Place Name Change and GIS

This paper discusses the aim and the process of designing a community-engaged open-access GIS toponymic platform, based on Indigenous Evenki place names. Most projects on Indigenous toponymy available online are either oriented towards professional use among scholars or serve as enclosed repositories of Indigenous knowledge. Toponymic atlases remain the most common form of documenting and representing Indigenous place naming systems. Yet, temporal and geographic comparisons of place names have clearly demonstrated that, along with a conventional understanding of Indigenous place names as stable and conservative, there is a dynamic model of place naming to be found in nomadic societies, when the names are not only passed through generations but also modified and created. This finding required a number of methodological approaches regarding how researchers might collect and represent geospatial concepts and place names in nomadic societies, with the use of GIS technology. Our project attempts to approach this issue by creating an open digital platform that combines GIS with Indigenous vernacular cartography, place names, and a great variety of data regarding the meaning and use of toponyms, their evolution, and change. We call this approach a “process toponymy” and advocate for applying a semiotic approach to documenting and representing Indigenous place names’ knowledge via GIS-based platforms.

The American cultural landscape has entered an extraordinarily tumultuous time. At the time of this writing, in 2020, a new wave of anti-racist protest is sweeping the globe in response to the murders of unarmed Black women and men both at the hands of the state and white supremacist vigilantes. The memorial landscape, particularly in terms of place names, has become once again a site for (re)asserting a Black sense of place and the past, as well as for diverting attention away from concrete policy demands that could improve the lived material realities of the marginalized, especially Black people. This chapter explores the history and evolution of American place name landscape change and scholarly debates over the politics of place (re)naming. It situates place name politics in a wider critical historical and geographic context by surveying recent struggles over place names on American university campuses. Finally, in view of the increasing role the toponymic landscape plays in oppressed peoples’ demands for change, it concludes with a reflection on the possibilities and limits of reparative place (re)naming and a word of caution given how authorized place name changes are often used to placate rather than meet demands for justice.

This article discusses Indigenous Evenki place names (hydronyms) on official topographic maps and handwritten sketches in a broader context of Soviet and Russian regimes of spatial inscription and toponymic policies and their legacies. The early Soviet policy of korenizatsia (indigenization) facilitated the incorporation of Indigenous place names into official nomenclature. As a result, a large number of Indigenous toponyms appeared on official maps. The aim of this article is to examine the evolving relationships between Indigenous place names and official place names of Indigenous origin across three historical periods (the 1920s, the 1950s, and the contemporary era) and in two politically distinct settings, the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) and the Amur region. The data sets for this research were extracted from official maps and Evenki archival sketch maps collected by Glafira Vasilevich in Siberia between the 1920s and the 1960s. Using Quantum GIS in conjunction with ethnographic fieldwork, statistical analysis, and qualitative linguistic assessment, this research further investigates the evolution of Indigenous names on maps, focusing on the most characteristic changes in their inscription over the past century. This article concludes by highlighting the power dynamics between different Indigenous place-naming traditions in Siberia, where various Indigenous communities have historically distinct opportunities to influence toponymic policies.

The age and origins of the indigenous settlement names in Kose parish The purpose of this article is to provide a more detailed survey of the age and origins of the indigenous settlement names in Kose Parish. The place names that already existed before the Great Northern War are considered to be indigenous, and therefore, the names recorded between the 13th and 17th centuries will be examined. The source material comes primarily from the place name archives of the Institute of the Estonian Language, for which place names from Kose Parish have been collected from 1929 to 1969. A large percentage of the village names from Kose Parish are very old – a quarter of the village names in the place name archives of the Institute of the Estonian Language date back to ancient times and they are already mentioned in the Danish Census Book. Later on, the names of the manors that were established in place of the villages sometimes adopted the names of the ancient villages. By the end of the 17th century, recordings related to 26% of the names had been added, which means that more than half the village and manor names in Kose Parish are indigenous. In the case of the farm names, about 25% of them can be connected to the names that are found in the old sources (a similar result has also been achieved in the research of place names in the neighbouring areas). Of them 4% were indigenous, i.e. farm names that appeared in sources before the 18th century. The main section of the article is comprised of a list of indigenous names, where we can see the oldest spelling of the name and information regarding the probable origins of the name. The definite etymology of the oldest village and manor names can be determined very seldom, but the centuries-old forms of the name can surprisingly often be juxtaposed with old personal names (e.g. Alansi). The most transparent village and manor names are usually based on names related to nature (e.g. Kivioja). Most of the names of ancient farms are based on personal names (e.g. Hansoni). In many cases, this is only an indirect classification, because the names cannot be explained with only one equivalent. In the case of several settlement names that are not transparent today, the most likely point of departure is still a personal name (e.g. Ardu). Concurrences have also been discovered with Germanic personal names, and comparisons with Low German and Frisian names have helped to find explanations for place names that are difficult to etymologize. Settlement names have also undergone various specific developments.

