Talk:Oregon (toponym)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion in the past. The result of the discussion was keep.
This page is part of WikiProject Oregon, a WikiProject dedicated to articles related to the U.S. state of Oregon.
To participate: join (or just read up) at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
PSU stuff & Applegate Trail are the current Collaborations of the week.
Stub This page is rated as stub-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article is rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Discussion moved from Talk:Oregon

The following discussion was the impetus behind the creation of this page. -Pete 07:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm an Oregon native, and NOWHERE in Oregon is the 'disputed' pronunciation used. There may be some regional variation throughout the state, but they are all very close to the first pronunciation. There are places in the Eastern U.S. where "AR-eh-GONE" is the correct pronunciation for "Oregon", but not when referring to the state. (For example, I have a friend who grew up next to Lake Oregon in Wisconsin. "AR-eh-GONE" is a correct pronunciation there.) The pronunciation of the name of this state is not in dispute. There is a right way, and a wrong way. (I went to college in Prescott, Arizona. Most people, including myself before I moved there, would pronounce this town "PRESS-cot". The locals pronounce it "PRESS-kit". That makes "PRESS-kit" the correct pronunciation for that location, irrespective of the 'correct' pronunciation of the same word elsewhere.) Ehurtley 22:28, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

"Correct" pronunciation is determined not by the residents of the state, but by usage among English speakers in general just as for any other English word. The dictionary (Merriam Webster) cited for the pronunciation favored by Oregon residents lists both pronunciations as correct. So does American Heritage Dictionary. For us to overrule the research of multiple dictionaries based on personal preferences would be POV. Erall 19:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia's policy on the use of English is that articles relating to Britain use British English, without reference to the American equivalent, and articles relating to the USA use American English without citing the British equivalent (as opposed to International English for both). Equivalently, shouldn't the page on Oregon cite the "Oregon" pronounciation, without reference to the "everyone else's" pronounciation?
And by the way, the dictionary isn't God. It hardly has the final say on matters like this (dictionaries get plenty of stuff wrong, especially medical and scientific terminology). Radioactive afikomen 15:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
You bring up a good point with the British/American English analogy. Looking over the policy page (WP:SPELLING), it looks like it's intended for national differences rather than regional, but it might apply here by extension. On the other hand, the pronunciation policy page (WP:PRON) says to use both the English and the local pronunciations of foreign place names. Also not directly applicable here, but potentially relevant.
Dictionaries do indeed get things wrong, but they are the standard references for the meaning, etymology, and pronunciation of words. There's a strong presumption the dictionary is right unless someone comes up with other citations that are more reliable about the fact in question (for example, for medical terms I'd trust a medical reference book over a general-purpose dictionary). The dictionaries are the best verifiable source on this question that has been brought up so far. Erall 03:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
It should also be noted that the OED concurs on the multiple pronunciations. It lists for British English): /ˈɒrɪɡ(ə)n/ and for American English: /ˈɔrəˌɡɑn/ and /ˈɔrəɡ(ə)n/. Hope that helps, though it doesn't address at all the "foreign vs. domestic" problem - I'm a lifelong Oregonian (or as the OED also lists, Oregonite), and I don't think it's at all offensive or bad to have both pronunciations listed. akendall 05:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
this and this might also be helpful - they're from the archive of this page. akendall 06:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, akendall, for pointing out earlier contributions to this discussion. I'm beginning to think this conversation and the accompanying reversions are becoming a drain on this page, which is about much more than the pronunciation of the state's name. Let me suggest the following solution: since the origin of the name "Oregon" is itself unknown, and there is an interesting collection of theories, we should create an article called something like History of the name "Oregon", drawing info from this page and the Columbia River page, and include a discussion of the various pronunciations. Then, the Oregon page can simply state that the pronunciation is a matter of some dispute, and link to the other page. Any objections, or suggestions for a better article title? -Pete 18:21, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

How about Etymology of the word Oregon or (Etymology of the name Oregon)? Taking a cue from Minnesota and a quick search around the wiki, which seems to show that generally the quotes are left off in titles except for the history of a certain expletive... Or if we really want to sound fancy, how about Oregon (toponym)? (as seen at Albania (toponym)) Katr67 18:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I like Oregon (toponym), and the fact that we can, once and for all, pawn this discussion off onto another page (though unfortunately, I'm sure we'll all still remain involved). akendall 18:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
This goes out to Erall who wants what we Orygonians do not want: The incorrect is fine here to go along with the correct as determined by residents of this state with a proper explanation, if and only if you get every other state/region/town to do the same. For instance you might want to check out the talk page for Illa noize and see how they like it when their name is mispronounced, even though this is a very common mispronuctiation as shown by Ludacris' Pimpin' All Over the World song where he goes to Illa-noize to get a taste of Chicago. Aboutmovies 18:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category

