But it may already be too late.
I agree with James Fallows, who considers “Czechia” a linguistic abomination. Apparently an attempt to introduce poetry to the colloquial name of the country as well as provide a shorter alternative, the government effort to foist this frankenword “Czechia” upon us is misguided at best.
Admittedly, “the Czech Republic” is somewhat unwieldy: It sounds too official and doesn’t flow off the tongue as “Czechoslovakia” once did. But Czechia is not the answer, and not just because of how many people will confuse it with Chechnya. It’s all well and good for Slovaks, who after the Velvet Divorce retained the poetic-sounding “Slovakia.”
Here is where I part company with Fallows, who suggests Česko and Bohemia as possible alternative to “the Czech Republic”:
- The Czech neologism Česko, common in informal usage, is not a solution, in part because since English lacks the háček diacritic, anglophones might run around saying “Sesko” until they get used to it. Czesko is similarly a non-starter.
- Bohemia is even worse as a pragueocentric name that neglects the whole eastern half of the country. Not that Moravians aren’t used to the disdain: Poet Jan Skácel maintained that the Moravian anthem was the pause between Czech and Slovak portions of the Czechoslovak national anthem (Kde domov můj? and Nad Tatrou sa blýska, respectively). Silesians might likewise object to being citizens of “Bohemia.”
Do I have any alternative of my own to propose? Yes, though it is not a perfect solution: “the Czech Lands.” It does have the advantage of saving two syllables over “the Czech Republic” and it is more poetic than the official title. (For a long time I have in informal speech called the place “Czecho,” perhaps a bit flippantly. But of course this won’t do for an officially sanctioned title.)
Nevertheless, even proponents of the change admit that Czechs themselves do not use the term “Czechia.”
I disagree that Czechia is a linguistic abomination. Why? Because as James Follows says in the Atlantic the new name sounds weird and because it is a new word? I can understand that it sounds weird for him and for you (?) but majority of people seem to like it and time will show if the word Czechia will naturalize. (I am expecting it will) “Words change as well as men do” as somebody once said and language generally is in a constant change across time, space and social groups. As for your invention “the Czech Lands” Paul, it does sound very poetic but I don’t think it would fulfill the task give to this endeavor- to find a shorter version of the official name for commercial and sport purposes.
Thanks for your reply, Eva.
My most complete response would be to quote from James Fallows’s most recent blog entry, where he writes, “I have yet to hear from a native English-speaker who thinks that ‘Czechia’ is a great idea.” And that is the crux of the matter. You are right, Eva, that short is better in theory, but not at the expense of euphony. And Czechia just doesn’t sound good to native anglophones. For this reason I don’t think the term will gain currency. But time will tell. After all, “television” was once seen as a monstrous word, given its roots in both Greek (τῆλε) and Latin (vīsiō), and that one took off. Let’s just say that I hope Czechia remains in obscurity.
Well every word seems strange at first, right? Turkey? Belarus? Zimbabwe? Czechoslovakia! After heard 1000 times reactions will be different, as it was common all along. Linguistically it is created with cold logic, and “created” is not the right word – Czechia is not new name, used in past (although not so often of course). In Internet age it has easier path to become known.
If “Czechia” is not a new name and was used in the past why did it not become established? It was probably as unpopular as today, difficult to pronounce, and therefore never widely used. Ať žije Česká republika!
I do not understand the problem. There is a country officially called “Republic of South Africa”. The short form is “South Africa” and its inhabitants are referred to as “South Africans”. Nobody considers there a need for a shorter form. What’s wrong with “Czech Republic”? We should build on this brand rather than embark on a newly minted name which is difficult to pronounce in English and at the same time confusing (Cechnya). To the latter point (confusion): Ask any Swiss living outside of Europe how often she/he has been asked if they speak Swedish in Switzerland, or how sometimes people mix up Switzerland and Swaziland. The same is bound to happen with Czechia.
The “Republic” in the name is the problem and difference of course – political pretentious name where other countries commonly uses “nickname” – geographic name, even South Africa is informal name, informal name does not have to be one-word, but it should leave political words. Czech Republic is not timeless name, it refers only to history of the state Czech Republic beginning 1993. Czechia can be used for whole Czech history, including kingdoms and republics (now “Czech lands” is used as unifying history term which of course was never official name). Foreigners DO show need for shorter form and they are inventing something like Czech, Czecho, Bohemia, Czechy, CzechR, Czechs – tell me it is OK to have tons of twisted nicknames and no official.
The “Dominican Republic” has no problems andto add to possible confusion there is another country called “Dominica”. We have to face it: The history of our country is different and special. The fact that there is no established short name in English is the best proof. What is objectable is the way this new ugly name “Czechia” was presented: Without a broad consultation of the population in the country or fellow citizens living abroad, without proper studies on the name’s acceptance, clarity, pronounciation, and image in the Anglosaxon world. This is about the name of a country, so it should be handled in a comprehensive, careful, and (hint) democratic way.
There is a valid reason why Vaclav Havel objected the term “Česko”, and he would turn in his grave if he knew about “Czechia”. Let’s keep it as it is: Czech Republic, with “Czech Lands” as an alternative (just like Netherlands).
