Talk:Kangchenjunga

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information)
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance to WikiProject Mountains on the project's importance scale.
	If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments. Help with this template

Where does the 21,300' claim come on the 1905 expedition? Any references? In Crowley's autobiography he claimed around 25,000'.

The first few paragraphs suggest that this is the second highest peak in Nepal and also the tallest in India. This is confusing. Does the border travel directly over the peak? Perhaps there a standard way of assigning peaks to countries that allows this. Can someone clear this up?--Malcohol 15:38, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Unfortunately and confusingly, the border _does_ pass over the peak of Kanchenjunga. The same goes for Mount Everest as well, which defines the border between Tibet and Nepal. To the best of my knowledge, there is no unambiguous way to resolve this. -- Amar 11:33, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

This kind of thing happens all the time, and the wording is standard. Borders are often formally defined as "all lands drained by X River", which means that a great many summits are in two countries. Stan 14:28, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 After 1975 it became the tallest peak in India. 2 Spelling 3 More info 4 Nepal-India border 5 Query?? 6 Map

[edit] After 1975 it became the tallest peak in India.

What happend in 1975 to suddenly make it the tallest peak in India? srs 21:42, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Kanchenjunga is in Sikkim, which was independent until 1975. The highest mountain in India before then was Nanda Devi, in Uttaranchal. (But note that India claims the whole of Kashmir, including the Karakoram; under this interpretation the highest peak in India has always been K2.) Gdr 22:05, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Sikkim was an Indian protectorate until 1975, when it was annexed by India after a referendum in which the Sikkimese voted to fully join the Indian union. Sikkim was a British Indian protectorate before India became independent. It was not fully independent in 1975 as stated above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.126.199.122 (talk) 20:09, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spelling

The mountain needs to be spelled properly first, Kanchenjunga (notice there isn't a G ) seems to be universally disliked by those that have been there or live there. Old references seem to suggest that Kangchenjunga is closer and used more widley, even if there is dispute by the indigenous population(s), one recent highly respected reference is http://www.hindu.com/mag/2005/02/20/stories/2005022000500200.htm. "Kanchenjunga" is, from what I'm told by the experienced and so forth, is an American spelling. One of the reasons I know some of this is that I had misspelled it in a video concerning the first ascent, and got into hot water by some of the team members that did its first ascent in 1955 and went on too write definitive books on the mountain. (Gowron 19:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC))

Encyclopedia Britannica and Hutchinson Encyclopedia use "Kanchenjunga". But Everest News, the Peakware World Mountain Encyclopedia, Viewfinder Panoramas use "Kangchenjunga".

Among Indian newspapers, Times of India and the Hindustan Times use "Kanchenjuna". Even the Hindu Times, which you cite above for using "Kangchenjunga", uses the other spelling too, e.g. [1].

Finally, I see that the Survey of India use "Kanchenjunga" on their physical map [2]. I'm inclined to take this as definitive. Your comments? Gdr 21:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

The spelling Kanchenjunga is often used. Whether is is any definitive answer to the question "Is it wrong, or a correct alternative", I do not know. But from the summitpost page, I have extracted this: The name is also spelled Kanchenjunga, but according to the Himalayan Journal article, people who know the Tibetan language strongly insist that the 'g' should be there.

This seems to me to be correct. The translation is "Five (ga) Great (chen) Snow (kang) Treasures (jun, from zod)", which includes the Tibetan word for snow, which is surely "Kang" and not "Kan". There are very many Kangri's (snow mountains), but I have never seen a "Kanri". The official Nepalese map spells it Kañchanjangha (with dots over the second "a" and third "n"); this suggests the first n is not quite n or ng, perhaps something more like ny. But to use this spelling would confuse almost everyone. On balance, I favour the Tibetan derived spelling "Kangchenjunga".

The above spelling is used here in a table by Eberhard Jurgalski, who has been researching these matters for a long time. Also, on the lists on this mountain site, Kangchenjunga is used throughout, with no alternatives supplied. I vote accordingly. Viewfinder 21:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I vote wih ViewFinder. My father John Angelo Jackson was on the original first ascent of "Kangchenjunga" in 1955 and wrote two books on the subject. He spoke the language and understood their meaning by the locals. My father also wrote for the "Himalayan Journal" many times and always used "Kangchenjunga", but more importantly recently published a new book on 50 plus years in the Himalayas and the it was confirmed by Indus publishing to be "Kangchenjunga". Unfortunately maps are not consistent, for one reason of another, here is a segment of a large but much earlier map used to mark out the 300 mile trek in 1954 that my father did. Kangchenjunga, and so definitive as well then?.