Artikkelissa selvitetään, millaisista paikoista Pohjois-Amerikan ensimmäisen siirtolaispolven suomalaiset ovat kirjeissään puhuneet ja mitä paikannimiä he ovat näistä paikoista käyttäneet. Tutkimusaineisto koostuu 434 Pohjois-Amerikasta Etelä-Pohjanmaalle vuosina 1881–1939 lähetetystä kirjeestä. Kirjeistä on koottu kaikki paikannimet, jotka viittaavat Pohjois-Amerikassa sijaitseviin paikkoihin. Paikannimiaineisto koostuu 199 eri paikannimestä, joita käytetään kirjeissä 881 kertaa. Paikannimiä analysoidaan sosio-onomastiikan, kontaktionomastiikan ja kriittisen onomastiikan keinoin. Analyysissa tarkastellaan, millaisissa kirjoitusasuissa nimiä niitä käytetään, mikä on paikannimien kieli, millä tavoin jotkin paikannimet ovat mukautuneet suomeen ja millainen on nimenkäyttäjän suhde siihen paikkaan, jonka nimeä käyttää. Mahdollisuuksien mukaan tarkastellaan myös syitä nimenkäytön taustalla. Kirjeissä käytetyt paikannimet voidaan jakaa viiteen kategoriaan: viralliset paikannimet, paikannimen ja appellatiivin, adjektiivin tai postposition yhdistelmät, fonologisia muutoksia sisältävät paikannimet, lyhennelmät ja käännösnimet. Tutkimus osoittaa, että kirjeissä puhutaan eniten osavaltioista, kaupungeista sekä muista pienemmistä asutusalueista. Huomattavasti vähemmän puhutaan luonnonpaikoista. Tutkimus osoittaa myös, että paikoista puhutaan eniten sekä niiden virallisilla nimillä että suomeen fonologisesti mukautuneilla nimillä. Vähiten käytetään lyhennelmiä ja käännösnimiä. Tulokset tukevat aiempia kirjetutkimuksissa tehtyjä havaintoja: ne kirjoittajat, jotka ovat kirjeissään käyttäneet fonologisesti mukautettua paikannimeä, näyttäisivät olevan kirjoitustaidoiltaan harjaantumattomampia kuin ne, jotka ovat käyttäneet paikannimien virallisia asuja. Tutkimuksessa nousee esiin suomalaisten rooli osana Pohjois-Amerikan asutuskolonialismia: kirjeissä mainitaan muutama asutusalue, joille on annettu suomenkielinen ja Suomeen viittaava nimi. Place names in letters written by first-generation Finnish Americans The article examines what kind of places the Finnish of the first immigrant ­generation spoke about in their letters, and what names they used for these places. The research material consists of 434 letters sent from North America to ­Southern Ostrobothnia between 1881 and 1939. All the place names that refer to places in North America have been collected from these letters. The place name material consists of 199 different place names, which are used 881 times. Place names are analysed using socio-onomastics, contact onomastics and critical onomastics. The analysis examines the spellings in which these names appear, the language of the place names, how some place names have been adapted from English to Finnish, and the relationship of the name user to the place named. If possible, the reasons behind the use of names are also examined. Place names can be divided into five categories: official place names; combinations of place name and appellative, adjective or postposition; place names with phono­logical changes; abbreviations; and translated names. The research shows that the writers mostly speak about cities and other settlements. Much less is spoken about natural places. The research also shows that places are most often referred to by both their official names and names that are phonologically adapted to Finnish. Abbreviations and translated names are used much less. The results support previous observations made in correspondence studies: those writers who used a phonologically adapted place name seem to be more inexperienced in their writing skills than those who used the official forms. The research also explores Finnish settler colonialism in North America: the letters mention a few settlement areas that have been given Finnish names.