Every few months Hmains comes along and tries to put this article under Category:Oregon culture. And every few months I put it back into the top-level Category:Oregon. I'm too tired to articulate my reasoning right now, but it just seems to make sense. Does anybody else have an opinion before I go try to convince him to stop doing that? Katr67 (talk) 05:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Every few months I see Hmains do that, and kind of scratch my head. It doesn't seem like a terribly bad category to put it in, but I really don't see any good reason for it. I guess if s/he's insistent, a compromise might be to put it in both categories; categories are supposed to ease navigation, and if s/he sees some reason why it's better in that category, so be it; but keep it in the top level too, because I think there's lots of people who wouldn't think to look there. (Vertical categorization, contrary to popular opinion, is not "against the rules" -- just discouraged in most cases.) -Pete (talk) 05:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Culture seems a little to a lot wrong to me too. It would be one thing if we celebrated the history of the word, or it were embedded in—say—our state handshake. But it's more a linguistic, academic, and/or historical topic, not culture. —EncMstr 06:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
It's occurred to me that a Category:Words might be useful, given an array of such definition-oriented articles (some admittedly of my own authorship or contribution: skookum, skookumchuck, saltchuck, and others around which there's a culture, and other usages including specific places or derivative concepts/names (skookum (cat) for instance). Category:Pacific Northwest words almost seesm like a good idea, no? Wouldn't need a Category:Words hierarchy, just as a subcat off Category:Pacific Northwest. A bc-side word for the list is rancherie, not sure if it's around in the US; I'm sure it's a longer list if we all gave it some thought, .e. name/word articles like this one.Skookum1 (talk) 22:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
It's already in Category:Etymology, which is a sub-cat of Category:Words. A new category specifically for PNW words would be great, if and when we have a few more articles to put in it; I'd think it's better to focus on writing those articles first, and worry about categorization later. Very interested to see what you come up with. -Pete (talk) 16:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Well,as you can wsee a number already have articles....Squamish (wind) and williwaw also come to mind, also chinook (wind) in its coastal context. Tyee should probably have an article, though I don't mean to invoke only CJ words, there are others non-CJ, I'll have to put on my thinking cap.... Saltchuck btw turns up as a corporate name, Saltchuk Resources, as also does Skookum (Skookum Tools).Skookum1 (talk) 16:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah - potlatch, of course. More CJ, let me see if I can do better....Skookum1 (talk) 16:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Tyee redirects to Tribal chief, which is only one of its meanings; almost seems like it shoudl be an article like Skookum and Skookumchuck - Tyee salmon, Tyee in the sense of boss, tyee in the sense of the larger of two/several things etc.Skookum1 (talk) 16:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Muckamuck shows up as a business name, also - for a pet food company. List of companies and organizations with Chinook Jargon names seems a bit ponderous of a title, but potentially a fair-sized list, and interesting no doubt....I'll relocate this discusson to Talk:Pacific Northwest or Talk:List of Chinook Jargon placenames or some such as it's far off topic from Oregon (toponym).Skookum1 (talk) 16:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ouragon

Others derive the name as a corruption of the French word ouragan (hurricane), referring to the tumultuous nature of the winter storms that batter the northwest Oregon County (Oregon, Washington, and Idaho).[citation needed]

Actually I think I can dig up a webref for that, although it's the windws of the Columbia Gorge the story was in reference to; in the CHINOOK list on http://www.linguistlist.org - should be searchable there as "ouragon", and there were various works cited in the discussion. If anyone's interested in this and wants to dig there, it'll be easy to find, or I'll vget to it eventually. Myself I lean towards teh hurricane explanation, but that's just a gut feeling. "French fur traders" can be even more specific, given the limited and very documented staff of the HBC and NWC; Pere la Verendrye at least, I'm not familiar with the French era of Prairie exploration,m though all us Canucks get fed it in elementary school, or did n my day anyway. Could be someone else, a first provenance; the text should not that they were francophone employees of British fur companies, unless all this is supposed to have taken place in teh days of New France...whch it may have. Grande fleuve de l'Ouest occurs on some maps, lke the Mer de l'Ouest, which as apocrphyal hsitories lke Bergi and Cibola and Anian all have connectsion to the region, as also the legendary era of the Northwest Passage. Oregon's origins as a name le n that msty period, of places referred to, imagined, that had never been seen, or by only a few; the French origin certainly strikes me as plausible despite the endorsement of the Wisconsin theory; they should be [[francophone]] and ''not'' [[France|French]] or [[French|Quebec]] or even [[French Canadian]] fur traders - many, though francophone, were not canadien but Metis orotherwise borne beoyond the Canadas. "Francophone\s in the employ of the Hudson's Bay Company and/or the Northwest Company (or the Pacific Fur Company" or some such (the PFC despite its American ownership was mostly French staffed. Anyway I'll dig out the cite(s) from CHINOOK when I have wsome more time....Skookum1 (talk) 22:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)