| Username |
Post |
| ashu |
Posted
on 20-Apr-01 12:15 AM
Hari wrote:
>In some ways, yes, we cannot impose what the english speaking >world calls us,
Well, I don't know about that.
But let's look at these pieces of evidence.
One of the world's most influential newspapers
"The New York Times" uses Nepali and NOT Nepalese.
Another one of the world's most influential magazines
THE ECONOMIST of London also uses Nepali and
NOT Nepalese. I'd imagine that it's the same
at the Washington Post and the Wall Street
Journal.
Well, I don't know about you, but as far as I am concerned, The New York Times and The Economist are pretty much good representatives of the Western (media) mainstream.
Nobody is trying to be politically correct here.
So, to address your concern, we don't have to impose
anything on the English speaking world re: whether
they should call us Nepali or Nepalese.
Going by the evidence, their best media representatives
are ALREADY calling us Nepalis anyway.
oohi
ashu
|
| SP |
Posted
on 21-Apr-01 12:29 PM
NY Times: 21 hits for 'Nepalese' 3 hits for 'Nepali' (searching for 1 past year) http://www.nytimes.com
The Economist: 8 hits for 'Nepalese' 9 hits for 'Nepali' http://www.economist.com
I stil don't believe we need to use 'nepali' :)
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 22-Apr-01 02:35 AM
Hi San,
In light of the evidence you've dug up, I'm happy to
modify my earlier thinking a bit.
That said, as it must be clear, I prefer
"Nepali" to "Nepalese".
Neither word, as I have repeatedly said, is more correct
than the other, nor is it offensive in any way.
So, back to my first conclusion: Whether you use Nepali or Nepalese, it all boils down to preferences.
And so, back to the earlier recommendation: All things being
equal, why not use Nepali instead of Nepalese? :-)
oohi
ashu
|