Indigenous place names contain knowledge of the landscape and encode unique perceptions of landscapes with which Indigenous Peoples have interacted for hundreds, often thousands, of years. However, many Indigenous place names have been lost as a result of colonization. Furthermore, many of these have been replaced with colonial place names, and their loss contributes to overall language attrition. In turn, the loss of language makes it difficult, or even impossible, to understand the concepts embedded within Indigenous place names that do remain in use. The documentation and conservation of place names is thus an important aspect of Indigenous language preservation and revitalization that can help facilitate reconnection with the language and the land. This paper outlines the Atlas of Kanyen'kehá:ka Space digital atlas project, an initiative that uses digital mapping to aid in the documentation and revitalization of the Kanyen'kéha (Mohawk) language through community participatory mapping of Kanyen'kéha place names and landscape-related language. It describes the initial stages of the Atlas of Kanyen'kehá:ka Space project, including its theoretical framework, the O'nonna model, and its community-based participatory methodology for digital mapping. It reports on a series of mapping workshops within three Kanyen'kehá:ka communities and shares initial findings and future directions for the project.

The erasure of Indigenous place names takes place all over the world, enabled by territoriality, private property and settler colonialism. Hawaiʻi did not escape this colonial process, but the writing over of our geographic labels has a unique genealogy. Unlike many places, Hawaiʻi’s inoa wahi (place names) were legally preserved and codified during the transition from common to private property by the constitutional monarchy that ruled Hawaiʻi. However, these place names were eventually obliterated as part of the geopolitical climate that began just after the Hawaiian Kingdom’s overthrow in 1893.This text will describe Hawaiʻi’s unique naming genealogy and examine the factors that contributed to it. Through the case study of Waikīkī’s transformation from food production area to international tourist destination, it will contextualize the process of place name erasure during Hawaiʻi’s post-overthrow and territorial period (1893–1959) and discuss the ways that Kanaka Maoli (Native Hawaiians) were disenfranchised historically. Additionally, this text will also detail processes that can be utilized to reclaim these Indigenous place names and the connections to land and identity for Hawaiʻi’s Indigenous people and landscape.

The rich fabric of place names knitting together the Americas weaves into a complex intercultural network of naming practices that span thousands of years as well as the globe. Indigenous, European, and settler communities each bestowed names upon places near and far whose meanings describe the place, its resources, or one’s experiences there. Names define the people who occupy a place. They commemorate an event or person in ways that evidence the gendered and racialized nature of place naming in the Americas, especially after 1492, through a predominately masculine lens. This study considers how women and people of color are represented in place names and the impacts of masculinist approaches to place nomenclature while contrasting Indigenous approaches to toponymy and the European reception of Indigenous place names in the Americas, with a focus on North America.

Cray, Ed. Ethnic and place names as derisive adjectives. Western Folklore 21 :27 -34, Jan. 1962. Fairclough, G. Thomas. A variant of 'downtown.' American Speech 37: 158, May 1962. Heier, Edmund. Russo-German place-names in Russia and in North America. Names 9:260-68, Dec. 1961. Names resulting from the Russo-German immigration are discussed on p.266-68. Jennings, Gary. Naming names and backgrounds. Denver Post Oct. 29, 1961, Roundup p. 31. General article on names in the U. S. Condensed in Reader's Digest 79:114-16; Dec. 1961 under title: Why did they call it that? Kane, Joseph Nathan. The American counties; a ~ecord of the origin of the names of the 3,072 counties, dates of creation and organization, area, 1960 population, historical data, etc, of the fifty States. Rev. ed. New York, Scarecrow Press, 1962. 540 p. 1st ed. 1960. 500 p. Kilpatrick, Jack Frederick. An etymological note on the tribal name of the Cherokees and certain place and proper names derived from Cherokee. Journal of the Graduate Research Genter 30:37-41, April 1962. Krueger , John R. A pronunciation standard for place names of the Pacific Northwest. American Speech 37 :74, Feb. 1962. Local pronunciations of some tribal names and place-names. Further comments by C. F. Voegelin, ibid. 37 :75, Feb. 1962. Leigh, Rufus Wood. Naming of the Green, Sevier, and Virgin Rivers. Utah Historical Quarterly 29: 137 -47, April 1961. Adapted from his full-length book manuscript, Indian, Spanish, and government survey place names oj the Great Basin and Oolorado plateaus.