Unfortunately "The Hindu" spelled it WRONG ONCE in FIFTEEN! spellings (so one of the points above is lost), and sadly the paragraph contained two spellings which concerned my father. I know all of the 1st Kangchenjunga expeditioners of 1955 (and many others), who have also written on the subject with a similar take on the matter. If a definitive proof required I will personally write to Harish Kapadia on behalf of Wikipedia and get a document proving it one way or another, would that suffice? (Gowron 19:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC))

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have been in touch with Harish Kapadia and it is official and from an expert. Kan(G)chenjunga is the correct spelling KANCHENJUNGA is a misspelling and means nothing to the people that live there. What follows bellow is part of a communication with the renowned Indian author, publisher and mountaineer.

"KANGCHENJUNGA -- is the correct spelling with " G " in there. Kang means snow and it must be there, in the Five Treasures of Snows. Even some recent Survey of India maps too spells it wrongly but many years ago the correct spelling with " G " was established and followed by all scholarly publications. For full details kindly see HIMALAYAN JOURNAL

Vol. 2 p. 131 and vol. 3 p. 152. also see vol. 3, p.152" Harish Kapadia

Please remove KANCHENJUNGA as it is incorrect (Gowron 17:29, 15 June 2006 (UTC))

It may be a misspelling but but Kanchenjunga has a long history of use in the English language and so should not be removed entirely. After all both spellings are transliterations into the Roman alphabet and possibly neither spelling fully expresses the nuances of the sounds of the original,though one may be more accurate than the other. Dabbler 00:51, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe not removed from being labelled as incorrectly spelled, but you have to take into account that the people that live in these countries do take exception to our misuse and rather arrogant of us to blithely carry on the slang, please read the above "proof" (for want of a better word) as there are good reason why it must be spelled correctly. Too what writtings other than Ransome are you refering you maybe right of course, however a quick look at Aleister Crowley's work of 1905 (chapters 51 to 53) inclusive spell the mountain correctly (Kangchenjunga) with just one exception (out of 20 occurences) and you could call that a typo. Would you agree that if we started to spell Mount Washington Mount Washingtin is wrong, that would be heresy and you would be right to ask that we spell it correctly. By all means state that different spelling exist in the West, but also state that they are incorrect. (Gowron 07:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC))

I think you're making a bit more of an issue over this than it deserves. When even the Survey of India use "Kanchenjunga" on their map it would be fairest simply to note that there are multiple spellings in English. In particular I cut this piece of speculation:

[Ransome's spelled it without a "g" in Swallows and Amazons] which has probably lead to the incorrect spelling of the real mountain's name entering into literature, which is unfortunate in retrospect as it has possibly lead to a lot of confusion.

Of course, this could go back in if evidence were presented for it. Gdr 09:59, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

"fair comment" regarding the doubtful sentence, would be a very interesting side story o find out why, I guess thats why Wikipedia is so good. I understand that you feel deffensive regarding this issue, but as stated above from Harish Kapadia (an authority on the subject) the Survey of India have got it wrong and Harish Kapadia tells us why. I've gone to great lengths to get this right. It is a disservice to say that we in the West have other spellings, we get it wrong are we not big enough to correct ourselves? There is another missconception regarding the word HIMALAYA it should never have an S at the end and yet we in the West keep doing it to support our own grammer, it does not make it right. (Gowron 10:15, 16 June 2006 (UTC))

Just as a dictionary reports what language is, not what it should be; an encyclopedia should report knowledge as it is not what it should be. Let us say I had read the word "Kanchenjunga" in any one of any number of sources (not just Ransome). I enter it into Wikipedia to learn more and find "Kangchenjunga". Surely I should be able to find out that there are two or more spellings in English and that Kangchenjunga is the more correct in representing the original word while "Kanchenjunga" has been widely used in English. By the way Arthur Ransome merely used the spelling that was most commonly used in his time, he didn't originate it. It was the spelling he read when he was reading English newspapers about the German expeditions of the time. Dabbler 11:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

By the way Gowron reverted my sentence about Ransome's use saying it was an "incorrect statement" As I have read Ransome extensively and both his Biography and Autobiography, I would like to know the factual basis for his saying that the statement I added was "incorrect, or is it that it doesn't follow his own beliefs. Dabbler 11:36, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Many apologies for that I'll revert to your comments, I was a little confused by your paragraph, I could not sort out wheather Ransome used KANCHENJUNGA or KANGCHENJUNGA and thought you were refering the the former spelling. I had thought you mean't the KANCHENJUNGA was the most widely used in the 1930, which would have been incorrect. Again apologies if I was incorrect in my assumption. (Gowron 11:51, 16 June 2006 (UTC))

