Are proper names translated?

Updated on March the 8th, 2022.

We are translating a text. Everything is going well until we come across a proper noun without any meaning. To translate or not to translate, that is the question. We will eventually choose one or the other – but how is this choice evolving over time?

Evolution of the usage of foreign languages

In order to learn about the evolution of translation choices, we need to answer a prior question.  Is the usage of foreign languages evolving, and how?  Fortunately, we don’t need an exhaustive research – we already know the answer.  Just as the accumulation of years of peace stimulates mobility between countries (phrase written on February the 18th, 2022), just as new learning resources such as cassettes, videotapes and video and audio discs become widespread, just as new forms of communication over the net such as instant messaging and videoconferencing become generally available, there is no doubt that the usage of foreign languages is expanding to the point of most people speaking and writing in at least one foreign language today.  Both the Universe and the usage of foreign language are in continuous expansion – and that also means that there was a time in the past when both were tiny, and that we are ready to address the question of evolution of translation choices.

Translation of proper names in the past

In the past, learning resources were limited to books and magazines.  Without audio records, the only way to learn of the pronunciation of a word was to ask a native speaker.  This affected specially proper names – every now and then, someone with a previously unknown proper name would become relevant, and everybody would struggle to pronounce the name right.  The solution for this problem was to translate first names following an equivalence table.  David was always David for British, German, French, Spanish and Portuguese – but the british Elizabeth was Elisabeth for the German, Élisabeth for the French, and Isabel for the Spanish and the Portuguese.

Translation of proper names in the present

Over the years, this patch became obsolete – as mobility and communications increased, so did the chances of talking to foreign people, and then the translated names would become an obstacle.  Referring a Queen of England as ‘Isabel’ would only surprise the interlocutor.  ‘You surely mean a Spanish or Portuguese Queen, don’t you?’.  By now, peoples names are no longer translated, even for names that have a meaning.  Same thing happens with collective names such as sports teams and musical groups.  Referring the Rolling Stones without knowing the meaning of the name is probably a loss, but it certainly avoids confusion.  Also, people calling for a person on a public space would better use a name that the person could recognize.

Are proper names translated?

After answering the question about the evolution of translation choices, we can finally address the titular question – are proper names translated today?  Well, before anything else, let us have a reminder that this is a students’ blog, not a linguists’ one, so this is to be taken as an observation rather than a rule.  In general, proper names are not translated.  Some exceptions are observed, and the obvious one is the Toponyms, the names for places.

Toponyms

Let’s consider a possible scenario. Six people meet in an Internet chat. One French, one German, one Italian, one Portuguese, one Spanish and one from the United Kingdom. They decide to introduce themselves and write the name of their city.

The French writes ‘Marseille’. Everything seems right for the German and the one from United Kingdom, but the rest is surprised. Where is that? The French answers that it is in the coast of the Gulf of Lion. ‘Marsiglia’, writes the Italian. ‘Marselha’, writes the Portuguese. ‘Marsella’, writes the Spanish.

The Portuguese writes ‘Lisboa’. That seems right for the Spanish, but the rest are at a loss. What city is that? The Portuguese answers that it is the capital. ‘Lisbon’, writes the one from the United Kingdom. ‘Lissabon’, writes the German. ‘Lisbonne’, writes the French. ‘Lisbona’, writes the Italian.

The one from the United Kingdom writes ‘London’. That is OK for the German, but the rest don’t get a clue. What city is that? The capital, it is answered. ‘Londres’ write the Spanish, the French and the Portuguese. ‘Londra’, writes the Italian.

The Italian writes ‘Milano’. Nobody understands. Where is that? The Italian writes that it is the city that has the picture of the Last Supper from Leonardo da Vinci. ‘Milan’, write the French and the one from the United Kingdom. ‘Milán’, writes the Spanish. ‘Milão’, writes the Portuguese. ‘Mailand’, writes the German.

The Spanish writes ‘Zaragoza’. Nobody has got a clue. What city is that? The Spanish writes that it is the city with the Basilica of the Pillar. ‘Saragossa’, write the German and the one from the United Kingdom. ‘Saragosse’, writes the French. ‘Saragozza’, writes the Italian. ‘Saragoça’, writes the Portuguese.

The German writes ‘München’. Now not only nobody understands, but everybody objects the use of the diaeresis. The one from the United Kingdom doesn’t know how to type it, the Portuguese has recently quit using it along with smoking, and the rest think that it isn’t called for. The German writes that it is the city that held the 1972 Olympic Games. ‘Munich’, write the French and the one from the United Kingdom. ‘Múnich’, writes the Spanish. ‘Munique’, writes the Portuguese. ‘Monaco di Baviera’, writes the Italian.

At end, everybody manages to overcome the communication difficulties and the chat goes on uneventfully. But these difficulties are the reason why toponyms should be included in bilingual dictionaries in order to find their translation when needed. Currently some dictionaries have a Geography section, but it is far from enough.

Could toponyms be standardized?

At present, there is a trend of people pushing to standardize toponyms – we see it on Wikipedia, where it frequently generates edit wars.  But observation shows us that the prospect of toponym standardization is still far away because of two insurmountable obstacles in the way:

1. There is not a single alphabet.  Vigo is also written Виго, 维哥, فيجو, ויגו.  Could it be imposed a standard form to the people that use different alphabets such as Arab, Hebrew, Greek and so on?  No, of course not.  As long as there are more than one alphabet, the idea of writing each toponym only on its native alphabet is impractical.  So, a limited imposition only for the people that happen to share the same alphabet doesn’t make sense.
2. There is not a single pronunciation.  Even if this Latin alphabet was the single one, there is not a single way to pronounce it – therefore creating a conflict between preserving the sound and preserving the writing.  And, being students, we witness that prevalence of sound is the common trend – we see it on language teachers from different countries always teaching us to begin our learning like children do, by listening to the sounds, not by reading the symbols.  The obvious example of this prevalence of sounds over symbols would be the name of the country Chile: Italian speakers write it ‘Cile’ because that way the Italian pronunciation matches the Spanish one.

So, we need to learn the toponyms translations for now.

Conclusion

Once again, this is a students’ blog, related with the way languages are – for learning them, not for changing them.  Nobody knows what way the languages will be in the future.  This article is about the way the languages evolved so far.