U.S ≠ America

Post Reply New Topic

I use the term USians.

"australia" the continent, probably. there were legends of an unknown southern land "Terra Australis Incognita" since roman times, once the actual landmass we know today as australia began to be discovered and explored some referred to it as that famed terra australis, before the british took it as their own completely. the term Australia wasn't adopted for official use until 1824 after matthew flinders account of circumnavigation.

there's also the term australasia which referred to australia, NZ, new guinea and varying amounts of the neighboring islands.


there are some. geographically speaking mexico is - duh - NA, but if we're speaking about culture then it can't be denied that mexico, and every country south of it, is very different. i see why it would be an outlier in an otherwise anglo continent, which is probably a reason some don't count it.

canada??

Australia was named that by the explorering sailors (like Captain Cook) who stumbled upon the place before any europeans ever actually settled there. It was called "New Holland". And then later Australia. And then it became the British colony of "Australia", and then it became the independent nation of that name.

Columbus discovered the New World, and the later explorer named Vespucci discovered the coast of Brazil a few years later, and his name got attached to both continents of the new world.

So as with Australia -the continent was named first, and the nation was named after the continent.

The difference being: only one country comprising less than half of the land area of one of the two continents named "America" is called "the United States of America", or "America" for short. So only a fraction of "America" the continents is "America" the country.

The continent of Australia has only one nation: the nation of that name. There are no international boundries running through the continent of Australia like there are with every other continent (including arguably even Antarctica). The whole landmass is one country, and the one country is pretty much just that landmass. The Nation of Australia used to rule the eastern half of the Island of New Guinea (each half being the size of Texas), but no more. The nearby island of Tasmania is part of country, but arguably not part of the continent of Australia. But besides Tasmania the nation of Australia, and the continent, are pretty much the same landmass.

We citizens of the USA were called "Americans" pretty much from the end of the Revolutionary war. Its easier to say than "United Statesians". So the one country gradually usurped the name for all of both continents out of linguistic convenience. Probably isnt exactly fair.

I really, truly wouldn't mind being called "Yankees." Originally intended as an insult, it was turned against the insulters as a badge of honor. I call myself a Yankee occasionally and enjoy it completely. Besides, no other nation (within the American continents) seems to want the name.

What say everyone?

i like the term, was about to being it up myself. a bit of historical baggage, but most all demonyms have some.

for many spanish speakers in the new world, 'estadounidenses' is one more specific term, though a bit long...

I've often heard Americans refer to Britain as "England". This has something in common with the phenomenon raised by the OP, though in reverse, as it were.

That might have a lot to do with the generalized history of the Revolutionary War as taught in the United States when students are about 13 years of age. If a student's world-geography teacher failed to describe and explain the three constituent nations of Great Britain, the student's history teacher had a more difficult time describing and explaining that the "King of England" was actually the "King of Great Britain." In other words, we still call Elizabeth II the "Queen of England" even though that is just one of her 3,000 titles, and certainly not her primary title. So, there is, indeed, a cognitive disconnect between our understanding of the "Queen of England" and "the British are coming!" To too many Yankees (there, I used it in a sentence), England and Great Britain are one and the same. Too bad, really. Many Welsh and Scottish Brits immigrated here before, during and after our independence. It is almost as if they get forgotten in our haste to conflate the nation(s) with the island.

Now, the Manx. That is a different story as the Isle of Man is somewhat independent from the United Kingdom. BTW, I love John Rhys Davies' description of Man as "70,000 alcoholics clinging to a rock in the North Irish Sea. Hehe.

Well it's interesting to note that the term 'Yankee' referred originally to the inhabitants of New England, an expression which was itself established at an early stage (from the Mayflower era, around 1620). Thus maybe the term 'England' for our part of the world in general took root in the North American consciousness during that era, and has never been displaced?

It's also possible to argue, if you pursue the origin of the term far enough back, that the English (or the British?) are the true Yankees.....

You might be correct. I was thinking of mentioning that considering that the early immigrants to New England arrived here before the U.K. Acts of Union were adopted in 1706/7. To them, they might not have learned or cared too much about the name change back home, and cared a little more about their own "New England" name.

I assumed that people in the South would object to that.

Yep ^. That would be the obvious problem, ya'll!

We could always call ourselves "Gringos" I suppose. That would include Anglo Southerners as well as Anglo Northerners, but excludes the folks south of the Rio Grande.

The term Yankee started here in America, but the song was written as send up of us by the Brits.

The early settlers of New England called themselves "English" when dealing with the Indians. The local Indians mangled that word into "Yenges". Or thats how it was explained to me as a child. So New Englanders began to be known even to other Whites as "Yankees" during the Colonial period.

Then when the Revolution came that surgeon in the occupying British army wrote the song making fun of us colonial bumpkins, which we then adopted as our own patriotic tune. We were proud that we would call sticking a feather in our cap "high fashion" (everything cool - clothes or pasta- came from Italy back then so "macaroni" was the adjective that meant "cool").

Both the two oldest colonies: Jamestown in 1606, and Plymouth in 1620, predate the official formation of the UK in 1707.Might have something to do with why Americans lump all of the UK under the rubric of "English". The last of the 13 colonies was Georgia in 1730ish..

...and the non-Anglos?

I suspect that, because the northern states had a slightly higher percentage of residents who were patriots during the Revolutionary War (compared to the slightly higher percentage of residents in the southern states who were loyalists), one way the former southern loyalists could insult the former northern patriots during the Civil War would be to call them what the British had called them, "yankees." It was etymologically understandable, but somewhat illogical when one considers that most of the Revolutionary loyalists (of all states) ended up hating the British heavy-handed military tactics as much as the patriots did. Today's southern residents don't get too emotional about the term either way ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yankee ).

Your theory that Southerners "insulted" northerners by crediting Northerners with being "more patriotic" than themselves is ass backward, and doesnt make any sense.

Its was a lot simpler than that.

New Englanders called themselves "Yankees" before the Revolutionary War. And were called that by other colonists. It wasnt an epithet. Its just what New Englanders were called. And they were still called when Twain wrote "Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" in the 1880's.

When the nation split in two for the civil war it became handy to call Southerners "Rebs", and to call the opposing side "Yankees". Both sections of the country were still culturally dominated by the two oldest colonies (the South by Virginia, and the North by Massachussettes) even in the 1860's. So it was natural for Southerners to think of all Northerners as being New Englanders once removed. So them thar Northerners are all "Yankees".

Meanwhile the American shipping industry was at its hieght in the pre Civil War era. And it was centered in New England. "Yankee Clippers" and "Yankee Whalers" visited every corner of the globe. So for the world outside the USA the face of the USA was New England. So all Americans came to be called "Yankees" outside the USA. So today Southerners are just as insulted as Northerners by "Yankee Go Home" signs when abroad. But at home a "Yankee" is still a visitor from the North. Its doublethink.

what about them?

i imagine the quebecois have a few exonyms to refer to their anglo colleagues in canada. like tête(s) carrée(s) - a bit vulgar, meaning 'square heads'.

though i don't think i've ever heard anyone here, where i live, call the anglos/whites "gringos". nor have i heard hispanohablantes refer to the native english speakers by any other name (though it's very likely possibly i'm not looking hard enough or have missed something). if at all, they're described by where they're from. there isn't really an us vs them attitude at all i think, except among the edgy teens. but yeah i don't think "gringos" would be the best term to use...i'll stick with "yankees" from now on, or perhaps "patriots".

I was wondering what the non-Anglos would be called, but I was thinking "Anglo" as in a person of European descent, whereas perhaps what was meant was Anglophone.