Originally Posted by ue
British Columbia is an odd name in the contemporary sense, seeing as it is no longer British and the negative associations with Columbus, but there are bigger fish to fry, I think, if we were to rename things. I personally hate duplication of names as it is super derivative, not to mention confusing at times, and only debases the places that are named the same. For example, the Pacific Northwest has 3 Vancouver's... Vancouver BC, Vancouver WA, and Vancouver Island BC. Why? Yeah, I know, George Vancouver, but it's generic and confusing. I'd advocate leaving Vancouver BC as-is as it's the most well-known of the 3, but the other two ought to be renamed, especially Vancouver Island, as the name only makes the place feel less distinct than it really is from the Lower Mainland. Perhaps something named after the Nootka, similar to what was done with the Queen Charlotte Islands, now Haida Gwaii? Not sure about Vancouver WA but I'm sure something could be done.
Other places due for a rename -- Glacier National Park (BC, not MT), Northwest Territories, London, Hamilton, New Brunswick, Saint John (NB), PEI... either due to generic-ness or duplicity
Of course, places can have super generic names and still be popular, eg New York City, Los Angeles, Sydney, Rio de Janeiro, Buenos Aires, but I do think distinctive names do help, especially for places kind of in the shadow and unable to differentiate themselves.
|