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.
I never claimed the US invented any of those things. Though, you are stretching a bit if you want to claim people living in the US and who were US citizens based solely on where they were born and/or descended from. Bell may have been Scottish, but when he invented the telephone he did so as an American citizen working at his lab in Boston. Bell himself declared that "I am not one of those hyphenated Americans claiming allegiance to two countries, I am an American."
Many of those could also be disputed on the grounds of concept vs. reality. For example Babbage conceived of the idea of a computer, but he never built one. Turing is generally granted that recognition and yes, he is British. Television is also debatable. Baird is credited with creating the first working television system, but it was Farnsworth, an American that invented the first all electronic television and that is what became the first TV's. Baird's company sold TV's under license of Farnsworth's invention via RCA. Further, many of these inventions, in fact all of them, were created from the synthesis of ideas over time from various sources and inputs.
I'll give you that the internet as we know it was conceived and theorized by the Brits, if you acknowledge that the first actual working network that later became the interent was built by Americans, whom had consulted and worked with Lee.
lol, most of them are not cool. However, you claimed that "no one drives Chevy's in Europe". That statement is simply untrue. Conveniently you also choose to focus on the more lackluster American brands in Europe and completely ignore Ford, which last I checked comprises around 10% of the total European car market.
We already covered the rise of jeans.
I'll stop playing up the stereotype, albeit being a well sourced and factual one, when you admit the role of American culture in making English the international language it is. If we rewind all the way back to the beginning of our very entertaining exchange, the disagreement was solely over your stating that American culture has had little role in making English a lingua franca. I believe I have long ago supported that statement that American culture has had a primary role in making English so. Everything else has basically been banter centered around you discrediting everything American in a stereotypically British way while I defended it in a stereotypically American way. Of course, I actually took the time to link sources, discuss the history of certain trends, etc. while you just blustered and bluffed your way through. I refer you back to the image of Libby and Reagan.
I did not say that it has had 'little role in making English a lingua franca' but it is certainly NOT the only reason why the world leans towards English, I first posted here because somebody said that if New York was New Amsterdam then the 'worlds main language' would perhaps be Dutch - I am just disagreeing, I am not 'belittling' what the USA has 'given' to the world but the main point I have been trying to make is that English (for many reasons) would be widely spoken even without the US, jeans would be widely worn without the US, people would be driving around in cars and using computers without the US. You see these things mentioned are used in everyday life because of the way the 'world' has developed with the help of the US of course but with the help of plenty of other people from plenty of other nationalities too. Of course the US has 'contributed' to the development of cars, computers, TV etc but I am afraid you cant just lay 'claim' to it all - its simply not true!
I did not say that it has had 'little role in making English a lingua franca' but it is certainly NOT the only reason why the world leans towards English, I first posted here because somebody said that if New York was New Amsterdam then the 'worlds main language' would perhaps be Dutch - I am just disagreeing, I am not 'belittling' what the USA has 'given' to the world but the main point I have been trying to make is that English (for many reasons) would be widely spoken even without the US, jeans would be widely worn without the US, people would be driving around in cars and using computers without the US. You see these things mentioned are used in everyday life because of the way the 'world' has developed with the help of the US of course but with the help of plenty of other people from plenty of other nationalities too. Of course the US has 'contributed' to the development of cars, computers, TV etc but I am afraid you cant just lay 'claim' to it all - its simply not true!
OK, truce. I think we are both in general agreement on the main points of the thread. The world would not be speaking Dutch if NYC remained New Amsterdam. English as a lingua franca has many influences from Pax Britannica to American popular culture. The rest is merely quibbling and for the most part, at least from my perspective, more about getting a good laugh with our exchange then actually being serious.
OK, truce. I think we are both in general agreement on the main points of the thread. The world would not be speaking Dutch if NYC remained New Amsterdam. English as a lingua franca has many influences from Pax Britannica to American popular culture. The rest is merely quibbling and for the most part, at least from my perspective, more about getting a good laugh with our exchange then actually being serious.
Agreed!
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.