Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/40685
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Here's my _unprofessional_ opinion, based on what _I_ would like to read.

Short answer: Use the specific word when the specific matter. Use the common (English) word then the specific doesn't matter.

Long answer:  
Refer to the king as "the king", but if anyone calls him by name then use the proper title. Example:

> The king rose from his throne and glared on his subject imposingly.  
> "You may now address the king", declared one of his guards.  
> "Shah Alborz, it is an honour to have You receive me on this day", begged the merchant on his knees.

The title may as well be part of the name. It doesn't matter to the reader. If you have many people with the same titles it will be quite clear what are titles and what are names.

The same would go for any object. You don't have _asvarans_ drawing their _shamshirs_. You have _knights_ drawing their _swords_. But if at some point you describe the sword in more detail you would provide the name of the sword as part of the description. Example:

> Asvaran Ardashir drew his weapon and stood in unison with the other knights. His sword, a shamshir with a narrow and radically curved blade, glimmered in the bright sunlight.

Again, I'm not a writer. My answer is based on my personal and unprofessional opinion.

Original score: 3