On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 9:01 PM Steven Boozer via tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org> wrote:

So both {bama Hol} and {mIyama Hol} are correct, assuming they both refer to the same language. OTOH one might be a simplified official language used nation-wide vs. an “authentic” language/dialect used regionally. Does anyone know?

As for the country and people – why can’t they be referred to by more than one name? E.g. Russian/Soviet, American/U.S./Yank(ee), English/British/Brits, Anglo-Saxons, Castillian/Spanish, etc. There are historical, political, bureaucratic, ethnic, and religious reasons for preferring one over the other, but most outsiders don’t know, or even care, about those reasons. (Especially imaginary aliens light years away in the Beta Quadrant over three centuries from now.)

Indeed, the usage of "Burma" vs. "Myanmar" is a matter of political dispute and disagreement, with the choice possibly signaling one's allegiance to certain causes. I think this is a serious pitfall of asking for vocabulary dealing with 21st century political entities, like (North and South) Korea. Presumably, these disputes have been resolved by the 23rd and 24th centuries, but Maltz can't tell us how because it would violate some kind of temporal prime directive or something (despite his somehow sending us information about the Klingon language from the future), and so he's forced to give us vocabulary which reflects the current state of affairs.

De'vID