Conference thebay::joyoflex

    When I was in Australia a few months ago, the normal term for the
    "United States of America" was "America".  I've heard that in the
    United Kingdom as well, and also heard it from nationals of West
    Germany.
    
    I think you may be fighting the world on this one.

There are *two* interesting phenomena discussed here.
First the "pars pro toto":
- Russia for the USSR;
- England for the UK;
- Holland for the Netherlands;
... and this list can go on, I guess.

America for the US is a different matter: the opposite. It could be called a
"totum pro parte", right?

Here in Holland, and in the rest of the Netherlands as well, :-) we use
"America" for the USA. And yes: there is quite some confusion around the
words "Central-America" and "Middle-America" here.... 

Arie

    re: .1
    	I have no intention of fighting the world. Is Hawaii part of
    "America"?  Is Mexico part of "America"?
    
    	I am annoyed at the imprecision, but I would like to be on the
    winning side.  Would the typical citizen of the United States of
    America regard both of the above as "America" and make no distinction?
    If (as I have heard suggested several times but think most unlikely)
    Eire applied to join the Union would that also be regarded as
    "America"? If the average English speaker distinguishes between the two
    concepts then what is the right word for the one that is not "America"?
    
    	From what I have always understood, the majority of the states of
    the United States of America are in the continent of North America, and
    they occupy a substantial part of the land area of the continent. Would
    anyone be offended if I described Mexicans or Canadians as "Americans"
    the same as I could describe Spaniards or Lithuanians as "Europeans"?
    If so, then we have lost a word to describe the inhabitants of that
    continent.
    
    	In cases such as "England", "Britain" "The British isles", "The
    British Empire", "The British Commonwealth" there is a term for every
    concept that people consider important, and the problem is just casual
    imprecise usage. The same is true for "Holland" and "Netherlands".
    It is not the same as having a concept with no word.
    
    	If we can decide what the words "America" and "American" most
    commonly refer to then we could have a competition for words for the
    other concept, since I am sure most people distinguish the two
    concepts.

    	On a related subject, what should we call inhabitants of the EEC?
    In some ways the separate states are already closer than the states of
    the United States of America, and are moving together faster than the
    American states.
    
    	I wince at the word "Eecans" and "Europeans" will be just as
    inaccurate as using "Americans" to describe citizens of the United
    States of America - Morocco is a likely member, and if European Russia
    ever joins it will probably bring in Asian Russia with it.

    But how can you hope to be on the winning side side when inhabitants of
    the U.S.A. use the adjective `American' in the `U.S.' sense? The way
    a Peruvian behaves isn't referred to - by anyone, to my knowledge -
    as `The American Way'. And can a Mexican realize `The Great American
    Dream'? And what is the all-american kid, if not from the U.S.A.?
    
    I agree that the way people abuse the word `America' is lamentable.
    But surely the cause has been lost long since (and I blame the
    Americans).
    
    b
    

    
    Answering as a U.S. citizen:
    
    >    	I have no intention of fighting the world. Is Hawaii
    >part of "America"?  Is Mexico part of "America"? I am annoyed at
    >the imprecision, but I would like to be on the winning side. 
    >Would the typical citizen of the United States of America regard
    >both of the above as "America" and make no distinction?
    
    Assuming I'm a typical citizen, yes, Hawaii is part of America and
    no, Mexico isn't in most cases.  
    
>    If (as I have heard suggested several times but think most unlikely)
>    Eire applied to join the Union would that also be regarded as
>    "America"? 
    
    Yes.
    
    >If the average English speaker distinguishes between the two
>    concepts then what is the right word for the one that is not "America"?
>  	From what I have always understood, the majority of the states of
>    the United States of America are in the continent of North America, and
>    they occupy a substantial part of the land area of the continent. Would
>    anyone be offended if I described Mexicans or Canadians as "Americans"
>    the same as I could describe Spaniards or Lithuanians as "Europeans"?
    
    The Mexicans and Canadians are generally offended at being
    EXcluded from the term "America"; they would like to see a term
    that defines only residents of the US.  The trouble is there isn't
    a good term to transform "residents of the US" to a single noun. 
    "American" is so short and convenient.
    
    But when I travel elsewhere or write or speak in an international
    context, I try to be sensitive to the issue and to not refer to
    myself as an American.  I fear I, too, am fighting a losing
    battle.
    
>    If so, then we have lost a word to describe the inhabitants of that
>    continent.
    