Place names are a linguistic message carrying spatial information. These names contain a wealth of knowledge in regard to descriptions of landscape, environment, navigation, past events, and people’s overall relationships to place. In cases where this information is part of an intergenerational, long-term relationship with a specific landscape, place names can be considered Indigenous knowledge and thus, may be especially significant within the context of places that have been subject to colonization, or have undergone significant environmental change. Until very recently, place name studies were often limited to a focus on linguistic elements and confined to paper as text. However, the advent of new digital technologies can now allow us to look at place names in new and different ways by using them as the input on digital mapping platforms to create visualizations of space. This chapter outlines three specific techniques that I developed over the course of my dissertation working together with members of the Kanyen’kehá:ka (Mohawk) on place names and Indigenous place naming conventions. Using the structures, meanings, and sounds of some of these names, I demonstrate how mapping these different aspects can produce visual patterns that allow us to see a landscape in new ways. These techniques, when used with community participatory mapping, can facilitate better understanding and representation of Indigenous relationships to place through digital mapping.

In Morocco, the contemporary emphasis on regionalisation and increased tolerance for ethnolinguistic diversity belie state attempts to dissipate pre‐Independence ‘tribal’ allegiances among citizens for whom they hold sway. Ever‐refined rural administrative boundaries and the new place names that accompany them suggest new models for group organisation ‐ challenging indigenous understandings about the links between different locations, and about links between people and places. This article argues that Tashelhit speakers of the Souss region engage in information management by selectively revealing and concealing personal information, thus challenging state attempts to eliminate family and ‘tribe’ from place and personal names. Civil registries, school records, and national identity cards document the discrepancies between indigenous and state naming practices, raising difficulties for citizens who must increasingly rely on documents over oral testimony to pursue legal and administrative ends.

This article presents the cartographic outcome of a 3-year collaboration with Penobscot Nation Cultural & Historic Preservation to map the traditional place names of Penobscot territory in the state of Maine. After a consideration of the challenges of mapping Indigenous place names, I describe my cartographic contribution to the project, to transform the map design using the tools of narrativity and translation. Initial insights about Penobscot place names then led to wider insights regarding Indigenous place names and traditional cartography, through a comparison to similar practices in the place name traditions of other communities. I then explain how these insights influenced the design of the map itself.

The purpose of this study is to analyze the place names in Korean textbooks and to examine the role of the place names in the textbooks The subjects of the study are ‘Seoul University Korean’ and ‘Sejong Korean’. The place names were based on the classification of place names in the National Atlas and were classified into natural place names, human place names, and administrative place names. Natural place names and administrative place names appeared evenly in the two textbooks, but humanities place names showed large regional deviations and differences. The place names in the textbooks show not only the geographical location but also the changes of society, symbolize the times, and let us know the history, tourism and food culture of our country. This study can not only provide a way to reflect various place names in textbooks in a balanced way, but can also be used as basic data to reveal changes in place names in Korean language textbooks.

When we encounter most place names, we encounter the generalist contraptions of colonial projects. As a result of settler violences, the existence of place names in Turtle Island becomes dynamically layered and complex, representing language that has been erased, language that aims to replace, and language that has resisted erasure and replacement. This chapter explores the ways in which settler linguistic practices act to facilitate the interruption of accurate knowledge of place, and explores the ways that the restoration of indigenous place names, in contrast, offers an opportunity to disassemble linguistic violences within every-day landscapes. This chapter suggests that there is particular opportunity in this moment to acknowledge the contexts of ongoing colonialist projects within [what is called in English] the United States, and to trace some of the forces of erasure that colonialist place names represent. Grounded in the author’s toponymic work in the Hodino̱hsho:nih landscape, in [what is called in English] Upstate New York, this chapter’s discussion argues for the ability of place name restoration work to embody reparative and replenishing practice within the environments in which we live, and to enact liberatory practices of repair.

Place names, also known as toponyms, are a fundamental part of our cultural and geographical environment. Like many Indigenous groups, Inuvialuit in what is now northwestern Canada use place names to describe the landscape, guide and warn travellers, and convey important cultural information (Hart 2011, 9). Many efforts are underway to document, restore and promote the use of Indigenous toponyms in Canada, including their submission to provincial and territorial naming authorities (Inuit Heritage Trust 2016). A related means of raising the profile of Inuvialuit place names is their inclusion on maps that are readily accessible to the public. In their ten calls to action for natural science researchers working in Canada, Wong et al. (2020) underscore the need for Indigenous place names to be incorporated, with permission, in maps and text associated with scientific research to recognize the stories and Indigenous Knowledge behind the names (777). This paper is a step in addressing this call to action by presenting the results of an analysis of Inuvialuktun-language place names in the Tuktoyaktuk area. The analysis examines how readily the names are identified in official, and popular non-official sources and discusses implications for promoting Indigenous Knowledge more broadly.