Gil, well said. I couldn’t agree more.
Gil, I am sorry that you find Czechia ugly, also I am not so sure if VH would be turning in his grave? He might have like it. The – ia suffix is wildly used in English for names of places, maybe the other use for it – names of illnesses make people see red?
The name Czechia was picked “officially” already in 2006 or even earlier and was approved by the “Terminological commission of the Czech Geodesic and Land Register Office” (sounding in both Czech or English like one of the Kafkaes offices) and they probably did some studies. I think it was an utilitarian undertaking from the beginning. Anyway, the idea that Czech Government (?) would consults Czech Expats is fresh, let’s start an initiative?:)
Eva,
If you were a native speaker of English, you might have a different opinion. It’s one thing to be proficient in a language (as you undoubtedly are); it’s another to be a native speaker. Speaking as a native English speaker, I can only say that when I first saw this name, I laughed out loud. It was clearly a joke, right? But then I saw it appear more often and realized that some people took the term seriously. But my dislike for “Czechia” never abated.
Again I must return to James Fallows’s remark that he hasn’t heard any defense of the term by a native speaker of English. Who knows, maybe there is somewhere a native anglophone who likes the term, but Fallows has fielded a lot of mail on the topic, so he has a large sample size.
Gil makes an excellent point about the term being presented in top-down fashion.
This article from Lidové noviny “Shoda na Hradě: ať se Česku v zahraničí říká Czechia. Souhlasil Zeman i Sobotka” lays out how government officials presented the term, demanding worldwide compliance:
http://www.lidovky.cz/shoda-na-hrade-at-se-cesku-v-zahranici-rika-czechia-souhlasil-zeman-i-sobotka-1bx-/zpravy-domov.aspx?c=A160414_193320_ln_domov_ele
One leader of a Silesian cultural group who was cited in the article had an initial negative reaction to the term, partly due to the lack of euphony (“její prvotní reakce na název Czechia byla odmítavá a navíc jí pojmenování nezní libozvučně”). She allowed herself to be convinced otherwise over time, but what about her initial aversion to the word? Maybe there is some wisdom in her first reaction.
Eva, you claim that studies were done to determine popular opinion about the term. Do you have any sources?
Furthermore, as Gil points out, a number of countries around the world have informal versions of two or more words. Here are just a few examples off the top of my head:
Antigua and Barbuda
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Central African Republic
Costa Rica
Domincan Republic
French Guiana
Great Britain
Ivory Coast
French Guiana cannot be merely Guiana, because there is already a Guyana. Great Britain isn’t just England or Scotland or Wales or any other one-word term. And so on.
Additionally, I certainly understand the reactions of Moravians and Silesians who feel left out of the process of name creation. They often feel slighted by Bohemians. It’s true that they speak dialects of the Czech language, but language is not always the sole determining factor in nation name creation.
Finally, not to speak for Gil, who argues well on his own, but I think his comment meant that given that Havel objected strongly to the use of Česko, he would likely have a similar reaction to Czechia. Of course nobody can consult Havel for his opinion anymore, so we can set that aside.
My own opinion is that the Czech Republic is fine, and I would also accept the Czech Lands. I won’t be using Czechia, though.
Fully agree.
Paul, can you add “like” buttons to the functions of your blog?
Let me add the following. There is “France” and there is the “French Republic” which is the official name. France is more geographical whereas the French Republic is more than the mere territory of France. The term “Republic” is aspirational, it encompasses the values of the French Revolution, like Human Rights. It is a concept which transcends beyond the term “France”. On 14 July the French will say “Vive la Republique” (long live the republic), exactly for this reason.
The “Czech Republic” is similarly a concept – the modern home of Bohemians, Moravians, and Silesians. It carries the entire “package” of shared history. Czechia, however, sounds like a flat, contentless word. There is so much more to our country.
I first saw the word czechia in the teenage cartoon Rychlé Šípy. The cartoon was probably written in the 60’s. It was when they went to a soccer game and one of the German leaning fans exclaimed(paraphrasing): “Czechie Fuj, Rapid do Toho” 🙂
I too dislike the word Czechia although it seems only fair when Czechs and Slovaks split up and Czechs kept the original state flag that the Slovaks took the more poetic name Slovakia 🙂
Not only an abomination, I think the Czech-made name Czechia is a JOKE. Since when do one country’s apparatchiks dictate what the rest of the world should call them? Can anyone imagine government officials, let’s say in Berlin, issuing directives about their country name in English, Italian, or Czech for that matter? Good bye Germany, Tedesco, and Německo! It’s going to be Deutschlandia from now on.
Furthermore, the “incorrect” argument regarding the name “Bohemia” is based on a similarly twisted logic. The self-absorbed toponymy experts in Prague are ignoring a minor fact about traditional names of countries: they rarely accurately reflect their current geopolitical makeup. Sorry, Moravia, but you think “Russia” encompasses all of its dozens of republics and oblasts? Ever heard of a country commonly called Mexico? It’s a federation of 31 states, only one of which is called Mexico. Or, how about the name “America” for the United States? Also incorrect?