![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Nothing about the Oresund bridge here... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.243.147.144 ( talk • contribs) 23:06, 30 January 2006
What should we name the article?
The strait between Denmark and Sweden is called the same in both Denmark and Sweden, although it is spelled with a different character: Øresund and Öresund. Ø and Ö both referring to the same vowel, but that vowel is not used in the English language. In both Denmark and Sweden it's also informally referred to as sundet ('the sound').
English language sources refer to it as "the Sound": Norstedts sv-en dictionary translates "Öresund" with "the Sound". Encyclopædia Britannica and Encarta both list it as "the Sound" as well.
Suggestions made so far are: the Sound, Öresund, Øresund and Oresund.
This problem show up in all articles linking here as well (it's an important seaway after all so it's going to get mentioned in other articles). We could really use some insight by more editors, especially non Scandinavian ones.
—
Apis (
talk)
06:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Encyclopædia Britannica uses The Sound [1]. The same name is used by the Danish Maritime Authority [2] and in other official government documents [3]. Therefore the name of the article should be The Sound (strait). -- Muniswede ( talk) 21:38, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
As far as I know, there is no "Oresund" in traditional English usage. There is The Sound, or if one wants to use the local names, there is Øresund or Öresund. Subsequently, the article should be moved to one of these headings. However, I would like to hear the native English-speakers' word about this. Is The Sound still commonly used? -- Sasper 07:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm also from Sweden, county of Scania or Skåne in danish and swedish. To use danish spelling of this straight is not offensive to people of the part of Sweden that borders the straight. There are absolutely no objections to the spelling "Øresund" here. In fact the interregional trains that crosses the tunnel under (closest to Kastrup airpot of Copenhagen)and bridge above the sea is spelled "Øresundståg" on both sides of Øresund/Öresund. And since before 1658 Scania was a part of Denmark and we share the same blood and culture there is no offense in the danish spelling at all. The letter "Ö" / "Ø" is by the way pronounced exactly the same - like "U" in "church" or "Churchill". The swedish alphabet ends "...X,Y,Z,Å,Ä,Ö" while the danish ends "...X,Y,Z,Æ,Ø,Å". Pronounciated "Å"="Å" like "A" in "allright"; "Æ"="Ä" like "A" in "at". However in english wikipedia the english language should be used. Therefore the article should be eighter "Oresund" or "The Sound" - wich is the most known in the UK. /Eriksson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.249.36.33 ( talk) 20:12, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I think that Oresund would be the best name for this article, since it is the reasonable anglicised version of both the Danish Øresund and the Swedish Öresund. I'm sure it's fully comprehensible to people who have seen the Danish and Swedish terms and it is not any more clumsy. Giving preference to one of the two languages in this case could look almost a little POV, although I don't see it as a big issue and is more interested in consistency across articles. Tomas e ( talk) 10:08, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
So someone has objected to Oresund before.20:49, 15 March 2008 OldakQuill (talk | contribs) m (moved Oresund to Øresund: "Oresund" isn't a popular English spelling.)
I made a request for comments, hopefully that will resolve this.
I prefer the Sound and that the current article about the band the Sound is moved to The Sound (band). I think this waterway is more notable than a pop-band in both a geographical, political, economical and historical sense. :)
I don't think Oresund is a commonly used name anywhere, it's one of those bad compromises that makes everyone unhappy and is basically just wrong.
