wrote in message
...
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 21:35:32 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:
Chris Hogg wrote:
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 13:21:24 +0100, wrote:
When did everybody start calling a tidal wave a tsunami and why?
Why not use the Japanese word for earthquake too?
AIUI, the term 'tidal wave' is strictly incorrect, as the wave has
nothing to do with tides, unlike some other waves such as the Severn
Bore. Tsunami is the 'correct' term (even though we all know what a
tidal wave is). It apparently means 'harbour wave', which sounds just
as inappropriate.
That is correct. "Tidal wave" in English gives entirely the wrong
impression. Just before a big tsunami strikes the sea drains away
rapidly from the shoreline for a short while. Anyone living in a tsunami
prone region should know that this means run for high ground.
Tsunami is basically correct.
In Japanese. The English term is "tidal wave".
They are an artefact of the deep water
shockwave running into ever more shallow coastal waters, harbour and
beach. Well out to sea in deep water the effect is much less.
The word used until ten years ago was tidal wave, everybody understood
what that meant.
Google and you will find
"Tsunamis. "Tsunami" is the Japanese word meaning tidal wave. ...
General information,
"Tsunami" is the Japanese word meaning tidal wave. ..."
The two words are interchangeable.
Japanese for earthquake is "jishin". By no means unpronouncable but the
English language version is not misleading and so remains in use.
I can't see any merit in using Japanese terms, when English terms
already exist.
In the US they have used the term tsunami for a long time, possibly because
the place that suffers a lot from them is hawaii and there are a lot of
japanese there? Maybe this is an example of 'americanisation' of the english
language?
--
Tumbleweed
email replies not necessary but to contact use;
tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com