and links to articles with the rest. Timur lenk (talk) 13:31, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

(1) support, but you have to make sure the removed names are covered in an other type of article, e.g. which you listed here

(2) support, but you have to accept per WP:ENGLISH e.g. Valašské Meziříčí counts as English name (of course, it will coincide with the Czech (endemic) name)

(3) support.(KIENGIR (talk) 04:38, 4 January 2021 (UTC))