Talk:Netherlands (terminology)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was not written by an English speaker, thus a lot of sentences are either grammatically wrong or confusing.

feel free to edit it -- C mon 19:58, 29 June 2006 (UTC)


"Notably the Netherlands is amongst a small number of countries, who have a singular name for their country, while the English uses a plural form."

This needs to be expressed better, the form is clearly singular in English, as the above sentence itself demonstrates: "the Netherlands is".

In Portuguese 'Países Baixos' is only the official, formal designation. It occurs seldom and the Netherlands are normally called 'Holland'.

Excellent article, the historical explanation of the 'Low Countries' is very clear and informative!

António.


Contents

[edit] NPOV Issues

"In languages other than Dutch, including English, Holland is commonly and incorrectly used as a synonym for the Netherlands as a whole, while actually it just refers to the central-western part of the country."

The 'incorrectly' is seriously POV. There is considerable disagreement even within the Netherlands whether calling the country "Holland" in English is something one should care about. There is also no citation or reference for the claim that the name "Holland" is factually incorrect. Sure, there is a history here in which "Holland" was explicitly used for designating a specific part, but that is mostly no longer the case. Even people from other provinces do not generally complain about calling the Netherlands Holland, and I don't think it's fair to reflect the opinion of a select few in this article as fact. Gijs Kruitbosch 16:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

As long as the correct name (i.e. the designation used in Atlases and encyclopedias) is the Netherlands I feel comfortabel to say that Holand is incorrect. C mon 18:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, but factually incorrect is very strong language. I'm changing it to technically incorrect to maintain the distinction while moving the POV more toward the center. Mordien 18:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Holland is a part of the Netherlands and is incorrect to designate the whole country as "Holland". It happens in the Netherlands, but usually in the west only. There is nothing POV about stating that "Holland" is incorrect when you refer to the country.--Fogeltje 20:38, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Stating that "Holland" is used "usually in the west only" isn't correct. International traders often use Holland as well, even those based in other parts of the Netherlands. Which is not to say that this practice is NOT technically incorrect. Richard 08:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardw nl (talk • contribs)
That sounds similar to the situation in the UK ("the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland"). England is often used to refer to the whole country, when it's just the most populated part. Most people in England won't notice (or care), but people in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Island will! 57.66.65.38 10:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm... the last line in the first paragraph of the section "Holland" reads: This confusion between a part and its whole (pars pro toto) also exists with the names of other countries, such as Russia for the Soviet Union, England for the UK (see also British Isles terminology), or America for the USA. So, this last remark, though true, is rather superfluous.
Before that, the last point made in this discussion was that some international companies in the Netherlands, even outside of Holland, use the name Holland when they actually mean the Netherlands as a whole. In my opinion, this is mainly done because that's custom in various countries and the name Holland is better known and easier for non-Dutch people. Also, during international sport events, especially football (soccer), the Dutch team is encouraged by shouting "Holland!" or "Hup Holland!". Technically, it's still incorrect. But it's practiced far beyond the western part of the Netherlands. Richard 11:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I live in Limburg, and soccer is pretty much the only exception. Foreigners refering to "Holland" are routinely corrected here 88.159.74.100 17:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] diagramm?

How about a diagramm like this one [1] for the Netherlands too? --Soylentyellow 20:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Feel free! What I would like to see is a map which uses different colours for 1) Holland (North+South) 2) The Netherlands (as a state) 3) the Dutch language area in Europe and 4) The low countries/BENELUX. I think a Venn Diagram is also possible but less interesting because there is no intersection only 4 different circles of different size and include the smaller circles. C mon 21:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "The Netherlands embassy"

Shouldn't that be, erm, The Netherlands' embassy? What's being said in this paragraph, to me, seems to be based on something that was misinterpreted. --MooNFisH 05:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Guiana

The article links to Guiana, which is forwarded to Guianas, whereas Dutch Guiana forwards to Suriname. Wouldn't the link to Guianas be out of place here? I'm not too sure about this myself though, since there is no other link in the article to Guiana. My question is more: should there be one if only dutch guiana is mentioned? --MooNFisH 05:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Dutch Guiana was a colony within the region Guiana, and taking its name from the region; that's relevant, I think. —Tamfang 06:04, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] West-Frisia and Papiamento

Ehm, to confuse things even further: the eastern part of North Holland is actually the historic region of West Frisia. The distinction was dropped officially in 1815, but in republican times the States would be termed "The States of Holland and West Frisia". One might also add that Papiamento, the language spoken on the Leeward Netherlands Antilles, does not know the distinction between "Holland" and "Netherlands". Rather akwardly, when wanting do denote the Queen as head of state of the whole Kingdom, including the Antilles, she is styled Reina di Reino Hulandes, "Queen of the Dutch Kingdom"...--129.125.156.37 07:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Low Countries??