I am not sure if you understand. Ransome did use "Kanchenjunga" in his books but he didn't use it because he wanted to invent a new spelling of the name. He used it because that was the way that he saw the name spelled in the news reports of the 1930 German expeditions. In 1930, it was the most commonly used spelling in England where Ransome was living. It doesn't make it the right spelling, it is merely the spelling that was most commonly used. Check any newspapers of the time if you don't believe me. Dabbler 12:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

What newspapers have you got? Do you have copies? People would buy them off you if you have originals, historical stuff you know. All there are, are the odd scanned cutting with no information as to what it came out of or when. (MacDarwin 19:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC))

Its not a newspaper but a news magazine, Time, and an article headed Kanchenjunga's Tithe dated June 2 1930 Time article or this New York Times movie review for Throne of the Gods headlined "Scaling Kanchenjunga" and datinmg from December 22 1933.New York Times movie review.Dabbler 20:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, not as good a source as was hoped for (as its an American Publication), but still of solid interest. I take it there are quite a few copies, hate to sound like the guy whoe sells Magazines in the Simpsons, but you could sell those. You never know? (MacDarwin 20:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC))

Thayou for clarifying your position, we will have to differ on some points. The book by Aleister Crowley of 1905 and the Swiss Expedition, spell it Kangchenjunga, that would have been the prevailing book at the time on the subject, and as a result is not possible to state that "Kanchenjunga" "was the most widely used in 1930" the comment has little meaning without proof. You would think that an author would have been more rigorous than to take a spelling from a newspaper and gone to the library. I also think its to big step to go from "in Newspapers" to "in English" for the reasons just given. (Gowron 12:36, 16 June 2006 (UTC))

Ransome wasn't writing a travel book or a historical mountaineering treatise, he was writing a book for children and probably never ever read Crowley's book or studied Kangchenjunga in any serious manner. Newspapers rather than books are usually a good way of determining current educated usage and spelling of words in a community. And while it may not be only English and its definitely not only newspapers and its not 1931, but Google has Kanchenjunga beating Kangchenjunga by 245,000 to 197,000, so I think its fair to say that Kanchenjunga is probably still the most frequent spelling used regardless of its accuracy. Dabbler 22:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

The above Google method should be used with caution. Googling Ulugh Muztagh (in North Tibet) 7723m gives more hits than Ulugh Muztagh 6973m despite the fact that the latter was indisputably established in 1985. Puncak Jaya 5030m also gives more hits than 4884m. Viewfinder 22:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Ransome was writting a fairy story which is just fine. I am sorry to relate that even though you have a point about Ransome and his stories, it is poor thinking to extrapolate from this to suggest that Kanchenjunga is more widely used, do you have data? no. I have attempted to provide real data and review, this is not acceptable compared fiction, why?. Ransome worked for the newspapers, and so probably stopped his thinking right there. Relying on newsapers for accuracy is just nuts. Jospeh Hooker was a founding member of Kew Gardens, somebody who worked with fact, he used the correct usage (see reason above), as mentioned I have postulated, as a throw away comment, that the probable current misspelling is due to Ransome and his book as it is so widely published. It is also imnportant to mention at this time the West retains most of the Internet databases (the USA generally) and as such provide the innacurate result which you are clinging too, just Goolegling is insufficient not accurate. 80.176.235.247 00:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC))

This contributes nothing, newspapers get read more than dictionaries, the correct usage has been established and why, by the people that know or have been there (not me), move on. (Gowron 00:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC))

Dear God! I thought we, Ransome nerds were nit pickers and compulsive obsessives but mountain nerds like 80.176.235.247 seem far worse! Ransome wrote correct and contemporary English and he didn't write fairy stories, he wrote children's fiction and he didn't invent Kanchenjunga or its misspelling. Kangchenjunga is a lot more well known than Ulugh Muztagh (wherever the hell that is). So the name is far more widely used by many more people than one now quite obscure children's writer. Of course I know that Google is not a gospel method of telling what is true or false. I used it to point out that the "incorrect" version was more widespread than the "correct". Secondly an older "fact" is more likely to have propagated through Google than a newer one (as demonstrated by the Ulugh Muztagh height example) so its more widespread use indicates that it was more common in the past and may be being supplanted by newer sources. If you Google something that is in the process of changing in English you will receive a lot of hits for the old name as well as the new. I am not arguing that Kanchenjunga is a better name I was just trying to point out that it was an acceptable usage widely used in the past and still not extinct today. Dabbler 11:22, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Dabbler and anyone else interested! I have created an Ulugh Muztagh article with an external link which you can use to read all about it. Enjoy! Viewfinder 07:20, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Viewfinder, not just because Ulugh Muztagh story is interesting from a mountaineering, geographical, biological whatever point of view, but also for reporting fact. (Gowron 08:49, 18 June 2006 (UTC))

Thanks for the information, while I am not really very geographically challenged, Central Asia is not my strong point! It is interesting how mountains rise and fall in height depending on the effectiveness of the measuring techniques rather than merely geological processes. I am old enough to remember Everest being descibed in various sources as either 29002 or 29028 feet.Dabbler 13:20, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More info

I think this article needs more info about plantlife, climate, and animal life.

