I think in Arabic, a violent storm itself is known as "toofaan", or "tufan," with a soft "t" -- quite similar to typhoon methinks.
2
And let’s not forget the made up category of “superstorms” for category 1 hurricanes that hit the NY area ;)
1
I think the article actually gives good reason for the different nomenclature. By using each name respectfully we know where it is, how intense it could become and also in what direction it is rotating. No one in Tokyo would panic when they hear a hurricane is coming, unless they have family in the Caribbean.
3
Saffir-Simpson scale is flawed. It is not continuous as earthquake scale (strength say 4.5), but discrete (1,2,3,4 and 5). This then requires characterization such as "strong Category 3" or "weak category 3." Instead it should be 3.7 or 3.2, for example. The scale is also not correct from fluid mechanics point of view, since it should depend on the square of the wind speed. It is the dynamic pressure (which is proportional to the square of the wind speed) that determines the force exerted by the wind on structures. Why NHC sticks with this antiquated scale is a mystery!
2
It would be far less confusing if the scientific community would settle on one term for these storms.
1
@Gerry Power: It's history's fault. The Spanish first encountered hurricanes in the Caribbean Sea, and borrowed the word from the people there (who may have gotten it from the Maya). The same storms in the western Pacific were encountered by Westerners coming the other direction. Different place, different local name.
2