The Scandes Comments

Viewing: 1-9 of 9
The Lower Marmot

The Lower Marmot - Feb 15, 2006 2:01 pm - Hasn't voted

Re: Name

I'd suggest adding the word range just to clarify things a little bit for us dumb Americans, but Skanderna is great (preferable to me, actually). I'll come back and vote after school.



tomi - Feb 15, 2006 2:36 pm - Hasn't voted

Re: Name

first should be original (native) name then / english transcription,
this way we respect locals and second visitors from other countries can find easier in english.
just suggestions for all inputs


tallabomba - Feb 24, 2006 3:56 am - Hasn't voted


Well, what's in a name? Regardless of what name to use in the title, it would be nice to have the local name variants (popular and more formal/scientific) described for the respective languages (Sami, Norwegian, Swedish, Meänkieli, ..?) in the text. Many swedes call it Fjällen - "the mountains (that are higher than the treeline)". The word for mountain (lower ones in Scandinavia and all mountains everywhere else) is "berg" in Swedish. Quite different from how norwegians use their "fjell".

PS. I think Skanderna is fine as the main name, but the English name is fine too (and perhaps a more diplomatic solution in areas with many local languages).


tiziana - Feb 15, 2006 11:45 am - Voted 10/10

go on Lolli !!!

it will be a beautiful page ...with those fantastic photos:)
cheers ..Tiz

Gangolf Haub

Gangolf Haub - Mar 11, 2006 10:44 am - Voted 10/10

I'm sure...

... we haven't heard the end of the name discussion. My suggestion is to put the English name in front, the Swedish behind. This clearly is an area which spans more than one country and consequently you either use a neutral name or names in all languages. As there seems to be only one for the whole range in Swedish that should be ok. Still I would include a paragraph in the overview section, in which the different names might be discussed.

I have had similar discussions about the mountains of South Tyrol, which have German names but belong to Italy and thus received Italian names as well. Wherever I find them I report all names, not caring too much about the naming sequence.

Back to your page - I see that you have done a lot of work but I would expect some shuffling around over the weeks and days. E.g. Jotunheimen should be discussed in a bit more detail (a paragraph) as it is very important (though there is a page of its own). I'll have a look every now and then to see how it is going...

Vid Pogachnik

Vid Pogachnik - Mar 11, 2006 11:06 am - Voted 10/10

Great overview page!

Lolli, I'm glad that Northern Europe is so well covered on SP. I was not exploring much, but the Google map gives me only a little additional info. It's a lot of work, I know, but one map with names of main sub-areas would be welcome (instead of the satellite map). Regarding the name - stick to the original names, as long as all nations up there are comfortable with them. There's no need for an English translation, everyone knows where Scandinavia is.


Corax - Mar 15, 2006 5:03 pm - Voted 10/10

The name - again

The discussion about the name is quite entertaining. It almost qualifies for a separate section on the main page. The name is now the official name in English. What do you use for "query name"?
Anyway, great page, a good intro to the range.


steste - Sep 1, 2006 6:32 pm - Voted 10/10

Number one.

As usually you have done a good job. A lot of useful details to arrange a trip. I've been only on the Southern part of Scandinavian Countries and your page make me think about paying a visit to the North too.
Thanks for sharing.


norm79 - Mar 26, 2008 3:46 pm - Voted 10/10

And another...

Excellent page - very informative.
I think that the local name should have priority - the English name wasn't there first (except maybe in England).

Viewing: 1-9 of 9
Return to 'The Scandes' main page