This section is interesting but fails to note that the Low Countries is not only a historical tzerm but also a geographical one. TinyMark 09:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Netherlandic

Netherlandic — which isn't currently mentioned in the article — was recently introduced in my organisation as a politically-correct (I think) version of the language "Dutch". It also seems to be listed as a synonym (of sorts) of Netherlandish — which is currently mentioned in the article.
Note: The Dutch language article mentions (only) the dialects(?) "Belgian Dutch" and "Netherlandic Dutch".
—DIV (128.250.204.118 09:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC))

I don't think Netherlandic is an official word. Even Netherlandish has only very limited use, according to the article. Belgian Dutch is often called Flemish, but only when it's necessary to make a distinction between it and "standard" Dutch. The differences between Flemish and Dutch are mostly pronounciation and ways of saying something (example: "for sure" is "vast en zeker" in the Netherlands while in Flanders "zeker en vast" is more common). The official language rules for Dutch are the same in the entire Kingdom (of the Netherlands), Belgium and Surinam.
Richard 09:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Singular/plural

I'm trying to find out when exactly English switched to saying "The Netherlands is" instead of "The Netherlands are". Does anyone have information on this? It would be nice to have it in the article, addressing also António's comment at the top of this discussion page. Classical geographer 09:29, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Sometime after the question I have... arose, I have to suspect. Why aren't terms like Burgundian Netherlands, Spanish Netherlands, Austrian Netherlands (and I suspect almost unrelated, but, the French Netherlands as well) mentioned and discussed in this etymological article? Etymology is inherently historical! Leaving those out is shocking to me!
Given that those states up to the Napoleonic conquests were all fractured into small fiefs, counties and so forth will nobility and all their predations, perfidities, and poxes on the common folk, the plural form was perfectly sensible. Inasmuch as both Belgium and The Netherlands both enshrined monarchies shortly before, during, or after that era, the small states and petty nobility still played a large role in governance... which I suspect may not have died out in a de facto sense until post WW-II (and may not have all—hard to tell from here in Boston! <g>).

Etymological inertia given that set of circumstances seems downright reasonable on the plural sticking around, whereas with the rise of national identity and loyalties since Napoleons day, the Nederlander's own preference for singular forms makes perfect sense as well. The article would do well to address some of these factors, even if it's only to throw cold water on my suspicions, but preferably, by digging out the historic time line and incorporating that story for all of us to see. Cheers // FrankB 01:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is "Holland" used to refer to the whole country in the Dutch language?

In this article, it states that "In languages other than Dutch, including English, "Holland" is often used as a common but technically incorrect synonym for the Netherlands as a whole." However, in the article "Holland", "Holland" is also informally used in English and other languages, including sometimes the Dutch language itself, to mean the whole of the modern country of the Netherlands." If "Holland" is also used in the Dutch language to refer to the whole country then that should be added to this article, if it is not then it should be removed from the other. --Credema (talk) 05:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

It is used as such in the Dutch language. C mon (talk) 07:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
It is - but technically it's incorrect. It's like saying "England" while referring to the United Kingdom. That too is not unheard of even among native English speakers but that doesn't make it right. Richard 07:49, 3 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardw nl (talk • contribs)
It actually depends on where in the Netherlands you are. People from Noord- and Zuid-Holland use it, in other provinces it's hardly used to describe the Netherlands as a whole.--Fogeltje (talk) 10:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree with that, also with the England/UK comparison.--131.174.12.96 (talk) 12:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Just like England/UK then. Johnbod (talk) 19:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
It depends on context. For instance, in sports it is common to call the national team "Holland". /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Again, that heavily depends on the region. People from the west like to think that Noord- and Zuid-Holland are all that matters. The rest of the country thinks otherwise, no one in my region uses "Holland", in context of sports or other context.--Fogeltje (talk) 19:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Rephrase that... "there are people from the west..." I am from Zuid-Holland but I hardly ever use the term Holland when I mean the Netherlands - and certainly not in Dutch. Richard 08:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardw nl (talk • contribs)