many Indians still call it synonymously Bombay
Hm, m, m, Mumbai. As a foreigner, you should call her Mumbai. Bombayites may call her Bombay.
Tolerance and respect are both a thing in their own right.
Cheers, Sören
Créateur des bugs mobiles - let loose once, run everywhere.
(hooked on the Perl Programming language)
| [reply] |
You probably meant "Mumbaikars"? (Jehova, Jehova! ;)
Many institutions in Mumbai still retain the "Bombay" in their name and it's still used all over India (many languages spoken there). Source Wikipedia.
Someone could have send a private message to holli, but rather preferred to attack openly (again).
Since radical PC seems to be the new instrument of inquisition, we should rather discuss the "big" scandal of names like
- "Aix-la-Chapelle",
- "Nizza",
- "Nuremberg"
- "Monaco di Baviera".
- "Florenz"
- ...
| [reply] |
ex-colonies often have this de-namification by the colonisers. At the same time, I think that's the least of the problems in the life of the average "Bombayite" in the street (literally).
I was between two minds whether to post this as per "politically motivated 'problems'" etc., which is generally sound advice. But hey, some politics hidden in "Re^5" is also OK for me :)
Edit: it *may not* have been a colonial hand what gave the name Bombay:
The French traveller Louis Rousselet who visited in 1863 and 1868 tells us in his book L’Inde des Rajahs (pub. 1877 in Paris): "Etymologists have wrongly derived this name from the Portuguese Bôa Bahia, or (French: "bonne bai", English: "good bay"), not knowing that the tutelar goddess of this island has been, from remote antiquity, Bomba, or Mamba Dévi, and that she still..., possesses a temple". (from wikipedia)
| [reply] |
Indians?! Indians?!?!?!? Hacka', please. They prefer to be called sub-Continentals.
| [reply] |
| [reply] |