It wasn't Tom Cabot, but JOHN Cabot !!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cabot

As you know, I often translate CK's sentences with Tom, you get it, I think. :)

Who is Source_VOA? Is it a code name for older sentences without owners?

Can we change this sentence to Giovanni Caboto (as he obviously was Italian, and not British or American, as the current name suggests). I believe changing the name may finish the current saga.

As it seems that this sentence triggered the whole thread, I would like to change it to Giovanni Caboto and then have all the other sentences here changed accordingly.

Well, I see no objection against usage:

In English, it is usage that "Giovanni Caboto" is named "John Cabot" and in French « Jean Cabot »

But there is no reason why the English transcription should be conveyed in any other language than English...

Source_VOA are the sentences imported (I think by CK) from Voice of America.

I retract my request :)

I forgot that he lived in England for a major part of his life, together with his entire family, so I guess an English form of his name is perfectly OK, as he probably used it himself, living in England.

SC, as he was British citizen (since the year 1490), I believe this was the name he was called then.

So, there's nothing wrong in calling him his own name (rather than a British form of his Italian name). Seems then that besides his Italian name, he afterwards had a British name, being a British citizen. People can therefore use this name for him also in sentences in the other languages.

>I forgot that he lived in England for a major part of his life, together with his entire family, so I guess an English form of his name is perfectly OK

Even if not, I think usage is acceptable.

For instance, the Dutch humanist Erasmus is known in France under the name « Érasme » since the 16th century. No French would ever refer to him by his original name. But that would be curious if suddenly Germans were to refer to him with that French transcription...

The same goes with transcription of Chinese ([eng]Confucius/[deu]Konfuzius...) or Japanese figures. Different Eeropean languages have adopted different transcriptions of their names. Each transcription is to be limited to its language of origin...

>So, there's nothing wrong in calling him his own name (rather than a British form of his Italian name). Seems then that besides his Italian name, he afterwards had a British name, being a British citizen. People can therefore use this name for him also in sentences in the other languages.

There is no trace he changed his name. He was an employee of the King of England for the last 4 years of his life...I don't change my name when I change employer...

To me "John Cabot" is a mere transcription of his name for the English language and should not be used in other languages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cabot