A Kyiv by Any Other Name Would Spell as Sweet

A small matter, but one that nags at me a bit, so what the heck…

The other week, I was talking with a friend and mentioned the capital city of Ukraine, which I pronounced as “Kiev,” when my friend corrected me and said that I was confusing things, that Kiev and Kyiv were two different cities in Ukraine.  I explained that, no, they were the same, but a year or two ago, news reporter and analysts began calling Kiev – “Keev” – based largely, I suspect, on seeing that it’s spelled in Ukraine as “Kyiv.”

A few days passed, and then, as I wrote here the other day, I spoke with my cousin’s wife  -- who is, in fact, from Kyiv, and her parents still live there.  What I noticed is that the way she kept pronouncing the city gave a clue to perhaps why (in addition to the spelling...) it was called “Kiev” here for so many years. 

She speaks English beautifully, though understandably has a thick Ukrainian accent.  And listening closely, it seemed that she was not pronouncing Kyiv like people on TV now do as “Keev,” but instead had a very soft second syllable, one that split the name with a quiet emphasis, making it “KEEE-if.”  (In other words, the “iv” part of “Ky-iv.”)  It was not as heavily-pronounced as we here in the U.S. used to pronounce the city as “Kee-EV,” but there definitely was a second syllable, although one that was very quick, making it near-silent under the accent.  But I started listening closely to find if I heard wrong or if it was just a one-time “slip,” and no, it was not a slip, and I heard right, she definitely kept saying it each time with two syllables, as “KEEE-if.” 

What I suspect is that because of the Ukrainian accent of people actually from Ukraine (which is as it should be), most in the West don’t hear the soft, almost guttural second syllable.  And so when a few people on TV (even experts) started calling it “Keev” a few years ago, everyone else just picked up on the U.S. “sound” and just assumed that’s what it was.  And besides, a one-syllable, quick “Keev” is easier for everyone to say, even for TV anchors and analysts.    

But honestly, while I found her pronunciation very interesting – and explains why, along with the Anglicized spelling, Americans for decades called it “Kee-EV,” it also makes perfects sense.  Why shouldn’t Kyiv have two syllables – Ky-iv?  After all, while not precisely the same thing, we give a separate syllable to “y” words like Wyeth, lying, tying, and hyena.  They’re not “WHYYYTH” or “LYng” or “HY-na.”

So, me, I’m sticking with my assumption all along, the soft second syllable of “Ky-iv.”  Even if it means people will keep trying to correct me.  Which, after all, is nothing new.  And always appreciated.  Most especially those times when they correct me and I get to correct back in return that I was right.

And if I say this properly, and make the "iv" part as soft as possible, if I'm lucky they may never even hear it...

UPDATE:  The other day, I was talking on the phone with my cousin, who's married to my...well, "cousin-in-law" (if such a thing exists) from Kyiv in this article.  When I happened to bring the piece up, he burst out, "Yes!!  That drives me crazy!!  People keep calling it "Keev" now!"  And it's not, he went on, far more insistently than me, it's two syllables.  Which he knows from his wife who was born there, his in-laws who live there, and from himself visiting there.  And hearing "KEEE-if" said all the time.