[edit] Nepal-India border

Please stop adding these unsourced claims that the Kangchenjunga main peak is wholly in India. It is on the border. It is the 8586m peak shown on official Nepalese mapping. Viewfinder 06:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Following more POV editing I transferred the above link into the main article's Notes section. I know it includes a link to my site but there seems to be no other way. If anyone can replace it with a better link then please do so. Viewfinder 05:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Viewfinder, apart from everything else thats known, the massif according to the Himalayan Club (founded in Kolkata (1928), India), taken from the 50th renunion of the first ascent of Kangchenjunga, is located at 27' 42'09" North by 88' 09'01" East, "Kangchejunga straddles the border between the Western frontier of Sikkim, India and the North East corner of Nepal". If you want this data put in I'll gladly insert it and create the citation with the ISBN. Just noticed its sort of there. I've got another query below. (Gowron 09:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Query??

The opening paragraph has this in it "Kangchenjunga is written and pronounced as "Kanchanjunga" in Nepal which means "pure peak (of mountain)" and Kangchenjunga is also one of the best conservation areas in Nepal which is home to the Red Panda and other snow animals, birds and plants. India's side of Kangchenjunga also has a protected park area."

Question: If the "Kangchenjunga Conservation Area" (its written name) resides in Nepal why is it spelled "Kangchenjunga"?, I'm curious as I know one or two of the people who have worked on it. The URL (http://www.wwfnepal.org/images/Annua003.pdf) is the Annual report from Nepal on the concervation area and spells it consistently "Kangchenjunga"?

Another reference to this curio is that of Tenzing Norgay (born Tsa-chu (Nepal) or possibly Moyey (Tibet) and raised in Thami in (Nepal)) of Everest fame, in his book "Man of Everest" he uses the spelling "Kangchenjunga" he also gives the full (but unused) title of "Kang-chen-dzod-nga" which also has been explained already in the text? Tenzing Norgay goes on to translate and it is very similar to that given already "The Great Snow with Five Treasures"?

Maybe some other references from Nepal would be useful as proof, then at least the article should say that both forms are used in Nepal. OR have I not understood the grammar of the sentence properly, which very possible, if so sorry. Please be assured that this query is in no way correcting anybody, but something is not quite right here. (Gowron 09:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)_

Official Nepalese mapping states "Kañchanjangha". The tilde on the first n suggests that neither "Kan" or "Kang" is 100% correct. But I see no reason to suppose that Kang is any less correct than Kan. Viewfinder 04:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the information Viewfinder, I take your points. I've no problem with the different spellings in this case, your right the tilde does augment the sound and I think I can get a Nepalese sherpa to express it. Two points to add are:

(1) Nepal seems to use all three spellings (Nepal's countrty representative uses the "g" form, in the PDF from WWF from Nepal, just a little odd thats all) and some Nepalese books suggest that as well. The naming of the conservation area causes more confusion. So I don't think it can be accurate to state that "this" country uses only one form. It might be useful to say something like "Nepal also uses these forms, etc". Maybe you could put the form you have found (Kañchanjangha) into the article as that seems a more legitimate Nepalese alternative.

(2) The translation no matter how its spelled, they all seem to be trying to be enunciating the same sorts of sounds and in the same order, can't differ by that much in their meaning. As I mentioned above probably the most famous Nepalese person around gives the translation "The Great Snow of Five Treasures" he was religeous a religeous. There are other versions of the latter but again they are all trying to express something very similar, i.e. "The Five treasusres of the Great Snow" or "The Five trasures of the Snows" etc. Maybe the term "pure peak (of mountain)" stems from differences in religeon, i.e. Hindu's and Buddhist's. Maybe the holly books causes a problem in translation when used by a member of a different faith. Just guessing, but the difference are quite marked. (Gowron 09:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Map

As always, a map would be nice. -- Writtenonsand 23:19, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, but the problem is how to find a map that is not copyrighted. The Google Earth image is excellent; the elevation terrain is also good, although there is a slight misalignment issue. Viewfinder 05:07, 26 July 2007 (UTC)