—
Apis (
talk)
06:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
"The Sound" sounds like the best solution. It's an English-language encyclopedia, so the most common English name should be the article name. -- Saddhiyama ( talk) 19:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
In American press reports, it is almost universally called "Oresund." Yes, the O is incorrect, but anglicized names often butcher spellings (Brazil, Japan, Spain, etc.) MarkNau ( talk) 22:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
I've now noticed that user "Vedum" is swedish - but without telling us that. As I understand he doesn't live in the Oresund-region however. (??) If my suspicion is true he has started a silly non-question debate whithout knowlidge of the region. And why he should feel offense by danish spelling I don't understand. Furthermore this name question in english Wikipedia is not up to danes or swedes (from any part X-danish or not), but to people with english as first language. In Sweden we spell "the River Thames" - "Themsen" (and just "River Thames" without "the" isn't possible to spell)The issue isn't a local matter, just english and if "Oresund" is the most common, that spelling should of course be used. /Eriksson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.249.36.33 ( talk) 20:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I see no consensus emerging from the above discussion but status quo, with Øresund as the article name and The Sound as the first name in the lead, is untidy and confusing. According to the Wikipedia naming conventions one should choose the "widely accepted English name, in a modern context" if one exists. By far the most common name used in English language media, on both sides of the Atlantic, appears to be Oresund, e.g. NYT [4] and BBC [5]. Most articles talk of Oresund, the Oresund bridge, [6] or Oresund region without reference to "the Sound". "The Sound" is a traditional English name for the strait (as evidenced by Encyclopædia Britannica's usage) but this name appears to have largely gone out of modern (media) usage. I therefore suggest that this and related articles use the name Oresund in article names and throughout the text, while giving the alternative English name and names in other languages in parentheses in the lead, and possibly containing a section on "Name". (For the record, as some contributors appear to find this significant, my nationality is (wait for it) Norwegian(!)) Oyst1 ( talk) 13:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
What does Oresund mean? -- Chvsanchez ( talk) 06:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Sorry - but even that link does not solve the problem of the etymology of "sund" and "sound". It is clear that it is of germanic origin. But is it also indo-european? If not, which language does it come from and what does it mean in that language? Is it from the same pre-indo-european language as "sheep"? Moreover, the derivation of "öre" from "ear" looks a little bit strange - a typical folk-etymology! Isn't it the problem, to identify that language? In which all three words have a meaning? 130.133.155.69 ( talk) 12:13, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
After reading the previous conversations, I came to conclusion that there is no official english name.
To the comment that there other ones that are called 'The Sound': at least those two mentioned are in english-speaking areas, and if this would follow the same convention, it should be the place or location and then 'sound'. Maybe then it would be something like Denmark-Sweden Sound, but that isn't probably sourcable from anywhere.
It is though quite strange that the name of the article is Øresund, but the article still starts with The Sound is....
82.141.95.57 (
talk)
22:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
The name of the danish city is HELSINGØR, not bloody Elsingore or whatever you call it. You can call the swedish town of Helsingborg by it's original name, but not the danish name? Why? Because Shakespere said so? The name is Helsingør, END OF STORY. - Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.49.41.78 ( talk) 19:40, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page not moved: no concensus in 56 days, no messages in the last 38 days. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 09:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Øresund → Oresund – Relisted. Vegaswikian ( talk) 21:56, 3 May 2011 (UTC) Øresund is the Danish place name while Öresund is the Swedish. The Sound is the traditional English name for the strait but Oresund (for the strait and as part of related names) is the name used in English language media both in Britain and the US. relisting Andrewa ( talk) 19:51, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Oyst1 ( talk) 08:25, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
{{
foreignchar|Oeresund|Ø}}
for the article for that purpose. Per Ryvyly's and AjaxSmack's arguments, I shall oppose the move. "Oresund" is just not the English name, in addition to being neither Swedish nor Danish ("The Sound" might be, but as I understand it is rather uncommon). To draw a parallel: the Danube River is known with many names in the countries it flows through: "Donau" in German, "Duna" in Hungarian, "Dunărea" in Romanian, "Dunaj"/"Dunav" in different Slavic languages, but the title of our article is the river's English name, because one exists:
Danube. On the other hand, another river is known as "Maritsa" in Bulgarian, "Evros" in Greek and "Meriç" in Turkish, and we have (randomly) selected one of those names (
Maritsa) because there isn't an English one. I think the issue with this strait is more comparable to that with the Maritsa than to that with the Danube. --
Theurgist (
talk)
02:47, 30 April 2011 (UTC)please add further "votes" to the poll above rather than to this section
This is a very interesting case in terms of use of diacritics in page titles generally. It's something of a perennial issue, and this case is I suspect one of the best we can hope for regarding making a case to drop the diacritics. Taking just the base article Oresund/Øresund/Öresund:
It's the last point that is especially relevant in terms of both the letter and intent of WP:AT. Taken together I think they make a very strong case for the move. So I'm especially interested in the logical consequences for article title policy if these moves are rejected despite this strong case. Andrewa ( talk) 19:51, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Interesting that so much of the above discussion concerns what is correct in other languages... isn't this completely irrelevant on two different grounds? Or am I missing something? If I'm correct, it could cut through a lot of the current impasse, perhaps? Andrewa ( talk) 14:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
( diff) The way these things go (on Wikipedia, idk why it has to be this way): There are sources, and then there are random experts explaining the sources for the "general public" on the popular media. For some reason, people always prefer to cite the latter, even when the actual sources are directly available online. Thus we get "According to linguist Ole Lauridsen in the Danish radio program Sproghjørnet": [8] I am sure Lauridsen simply explained the entries Ør and Øre in Ordbog over det danske Sprog. I am sure he did so perfectly adequately, it's not his fault if people prefer to play a game of Chinese whispers and cite "the Danish radio program Sproghjørnet" instead of just looking it up themselves.
