UKC

Nepal and China have reached an agreement that Mount Everest - known as Sagarmatha in Nepal and Chomolungma in Tibet - is 0.86 metres higher than previously calculated in 2005, standing at 8,848.86m (29,032 ft). The recorded height of the world's highest peak had previously differed following surveys by the two countries. China's previous calculation of 8,844.43m was four metres lower than Nepal's measurement, due to differing opinions on whether to include the snow cap or not.

I have always been puzzled about something.

Surely if is "known as Sagarmatha in Nepal and Chomolungma" then it's name IS Sagarmatha and the name Everest doesnt exist?

Might be time to scrap Everest name.  But I always thought it was lucky the chap Everest  had a poetic sounding surname. (Unlike Mt Godwin Austen).

The Italians know the city as Napoli, and yet we persist in calling it Naples. Germany/Deutschland, Spain/Espana — it's a long list.

I do agree that we should, as a matter of respect, know mountains by the name in the native language of the local people, but it's just a point of language. We do it all the time.

But surely your examples are translations?

Wow! How long before rising sea levels bring it down those 0 .86 meters.

Sarcasm aside, it's better that they agree.

Yeah, it's a tenuous argument. I'm torn because from a linguistics point of view I think it's perfectly acceptable to have different names for places and people in a different language, but on the other hand I also think that local mountains should be known by local names. Except in Scotland, where no one can pronounce them

Maybe there's an opportunity to leave Everest for the jumaring rich with their crampons on backwards, and sieze Sagamartha in relation to legitimate mountaineering?

I remember once traveling through Tuscany on the way to Florence and getting confused with all the road signs leading to Firenze and thinking, I've never heard of it, but it must be big satellite town or something....

Perfect!

Not if you're Tibetan. 

The Matterhorn is the Matterhorn to germanic speakers (including english), Cervin to francophones, and Monte Cervino (or something to that effect) to the Italians. Same place, different names depending on who you ask. not just translations. Everest is no different.

Yes interesting.

Having a quick look at Wikipedia of course quickly answered my question:

In 1849, the British survey wanted to preserve local names if possible (e.g., Kangchenjunga and Dhaulagiri), Waugh argued that he could not find any commonly used local name. Waugh's search for a local name was hampered by Nepal and Tibet's exclusion of foreigners. Waugh argued that because there were many local names, it would be difficult to favour one name over all others; he decided that Peak XV should be named after British surveyor Sir George Everest, his predecessor as Surveyor General of India.[19][20][21] Everest himself opposed the name suggested by Waugh and told the Royal Geographical Society in 1857 that "Everest" could not be written in Hindi nor pronounced by "the native of India". Waugh's proposed name prevailed despite the objections, and in 1865, the Royal Geographical Society officially adopted Mount Everest as the name for the highest mountain in the world.[19] The modern pronunciation of Everest (/ˈɛvərɪst/)[22] is different from Sir George's pronunciation of his surname (/ˈiːvrɪst/ EEV-rist).[23]

Although it seems like it should be pronounced Eve rist.

Sorry but I can't agree with that. Mount Everest,  K2, Broad Peak all have their mountaineering history and much of it is related to the British or English speaking nations. To deny them their English names is to deny them their rich histories created by men such as Martin Conway and Thomas Montgomerie.

I dunno if you've put your quote marks in the wrong  place, truncated your post or something else...

Can you try again please.

dont be a knob. we all know what he is on about even if we dont agree with the sentiment. its probably a simple typo, this is an online forum not an essay!

Oh yeah just realised I ballsed that up. Got there in the end though.

Claiming K2 as an English name is a bit of a stretch; surely it's more an English lack of name than anything else!?

Er, no. I don't understand it. That's why I asked him to repost. Instead of being abusive, you could just explain.

your the prick with your smug ass comment. you didnt ask him to explain it, you rudely told him to "try again". so you can f*ck off back to your pretentious high horse.

and nice try, editing your rude response, its still been seen.

Shouldn't you be at school?

Despite Webster's protestations, I still don't understand the bit about chomolungma in your post and would like to understand it.  Please could you explain.

Pretty please.

Breakthrough. I've only just realised that you were quoting from the OP.  I completely didn't realise the bit in quotes was taken from there. Many thanks for bearing with me.

Anyway, my question is why we would take the Nepalese name rather than the Tibetan one? 

I meant to say that either Sagarmatha or Chomolungma is its name and not Everest. But now understand why it is called Everest.

Ah ok. Either/ or.   What intrigues me is whether pressure from China would prevent people referring to it as Chomolungma. I guess  that is the case. Sad but inevitable.

Thomas Montgomerie identified 2 mountains on the Trigonometrical Survey of 1856. The first he named K1 know  locally as Masherbrum, the second he named K2. No know local name exists for the mountain.

... just the bare bones of a name, all rock and ice and storm and abyss. It makes no attempt to sound human. It is atoms and stars. It has the nakedness of the world before the first man – or of the cindered planet after the last.[20]

shouldnt you?