A wonderful book about such things (and other "place words") is "Landmarks" by Robert Macfarlane.
There does seem to be a richness that we're losing, in terms of our ability to describe nature. I often find myself struggling to describe places or to differentiate no-so-subtle (but also not trivially different) features (e.g., ravines cut by water flows of different rates and temporal consistencies). I love the collections people are making, but I find it hard to gain "fluency" in this way of describing nature. I guess that's an artifact of mostly being a "weekend warrior" when it comes to nature and most of my daily work revolving around science and computers.
> I guess that's an artifact of mostly being a "weekend warrior" when it comes to nature and most of my daily work revolving around science and computers.
I've always liked nature but I found that my awareness of nature - and it's variations - significantly increased when I moved to a house set within a reasonably large garden that included large mature trees (oak and beech). This awareness increased when I retired and could spend more time outside - daily if I wanted. I sometimes feel that I've spotted botanical distinctions that I wasn't previously aware of - e.g. the variations in spikiness of holly leaves depending on the age of the tree and height from the ground.
That makes sense. I guess it's all about time spent exposed to it. I do okay with geologic features (from being a backpacker and climber) except, oddly, types of rocks. But I have never been great at tree/plant identification. We did just move to a house with a decent yard/garden, so I am learning at least some of the names for things that are in the yard (and that we've started planting ourselves).
> The family had lived on the farm for so many generations, they adopted the place name as their own.
Well, it didn't take that many generations, necessarily. People in Norway used to use patronyms (like Olsen, son of Ole, Sjursdatter, daughter of Sjur), and tack on the name of the farm they lived on if there was need for further differentiation. The farm names could easily change several times through a lifetime, and you didn't necessarily even own the farm you were named after.
There was a push for fixed last names, with various legal requirements starting in 1920. Whatever name people used around then, stuck.
In the US we have the sadly neglected GNIS database, basically place names. I recall recently parsing their data and finding that a bit over ten percent of the place names were "historical," which in this context meant that they no longer existed. Something else might be there, but once another thing was, and it had this name.
It's interesting what you can learn from them. In western Oregon, largely settled by farmers and their families and so on, the names tend to be kind of boring (like... quite literally "Boring, Oregon") and not very "colorful".
Elsewhere, with more miners and cowboys and so on, you had things like "Jumpoff Joe Creek" - probably recognizable to anyone who has driven up and down I5 through Oregon - and "Whorehouse Meadow" and "Malheur Lake".
Also interesting is the distribution of names for a 'small valley'. Hollow, arroyo, draw, coulee, gulch, gully, etc...:
In slovenia, we have a bunch of place names, named after what was/is there, and since things repeat, place names also repeat, which can be a pain when trying to find stuff on a map or even when navigating with google maps
Someone lived by the stream ("Potok"), and you refer to it by that? After some time, that place gets named "Stream" ("Potok")... and we have 7 of those in slovenia.
A birch (or more) growing there (birch=Breza)? The locals refer to that as "Brezje", and we have 7 places named that.
Something with thorns ("Trn, Trnje")? 6 places named "Trnovec"
It's on a larger hill ("Planina")? 6 places.
Was there a new (nova) village (vas) built? 5 settlements named "nova vas"
Sometimes that can be solved by using "<settlement name> by <other large settlement>", but sometimes you have no idea and have to ask (or look at the post number or something).
I'm a fan of retaining and sharing what I consider to be "folk" names.
Paddy's Bluffs, that a main highway perilously traverses, are now called the Waimakariri bluffs according to the agency that maintains highways, the name based on the river that flows under them. But to me, they'll always be Paddy's Bluffs.
B'Limit, a mountain, which is now labelled as Blimit, but the apostrophe is a key part of its story (It's short for "the bloody limit", based on a joke told on the summit by the first climbers).
Iona Pass, crossed by a highway from one watershed to another, a name used during the stagecoach days, but no longer.
Devil's Chute, a very steep and slippery track to bypass a waterfall on the way into a hanging valley. The Organ Pipes, a distinctive geological structure in the bush above it, caused by a major earthquake in 1929.
The Malvern Hills are no longer labelled as such on maps, but a road that winds along their frontage still bears the name.
Two Tree Hill, a local hill that has, as you may guess, two very distinctive trees either side of the road at its summit. It's never had an official name, but I'd like it to.
And also, some names are recorded, but the stories behind them fade.
Reid Falls[0], a waterfall that used to cascade onto the highway through the Otira Gorge, but is now routed above it, was named after a roadman by the surname Reid who maintained that section of the coach road. After a good night at the pub in Otira, while walking back to his hut, he staggered off the side of the road and plummeted into the gorge at the point where that waterfall is.
So it was named Reid's Fall initially, then changed to Reid Falls, as a somewhat darkly humorous tribute.
Klondyke Corner, so called because people tried to live there, and in winter it got absolutely no sun at all, and the cold reminded some of the inhabitants of the intense cold they experienced during the Klondike Gold rush in the Yukon.
I’d like to see more examples of modern place names which the author deems inadequate, and some evidence that beautiful names are fading.
Among the places I’ve traveled (which are regretfully not many), it doesn’t quite feel like that nature/geography/person-related place names are largely being replaced by heavily commercial ones. So I need more convincing that is is actually happening.
I can give some! Real estate developers give the same, boring names over and over and over again. The most popular are "Utsikten" (the view), "Lia" (the hillside), "Sentrum", "Åsen" (the hill), and "Toppen" (the top). If they get creative, you get a slightly more marketing friendly version of the generics, like "Soltoppen" (the sunny top) or "Hvitveiskroken" ("Wood anemone corner").
I'm not as familiar with them, but I believe you have these in English speaking countries too? Alta Vista, Oak Ridge, Highland Park, Valley View, etc? If it's like in Norway, then any oaks or ridges near oak ridge housing community are purely accidental.
> I'm not as familiar with them, but I believe you have these in English speaking countries too
Yes, exactly. E.g. there are definitely similarities in the names of streets built on new estates. 'Acacia Avenue' is a joke generic street name in England. Estates built on old WW2 airfields (there are quite a few of these) often have streets that are named after aircraft.
We also have a phenomenon where old established pubs - with historically / locally relevant names - are now being rebranded by the chains that own them. So the Roeshot (named for the hill it is built on) is now the Toby Carvery.
[Edit] The other big effect in England is that older town names reflect the language of different waves of settlers / invaders [0]. Town names that end in 'ing', 'ford', 'ham' are usually Old English, 'thorp', 'thwaite', 'toft' etc are usually Scandinavian, etc.
There does seem to be a richness that we're losing, in terms of our ability to describe nature. I often find myself struggling to describe places or to differentiate no-so-subtle (but also not trivially different) features (e.g., ravines cut by water flows of different rates and temporal consistencies). I love the collections people are making, but I find it hard to gain "fluency" in this way of describing nature. I guess that's an artifact of mostly being a "weekend warrior" when it comes to nature and most of my daily work revolving around science and computers.
[0] https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/536563/landmarks-by...