Now, I don't speak Danish, and correct me if I am getting this wrong, but it seems clear to me from the ordbog that øre is simply the word for "ear" which then came to be used for coastline formations, and secondarily for gruset strandbred. I.e. this is not some mysterious separate lexeme for gruset strandbred which somehow came to be mixed up with the "ear word" as was suggested by the person citing the radio program. It is also the ordbog that brings up Korsøer as an example, and from a glance at a map it is beyond me how anyone could come up with the claim that there " the coast does not form an 'ear'". This is an inversion of what the actual source has to say to an extent that makes me wonder how this is possible. -- dab (𒁳) 10:15, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Here is a couple of first hand sources that support that the origin of Ør / Ör comes from gravel or sandy beach (often specified as a gravel or sandy spit) when used as part of a place name: First link is from the Danish online dictionary " ordbog over det danske sprog" and second from the online Danish encyclopedia " Den store danske" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.160.250.6 ( talk) 14:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Informally Sundet (lit. "the Strait") in both languages.
Not in Swedish, it isn't (I wouldn't know about Danish). I've grown up in an old fishing community on the Swedish side of Öresund, I've spent much my life sailing, swimming and talking about it, and I've not once heard it referred to as "Sundet" in any more specific sense than one would call any nearby narrow stretch of water The Sound. As "Sund" is a common noun, this statement makes as much sense as having "Informally The City" next to an article about Copenhagen. Unless someone can provide a sensible source, I'd recommend remove this sentence (or change to "in Danish" if appropriate). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.71.249.151 ( talk) 14:25, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Öresundsakvariet varnar tjuvfiskarna i Sundet har blivit modigare 85.230.179.30 ( talk) 22:21, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Nothing about the Oresund bridge here... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.243.147.144 ( talk • contribs) 23:06, 30 January 2006
What should we name the article?
The strait between Denmark and Sweden is called the same in both Denmark and Sweden, although it is spelled with a different character: Øresund and Öresund. Ø and Ö both referring to the same vowel, but that vowel is not used in the English language. In both Denmark and Sweden it's also informally referred to as sundet ('the sound').
English language sources refer to it as "the Sound": Norstedts sv-en dictionary translates "Öresund" with "the Sound". Encyclopædia Britannica and Encarta both list it as "the Sound" as well.
Suggestions made so far are: the Sound, Öresund, Øresund and Oresund.
This problem show up in all articles linking here as well (it's an important seaway after all so it's going to get mentioned in other articles). We could really use some insight by more editors, especially non Scandinavian ones.
—
Apis (
talk)
06:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Encyclopædia Britannica uses The Sound [1]. The same name is used by the Danish Maritime Authority [2] and in other official government documents [3]. Therefore the name of the article should be The Sound (strait). -- Muniswede ( talk) 21:38, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
As far as I know, there is no "Oresund" in traditional English usage. There is The Sound, or if one wants to use the local names, there is Øresund or Öresund. Subsequently, the article should be moved to one of these headings. However, I would like to hear the native English-speakers' word about this. Is The Sound still commonly used? -- Sasper 07:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm also from Sweden, county of Scania or Skåne in danish and swedish. To use danish spelling of this straight is not offensive to people of the part of Sweden that borders the straight. There are absolutely no objections to the spelling "Øresund" here. In fact the interregional trains that crosses the tunnel under (closest to Kastrup airpot of Copenhagen)and bridge above the sea is spelled "Øresundståg" on both sides of Øresund/Öresund. And since before 1658 Scania was a part of Denmark and we share the same blood and culture there is no offense in the danish spelling at all. The letter "Ö" / "Ø" is by the way pronounced exactly the same - like "U" in "church" or "Churchill". The swedish alphabet ends "...X,Y,Z,Å,Ä,Ö" while the danish ends "...X,Y,Z,Æ,Ø,Å". Pronounciated "Å"="Å" like "A" in "allright"; "Æ"="Ä" like "A" in "at". However in english wikipedia the english language should be used. Therefore the article should be eighter "Oresund" or "The Sound" - wich is the most known in the UK. /Eriksson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.249.36.33 ( talk) 20:12, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I think that Oresund would be the best name for this article, since it is the reasonable anglicised version of both the Danish Øresund and the Swedish Öresund. I'm sure it's fully comprehensible to people who have seen the Danish and Swedish terms and it is not any more clumsy. Giving preference to one of the two languages in this case could look almost a little POV, although I don't see it as a big issue and is more interested in consistency across articles. Tomas e ( talk) 10:08, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
So someone has objected to Oresund before.20:49, 15 March 2008 OldakQuill (talk | contribs) m (moved Oresund to Øresund: "Oresund" isn't a popular English spelling.)
