Why does "lake" come first (Lake Michigan) and "river" come second (Mississippi River)?

Answer 1

It doesn't always.

Great Salt Lake.

River dance (j/k)

etc.

It is usually local custom, nothing more. I haven't found any gramatical rules in my research.

Answer 2

Because lake is a precognatal word and river is a surcognatal word, hence the pre in precognatal meaning the suffix before so it would come before Michigan and sur meaning after so river would come after Mississippi, its a little confusing to explain, but its an easy concept, lol, hope I helped.

Answer 3

In England we many times famous individual with River or Lake, River Thames, River Severn, Lake Windermere and in Scotland, Loch Ness and Loch Lomond. notwithstanding countless different international locations invert the call so which you have got the Euphrates River or River Euphrates, River Nile or the Nile River. In China the Yellow River does not sound good if it became into River Yellow, it is an argument of determination,

Answer 4

It doesn't. Lake Michigan is the name of the lake.
The river is called the Mississippi - people just add 'river' at the end of it sometimes though it's unnecessary.

Answer 5

Doesn't it vary? The River Nile for example? There is a lake near me called Hawley Lake. I think it depends on the river or lake.

Answer 6

Because "River Mississippi" sounds weird.

Answer 7

What about River Phoenix or near where I live River Ribble?

Answer 8

It doesn't I live near the river trent and the river sense.
Also Coniston Lake etc.

So am not sure. but good question.

Answer 9

What about the river Thames or the river Nile or the river Danube?

Answer 10

Aaaa ... This is a question of the ages.

I shall have to reflect back to the time of my very first recollections to supply your answer with accuracy. It was during my youth, as I now recall clearly, that I was called upon to answer the chore of deciding this the dilemma - the feud between the waters as it was first know. The puddle and the stream were at odds over housing... the beaver and the fish were acting the between. My part was taken late in the game - the job of separating the four who were frantically beyond wits end and gaining in escalating violence upon one another. I became the peace maker. Neither the stream nor the puddle gave care to their names; they had no argument over it in the least, it turned out. Yet being the recipients of thoughtfulness, each under the advice of another, the fish for the stream and the beaver for the puddle, they were stagnated in their ability to first decide upon location and shape and second to get about the business of being.

The fish was insistent that the stream take a deep and broad shape, that it locate to the east and lay beautifully in the early morning sunrise. The Beaver vied for the puddle that he claim a great divide on the land, west to the west and all else to the east. A ribbon of shallows all connected together was his advice to the puddle, a concept unheard of until the break of that day but appealing to the puddle who meekly came into agreement with his council.

And so it was that the stream and the puddle so entrusted themselves to the others that they soon grew entrenched in their common belief that this should be the so of it all. Yet there remained the dilemma of taking up names; the rub was thus set into squeaking and moaning, and to gerrring and babbling. And they battled.

At my approach the stream was tangled upon the puddle and the beaver was so upon the fish, both tails in wild motion amits splashes upon waves. I called out, "Lake!" without knowing quite why, for the sound was all new to me, and yet Michigan, the fish, took an immediate halt and a back step. I then bellowed even louder than before for the attention of the others, "River! I sounded, an utterance of pure nonsense to my ears, but one which to my own surprise had its effect, too. This time it drew at the beaver, Mississippi, who parted from the neck of the stream with alacrity. The puddle calmed slowly of its own accord and in turn the stream left off as well, both to become near to motionless, and looking lazy, both being as tired as ever they were. With only a lift of my arms and with mere extensions of my fingers all held out in point, the combatants all surprisingly obeyed and departed the spot taking up directions of opposition on the compass. The puddle and the beaver moved off to the west while the stream and the fish splashed and flip flopped easterly. My job was quite pleasantly finished at the sight of them all and I smiled, in satisfaction and then repeated the same in respect of a nearby passing pathway. "Good day."

It came as news to me later that there were marriages formed. The Beaver to the puddle and the stream to the fish and that each pair were busy in just being. In addition came the news that the puddle had claimed itself a divide that it stretched itself North to South on the land like a ribbon, the same concept as I'd earlier heard of from the beaver. And soon came similar breezes of words that the fish and the stream had combined into union, the latter growing broad and running deep under the sun and the former looking forward to the prospects of fatherhood.

I can't recall the exact date of it nor put together in my mind just how or where I knew it first, but from that era on the sounds "River" and "Lake" were no longer unheard of but were attached by great degrees to the very parties of this history... It was that way ever after, that Lake and Michigan were commonly being said and likewise it was that Mississippi and River toned together easily from all lips. The names became fixed as it were. But for the life of me the why of it all is illusive still – yet, does it matter in the end to anyone?
[][][] r u randy? [][][]

Answer 11

Actually, for most lakes, "lake" comes second. Generally, for only the biggest lakes does "lake" come first.

Here in Michigan, we have 11,000+ lakes, and most of them "lake" comes second. I would say 95-99% percent of them have "lake" second.