Everyone else seems to be putting their 50c worth in for this whole Whanganui verses Wanganui thing that I thought I might as well add my voice as well.
The situation is far from simple but here are a few points to consider.
- Was the intention of the city founders to have a a Maori or an English name? Another good example is the town of Timaru. Is that name a Maori or an English one? Just for the record Timaru is a transliteration of the word Te Maru.
- Is it ok for one culture to miss-spell and miss-pronounce the language of another culture? If you argue that its not ok then you will probably need to re-write most of your maps and books. Europe is full of Anglicised place names which often bear no resemblance to the original names the natives use. Consider the correct names for Germany and Japan for instance.
- Local Maori pronunciation of the word Whanganui would be said with a soft W sound at the beginning of the word rather than the more common F sound that the rest of the country uses. Should we therefore be concerned with the pronunciation of the word or the spelling? If its the pronunciation then we need to keep the current spelling as the rest of the country will pronounce the Wh as an F.
- Should the cost of changing a city;s name even be considered? and is the cost argument even relevant?
- Should democracy be allowed to even come into such a question? and if so should a democratic decision be allowed even if it is wrong?
The issue seems to be about more than just the spelling of a city name though. The real issue which remains unspoken is which racial group has the most control. This is probably why neither Maori or those of European descent want to be seen to be “giving in”.
As for me – I would prefer to miss-spell the city name so that people would at least pronounce it correctly.
1) Don’t know about Timaru but it seems obvious that the intetion of “the city founders” was to use an existing Maori name.
2) The answer is no, it is not OK for one culture to miss-spell and miss-pronounce the language of another culture. I don’t know about other countries but what is important here in Whanganui is that we live together and should then have a greater knowledge and respect for one another. It may be acceptable for me to be ignorant of cultures I am unfamiliar with and have no contact to, but it is not acceptable within Aotearoa / New Zealand when Maori and NZ European are partners together.
3) I would hope that we can encourage the rest of the county to respect the local dialect and pronounce Whanganui accordingly. I have a theory that has no historical support what so ever but seems logical to me. Why would those that created written Maori use WH to sound as F? Perhaps they were writing it to sound as the Whanganui dialect sounds. The Whanganui region was one of the earlier settled areas. Then it was discovered that other regions used the same words but with the F sound but because those words has already been written the initial spelling was maintained.
4) No the cost should not be a consideration but the value should. The value is in integrity, recognition, and a step towards greater harmony. The cost has been way overstated.
5) No democracy can not change something that is wrong to right.
You are right. The real issue is one of control, but it is spoken of. Not by those who take the power for granted but by those who are most detrimentally effected by it.
I don’t believe the spelling and pronuncuation are seperable. If the pronunciation is important then we also need to correct the current usage from Wonganui to Wanganui. (But with a silent H)
This is a rerun of the debate that took place a number of years ago over the mountain formerly known as Mount Egmont. The debate was resolved, I believe, when the then Minister of Maori Affairs Koro Wetere, proposed that the mountain be known as either Mount Egmont OR Mount Taranaki. For most people it was a win-win solution, though I suspect the grandstanders were probably a little deflated!
I suggest that Wanganui be called either Wanganui OR Whanganui. It would take the heat from the current debate. It recognises the validity of arguements on both sides of the current debate, and both sides do have a case. Finally, it provides for a gradual phase in of changes if so desired. Someone will otherwise have to pay for all the changes, fortunately it won’t be me – I’m not a ratepayer, or businessman, -I live in WHangaehu!
I don’t get it, what do you mean by the 3rd paragraph?