I made a request for comments, hopefully that will resolve this.
I prefer the Sound and that the current article about the band the Sound is moved to The Sound (band). I think this waterway is more notable than a pop-band in both a geographical, political, economical and historical sense. :)
I don't think Oresund is a commonly used name anywhere, it's one of those bad compromises that makes everyone unhappy and is basically just wrong.
—
Apis (
talk)
06:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
"The Sound" sounds like the best solution. It's an English-language encyclopedia, so the most common English name should be the article name. -- Saddhiyama ( talk) 19:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
In American press reports, it is almost universally called "Oresund." Yes, the O is incorrect, but anglicized names often butcher spellings (Brazil, Japan, Spain, etc.) MarkNau ( talk) 22:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
I've now noticed that user "Vedum" is swedish - but without telling us that. As I understand he doesn't live in the Oresund-region however. (??) If my suspicion is true he has started a silly non-question debate whithout knowlidge of the region. And why he should feel offense by danish spelling I don't understand. Furthermore this name question in english Wikipedia is not up to danes or swedes (from any part X-danish or not), but to people with english as first language. In Sweden we spell "the River Thames" - "Themsen" (and just "River Thames" without "the" isn't possible to spell)The issue isn't a local matter, just english and if "Oresund" is the most common, that spelling should of course be used. /Eriksson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.249.36.33 ( talk) 20:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I see no consensus emerging from the above discussion but status quo, with Øresund as the article name and The Sound as the first name in the lead, is untidy and confusing. According to the Wikipedia naming conventions one should choose the "widely accepted English name, in a modern context" if one exists. By far the most common name used in English language media, on both sides of the Atlantic, appears to be Oresund, e.g. NYT [4] and BBC [5]. Most articles talk of Oresund, the Oresund bridge, [6] or Oresund region without reference to "the Sound". "The Sound" is a traditional English name for the strait (as evidenced by Encyclopædia Britannica's usage) but this name appears to have largely gone out of modern (media) usage. I therefore suggest that this and related articles use the name Oresund in article names and throughout the text, while giving the alternative English name and names in other languages in parentheses in the lead, and possibly containing a section on "Name". (For the record, as some contributors appear to find this significant, my nationality is (wait for it) Norwegian(!)) Oyst1 ( talk) 13:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
What does Oresund mean? -- Chvsanchez ( talk) 06:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Sorry - but even that link does not solve the problem of the etymology of "sund" and "sound". It is clear that it is of germanic origin. But is it also indo-european? If not, which language does it come from and what does it mean in that language? Is it from the same pre-indo-european language as "sheep"? Moreover, the derivation of "öre" from "ear" looks a little bit strange - a typical folk-etymology! Isn't it the problem, to identify that language? In which all three words have a meaning? 130.133.155.69 ( talk) 12:13, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
After reading the previous conversations, I came to conclusion that there is no official english name.
To the comment that there other ones that are called 'The Sound': at least those two mentioned are in english-speaking areas, and if this would follow the same convention, it should be the place or location and then 'sound'. Maybe then it would be something like Denmark-Sweden Sound, but that isn't probably sourcable from anywhere.
It is though quite strange that the name of the article is Øresund, but the article still starts with The Sound is....
