“While the name Nauru has been recognised internationally since independence, this proposed change seeks to more faithfully honour our nation’s heritage, our language, and our identity,” President David Adeang said in Parliament this year.
But when a country officially changes its name, it may take years or even decades to stick in people’s minds, no matter what is printed on official letterhead or embassy signs. That has proved to be a challenge for countries as large as Turkey (which now prefers Türkiye) and as small as Swaziland (now Eswatini), among others.
“It is definitely getting the spotlight and media attention,” Jose Filipe Torres, global director for nation and city branding at Bloom Consulting in Madrid, said of Nauru. “What’s important is what comes after that. What does it mean? What are they trying to achieve?”
Torres has advised the Turkish government on perceptions of its efforts to change the country’s name, and he sees lessons for Nauru.
“The name change is not what is going to change the perception,” he said. “It is the starting of a conversation of why they are trying to change the name.”
So, what’s wrong with “Nauru”?
That name “emerged because ‘Naoero’ could not be properly pronounced by foreign tongues, and was changed not by our choice, but for convenience,” Nauru’s government said on social media.
While there are some variations, “Naoero” can be pronounced nah-oh-EH-roh. Nauru is pronounced by English speakers around the world variously, with two syllables (NAH-roo or nah-ROO) or three (nah-OO-roo or NAH-oo-roo).
While pronunciation might seem like a minor issue, it matters to the people of Nauru.
“The fact that Nauru’s original name was shaped by outsiders’ inability or unwillingness to pronounce ‘Naoero’ properly reflects a clear power imbalance that the country is now interested in rectifying,” said Derek H. Alderman, a professor of geography at the University of Tennessee and an expert on place names. Even after countries gain independence, he said, “they are often still living with the legacy of the cultural and linguistic impositions of their colonisers”.
People have lived on Nauru for 3000 years. The West began to intrude in the 1700s, and Germany forcibly annexed the island in 1888. During World War I, Australia took over, and Japan occupied it during World War II. After that war, a protectorate of Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom ran the island until it achieved independence in 1968.
It saw an economic boom in the 20th century as a result of phosphate mining. But over-mining depleted supplies and damaged the environment, and much of the money from the plentiful years was squandered. More recently, the island has processed and housed seekers of asylum in Australia.
Like Nauru, many nations have sought to change their names as a way of rejecting a country’s colonial past. Ceylon (an English name derived from Portuguese) became Sri Lanka in 1972, and the New Hebrides (named after a British island chain) became Vanuatu in 1980.
Pronunciation has been the rub in a number of geographical name changes.
“In South Africa, the city now known as Mahikeng was named Mafeking during the colonial era,” said Frédéric Giraut, a professor of geography at the University of Geneva and director of the UNESCO chair in inclusive toponymy, the study of place naming. “This name sounded good to English ears by altering the etymology and pronunciation.”
Some renamings have been contentious. A significant number of people in Myanmar still want to refer to their country as Burma.
Not every change takes, either. You regularly hear the Eastern European country referred to both as Czech Republic (the formal name) or Czechia (a shortened version its government began pushing in recent years). And while some have adopted “Türkiye”, it is still common to call it “Turkey” in the English-speaking world.
The move to Türkiye “was an effort by the country to align its international identity with how it is referenced domestically, while distancing itself from jokes equating the country with the bird and Thanksgiving meal”, Alderman said.
“Names are a major source of national pride, and name changes can be about reasserting one’s legitimacy, history, and culture on the world stage.”
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
Written by: Victor Mather
©2026 THE NEW YORK TIMES
