Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And that's why if I am in a Portugese- or Spanish-speaking, Latin American nation, I'll defer to whatever the established demonym for American is in that language and culture. To do otherwise would be rude and disrespectful.
Just like when (an insignificant few) people from other nations tell us we should change the way we speak amongst ourselves, in our own language and in our own countries. No thanks
Well, african americans had done it, right? Imposed "prohibition" for some words. I am not in favor of it, but when a natural designation becomes very addicted, it can happen.
The american/latino in US is so nosence that for some crazy ones even an italian isnt latino , like this post bellow...
Quote:
Originally Posted by 415_s2k
Not really. It doesn't implicitly mean that they aren't any specific race, ethnicity, or culture, just that they originate somewhere from Mexico on down.
And for those nations in the Americas who want nothing to do with the US, its policies, its social problems, etc (which I really can't blame anyone for at all - I don't want anything to do with them... why do you think I live in the US' #1 economic competitor? Haha....), thank god for them that they have their own demonyms to specifically note that they do not originate from the US so that there is zero confusion!
How often do you meet someone from England or Italy who says, "I'm European," or a Vietnamese or Chinese person who says "I'm Asian" when asked about their place of origin, before stating where, specifically, they are from? This is a silly, emotional argument, and one that is emotionally stunted at that. It seems like it's more a desire to sock it to the US for those perceived transgressions than it is for any practical reason, which is a slap in the face in its own right... albiet one that no one in the US has ever noticed or cares about. If this argument presented itself anywhere else in the world, it would be equally pointless.
It is actually not about hating the USA and its values, political system, culture etc. It is about taking pride and maintaining our own identity. We are different in many ways and this is okay. We can be neighbours and enjoy the differences in what each one of us brings to the table. Can't this be said bout everywhere in the Americas ... We might be interested in each other, but want to maintain our identity and boarders.
I have Canadian and American friends and I have never heard Canadians complain about the fact that Americans are called that. As for JTUR88, you are just plain rude, and maybe you need to take a trip to Canada to learn manners!
Traveling through Europe, I have consistently been asked, (consistently!) why those from the U.S. say they are Americans (co-opting the expression) "as if there weren't other countries in this hemisphere." It's a real lexical issue. Once I asked a Spaniard what he would call me since Estadosunidense is a mouthful (Unitedstatesian).
He considered for a moment and replied, "Universal".
I honestly don't recall if I thought he meant me, personally, or United Staters, but either way, I like it and have used this ever since to describe myself in the context of my 'origin'/place of origin...identifying also as being from the U.S. In writing, I am always specific. That's just me.
Well, african americans had done it, right? Imposed "prohibition" for some words. I am not in favor of it, but when a natural designation becomes very addicted, it can happen.
The difference is that African Americans are English-speaking US citizens and residents, not Spanish-speaking residents of other nations... also, that many of the words that were replaced in the popular lexicon were purposefully offensive.
Quote:
The american/latino in US is so nosence that for some crazy ones even an italian isnt latino , like this post bellow...
It is actually not about hating the USA and its values, political system, culture etc. It is about taking pride and maintaining our own identity. We are different in many ways and this is okay. We can be neighbours and enjoy the differences in what each one of us brings to the table. Can't this be said bout everywhere in the Americas ... We might be interested in each other, but want to maintain our identity and boarders.
But, why does the identity of these nations and their pride take such a big hit based on the fact that the word for the continent they are on is also used to refer to a specific nation in another language?
Traveling through Europe, I have consistently been asked, (consistently!) why those from the U.S. say they are Americans (co-opting the expression) "as if there weren't other countries in this hemisphere." It's a real lexical issue.
Funny, most of the Europeans here have chimed in to say that some transliteration of "American" means "US citizen" in their language; there is no confusion, and no one really thinks of it as co-opting... which mimics my experiences with Europeans. The only ones who ever brought this up (I think maybe two or three over the course of my life) had - as I'd mentioned previously, these people already had a mild anti-US opinions over other issues, and this was just another example arrogance towards defenceless "ethnic" people.
Quote:
Once I asked a Spaniard what he would call me since Estadosunidense is a mouthful (Unitedstatesian).
He considered for a moment and replied, "Universal".
I honestly don't recall if I thought he meant me, personally, or United Staters, but either way, I like it and have used this ever since to describe myself in the context of my 'origin'/place of origin...identifying also as being from the U.S. In writing, I am always specific. That's just me.
If referring to a person who is a "world citizen" and os extensively lived and travelled, regardless of origin, that could make sense... but to Americans as a whole, that makes less sense as there is no "universal" in the US' name, and it also implies that US-originating people are everyone, that Americans' culture and opinions are those of the rest of the world. If that isn't self-serving, I don't know what is!
Latino (/læˈtinoʊ/ or /ləˈtinoʊ/)[1] is a cultural heritage used to refer to people with cultural ties to Latin America and people of nationalities within the bounds of Latin America, in contrast to Hispanic which is a demonym that includes Iberians and other speakers of the Spanish language as well as Latinos.
That's the way the term works, in English, specifically among Americans and Canadians. An Italian is, first and foremost, an Italian; after this, a European. If we were to assign another, regional desCriptor, they would be Mediterranean or Southern European, rather than a Latino.
The Latin culture in the first sense, is the culture of Latinos, founding people of Rome. By extension of meaning, Latin culture also means the culture of ancient Rome and the Roman Empire.
Currently, the countries of Latin culture focused people considered Latinos, groups whose working language and part of their cultural and ethnic heritage is derived from Ancient Rome. In this sense, they can be cited as reference the Latin culture of Spanish-speaking people, Italian speakers, Lusophone (Portuguese-speaking), Francophone (French-speaking).
List of countries / States of Latin culture:
Below presents a non-exhaustive list of Latin culture of countries, which can be differentiated into "first generation" (ancient Rome, now extinct), the "second generation" (Latin Europe, direct products of the Roman colonization) and countries of the "third generation", Latinized by the second generation***, located mainly in America.
It is also important to mention that there are also countries whose culture is not mainly Latin. These are countries that have been colonized by a Latin power, whose influence is, however, superficial, often limited to the official language. Often these non-Romance language countries can dominate a Latin language orally and have a relevant influence of Latin culture (African cultures, Native American or Asian). This occurs particularly in Francophone and Lusophone African countries, the Philippines and also in Haiti or Bolivia).
And finally, there is also the category of most non-Latin countries that have significant Latino minorities, such as Switzerland, Belgium or Canada.
Second-generation countries
Andorra
Spain
France
Italy
Monaco
Moldavia
Portugal
Romania
San Marino
Vatican
Third-generation countries
Brazil
Colombia
Argentina
Chile
Costa Rica
Cuba
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Mexico
Peru
Uruguay
Venezuela
Paraguay
Bolivia
Speaking Latin countries but hardly
classified as "Latin", these countries didn't have a significant human settlement that had contributed to the demographics of their populations
Haiti
Senegal
Philippines
Cameroon
Ivory Coast
Congo
Mozambique
Angola
Mali
Togo
Mostly non-Latin countries with relevant Romanesque-speaking minorities
Belgium
Canada
USA
Luxembourg
Switzerland
All these countries have a Romance language with official status, except for the United States.
*** The definition you gave applies for this group, that is obviously more far from the Latiniticy than an italian.
Last edited by Mr.Falcon; 01-03-2016 at 09:55 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, like this post bellow...
It is not about hating the USA
