Asenna Steam
kirjaudu sisään
|
kieli
简体中文 (yksinkertaistettu kiina)
繁體中文 (perinteinen kiina)
日本語 (japani)
한국어 (korea)
ไทย (thai)
български (bulgaria)
Čeština (tšekki)
Dansk (tanska)
Deutsch (saksa)
English (englanti)
Español – España (espanja – Espanja)
Español – Latinoamérica (espanja – Lat. Am.)
Ελληνικά (kreikka)
Français (ranska)
Italiano (italia)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesia)
Magyar (unkari)
Nederlands (hollanti)
Norsk (norja)
Polski (puola)
Português (portugali – Portugali)
Português – Brasil (portugali – Brasilia)
Română (romania)
Русский (venäjä)
Svenska (ruotsi)
Türkçe (turkki)
Tiếng Việt (vietnam)
Українська (ukraina)
Ilmoita käännösongelmasta
The example that you gave goes to prove the incongruity of the names as they stand. There is a clear pattern that is being followed here, as opposed to a more abstract system of naming, and, as such, the most reasonable thing to do is to standardise word forms.
"We value prosperity tradition"
"We value mercantile tradition"
See? It's not just merely the same case, it's same freaking word in all of those cases.
Those are names, and names don't need to follow a single form, exactly because of the above reason - every name has an "eaten" word hiding in it's shadow it's that word that needs to follow form, not anything else in it's stead.