82.141.95.57 (
talk)
22:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
The name of the danish city is HELSINGØR, not bloody Elsingore or whatever you call it. You can call the swedish town of Helsingborg by it's original name, but not the danish name? Why? Because Shakespere said so? The name is Helsingør, END OF STORY. - Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.49.41.78 ( talk) 19:40, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page not moved: no concensus in 56 days, no messages in the last 38 days. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 09:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Øresund → Oresund – Relisted. Vegaswikian ( talk) 21:56, 3 May 2011 (UTC) Øresund is the Danish place name while Öresund is the Swedish. The Sound is the traditional English name for the strait but Oresund (for the strait and as part of related names) is the name used in English language media both in Britain and the US. relisting Andrewa ( talk) 19:51, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Oyst1 ( talk) 08:25, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
{{
foreignchar|Oeresund|Ø}}
for the article for that purpose. Per Ryvyly's and AjaxSmack's arguments, I shall oppose the move. "Oresund" is just not the English name, in addition to being neither Swedish nor Danish ("The Sound" might be, but as I understand it is rather uncommon). To draw a parallel: the Danube River is known with many names in the countries it flows through: "Donau" in German, "Duna" in Hungarian, "Dunărea" in Romanian, "Dunaj"/"Dunav" in different Slavic languages, but the title of our article is the river's English name, because one exists:
Danube. On the other hand, another river is known as "Maritsa" in Bulgarian, "Evros" in Greek and "Meriç" in Turkish, and we have (randomly) selected one of those names (
Maritsa) because there isn't an English one. I think the issue with this strait is more comparable to that with the Maritsa than to that with the Danube. --
Theurgist (
talk)
02:47, 30 April 2011 (UTC)please add further "votes" to the poll above rather than to this section
This is a very interesting case in terms of use of diacritics in page titles generally. It's something of a perennial issue, and this case is I suspect one of the best we can hope for regarding making a case to drop the diacritics. Taking just the base article Oresund/Øresund/Öresund:
It's the last point that is especially relevant in terms of both the letter and intent of WP:AT. Taken together I think they make a very strong case for the move. So I'm especially interested in the logical consequences for article title policy if these moves are rejected despite this strong case. Andrewa ( talk) 19:51, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Interesting that so much of the above discussion concerns what is correct in other languages... isn't this completely irrelevant on two different grounds? Or am I missing something? If I'm correct, it could cut through a lot of the current impasse, perhaps? Andrewa ( talk) 14:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
( diff) The way these things go (on Wikipedia, idk why it has to be this way): There are sources, and then there are random experts explaining the sources for the "general public" on the popular media. For some reason, people always prefer to cite the latter, even when the actual sources are directly available online. Thus we get "According to linguist Ole Lauridsen in the Danish radio program Sproghjørnet": [8] I am sure Lauridsen simply explained the entries Ør and Øre in Ordbog over det danske Sprog. I am sure he did so perfectly adequately, it's not his fault if people prefer to play a game of Chinese whispers and cite "the Danish radio program Sproghjørnet" instead of just looking it up themselves.
Now, I don't speak Danish, and correct me if I am getting this wrong, but it seems clear to me from the ordbog that øre is simply the word for "ear" which then came to be used for coastline formations, and secondarily for gruset strandbred. I.e. this is not some mysterious separate lexeme for gruset strandbred which somehow came to be mixed up with the "ear word" as was suggested by the person citing the radio program. It is also the ordbog that brings up Korsøer as an example, and from a glance at a map it is beyond me how anyone could come up with the claim that there " the coast does not form an 'ear'". This is an inversion of what the actual source has to say to an extent that makes me wonder how this is possible. -- dab (𒁳) 10:15, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Here is a couple of first hand sources that support that the origin of Ør / Ör comes from gravel or sandy beach (often specified as a gravel or sandy spit) when used as part of a place name: First link is from the Danish online dictionary " ordbog over det danske sprog" and second from the online Danish encyclopedia " Den store danske" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.160.250.6 ( talk) 14:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Informally Sundet (lit. "the Strait") in both languages.
Not in Swedish, it isn't (I wouldn't know about Danish). I've grown up in an old fishing community on the Swedish side of Öresund, I've spent much my life sailing, swimming and talking about it, and I've not once heard it referred to as "Sundet" in any more specific sense than one would call any nearby narrow stretch of water The Sound. As "Sund" is a common noun, this statement makes as much sense as having "Informally The City" next to an article about Copenhagen. Unless someone can provide a sensible source, I'd recommend remove this sentence (or change to "in Danish" if appropriate). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.71.249.151 ( talk) 14:25, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Öresundsakvariet varnar tjuvfiskarna i Sundet har blivit modigare 85.230.179.30 ( talk) 22:21, 17 October 2017 (UTC)