"Kiev or Kyiv is the capital and the largest city of Ukraine, located in the north central part of the country on the Dnieper River"
both are acceptable- I prefrer Kyiv because it seems right to be that we transliterate from Ukrainian and not Russian as Ukrainian is the language of that country
Exactly. The Chinese pull this stunt and then have the nerve in their own language to name our cities in their own way. All languages do this. Here in Czech almost every German and Austrian town has a Czech version. Thus Regensburg becomes Rezno and Salzburg becomes Solnohrad, ect. The Ukrainians need to lighten up on this.
In Ukrainian we say: Київ (Kyiv).
In Russian we say: Киев (Kiev).
During the USSR time all languages and titles in native languages of soviet republics were replaced by Russian. In fact, our capital became Киев (Kiev) instead of Київ (Kyiv) , but now historical title Київ (Kyiv) returned.
You are all right in claiming that toponyms exist for various historical reasons, and even that they sometimes change. One of these reasons is to show respect for a people by letting them decide how they want their cities or country to be referred to. There are numerous examples of English speakers acquiescing to such requests: Mumbai, Beijing, even Myanmar. If the Germans asked us tomorrow to say Munchen, or the Italians to say Firenze, I'm sure the New York Times would comply. (Note, however, that we don't get our names for these places from OTHER languages. It's not like we currently refer to them by the Polish "Monachium" or the Spanish "Florencia," which would really be an analogous situation.)
The reason so many people feel comfortable saying "Kiev" in English is because for a very long time, the Russians told us to say that. Now the Ukrainians are asking us to say "Kyiv," and it would be beyond disrespectful—especially here where we've all gathered to learn their language—to deny them that right. It might feel awkward at first, but you can get used to it, just like we've all gotten used to Istanbul.
Sometimes DL accepts Kiev, but not in this exercise. I find this discussion very interesting. Although it is grammatically correct, I am going to respect Ukrainians' will to use rather Kyiv than Kiev just as I avoid using Polish word Murzyn though it does not have as negative connotations as English negro.
Another example is an appeal of the citizens of Côte d'Ivoire not to translate the name of their country, but British people do not seem to be eager to meet their expectations and prefer to use Ivory Coast. Last but not least, I do not like Germans referring to my hometown Wrocław as Breslau beacause it makes me think of Festung Breslau whereas the origines of my city date back to the Piast dynasty. I do not neglect German, Czech nor Polish contributions in Wrocław, but it has been for the longest period of time in Polish hands, so the name Wrocław is relevant.
Why not to take into consideration these political issues and the will of inhabitants?
Rather than the whole Kiev vs. Kyiv discussion.... my problem is the way to latinize Ukrainian used here in this case.
Kyyiv should be accepted as a correct transcription.
The scientifically correct latin writing for Київ is Kyyiv, why am i always corrected to "Kyiv"? In Ukrainian it's Київ, not Киiв , so the latin writing is Kyyiv, Ки= Ky, їв=yiv.
I guess it's because "Kyiv" was decided to be the "correct" latin writing by someone, because Kyyiv looked confusing to them?