    Yes, that appears to be the case.  
    
    I think it's in part because residents of the US don't think that
    geographical proximity is that important.  Political/cultural
    similarity is more important.  Canada is Canada, and  we generally
    refer to the part of the hemisphere that's south of us as Latin
    America.   If you asked an American whether "Europe" includes
    Poland, they'd say yes, but if you actually looked at how they use
    the words, you'd find that most of the time an unqualified
    "Europe" was used, it refered only to western Europe, not to the
    whole geographical continent.  
    
>    	If we can decide what the words "America" and "American" most
>    commonly refer to then we could have a competition for words for the
>    other concept, since I am sure most people distinguish the two
>    concepts.
    
    I said this already, but I'll repeat it for the sake of
    completeness -- I don't think most native citizens of the US think
    a word to refer to residents the rest of the continent of North
    America, without including South America, is an important
    distinction.  
    
    --bonnie

The main problem is that there isn't a single word to desribe a citizen of
the US satisfactorily. Even the term "United States" has some ambiguity,
as the USA is not the only country to have "United States" in its title 
(Mexico is officially "the United States of Mexico", I believe).

But then, on the other side of the Atlantic there are problems too. There  is
no totally satisfactory way of describing someone from the UK either. "Briton"
serves most purposes, but strictly speaking does not include those parts of 
the UK that are outside Great Britain (i.e. Northern Ireland). And (at least
for a few more weeks) there's the problem of distinguishing what "sort" of
German you are in one easy word. Even "West German" and "East German" 
wouldn't do -- as any German schoolchild would tell you, some parts of the
Bundesrepublik are further East than some parts of the GDR. 

One thing that I hear an awful lot in the US media is references to "the
English government" and "the English Prime Minister" when it should be the UK
they're referring to.

John

In Latin America, the acceptable term for residents of the United States of 
America is "Norteamericano" (one word or two? - I don't remember.)  Of course
lots of Latin American countries are on the North American continent, so this 
isn't too helpful.  I don't remember if Norteamericano is used in Spain or 
not.

Actually, "gringo" is probably more useful and less ambiguous.	:<{)

Larry

    Re .-1
    
    norteamericano - yes. One word/ no cap.
    
    But isn't a gringo any sort of (pale-skinned?) foreigner?

    re: .9
    
    Does norteamericano imply a lack of distinction between Canadians
    and USers?
    
    --bonnie

    Ah, confusion is wonderful! I love ambiguity! I feel sorry for those
    poor folks who see everything so clear cut in black and white.
    
    "America" as a term is used politically, geographically, geologically,
    socially, and for other purposes.
    
    Geologically, there are the continents of North America and South
    America. I'm not sure where the boundary is, and whether it includes
    the entire land mass between NA and SA. (Central America is not a
    continent.)
    
    Geographically there is North America (Canada, continental US, and
    Mexico; Central America (south of Mexico and north of Columbia); and
    South America (everything else). 
    
    Politically and socially, "American" means different things to
    different groups, as others have so aptly pointed out. The term must be
    considered in context. I give up trying to pinpoint a specific
    definition. We haven't mentioned native Americans -- maybe one of them
    would like to give their definition.

That's it, I've followed this too long without jumping in ...

As a Canadian, it is disturbing to say the least to hear our neighbours
south of the border refer to themselves as Americans because of the lack
of precision, and if the truth is told, very few of them have the right
to call themselves Americans.

On the other foot, it is extremely annoying for a Canadian to be referred to
as American although North American is OK.

Stuart

    While the term norteamericano may refer to any inhabitant of North
    America, several South and Central American groups differentiate
    citizens of the US of A by calling then Yankees -- as in "Yankee, go
    home."
    
    I believe they spell it with a "q" though -- something like yanque.
    
    Karen

    
    Ask Amerigo Vespucci, after whom I believe, the Americas were named
    (he was a friend of Columbus).                            
    
    If America does not refer to just the USA, then clearly the United
    States aren't, or, more precisely, are 'Some of the United States
    of America' or ' Some of the States of America, United'. I don't
    think the SSAU will catch on. If North America and South America
    are separate entities, then 'the Americas' must refer to the sum of those
    entities. However, if North America and South America are parts
    of the same entity (and they are joined together) then 'America'
    seems a suitable name to describe the whole. I like to see America
    used in its widest sense, ie the entire mainland New World.
    
    Using 'American' for a citozen of the US is never wrong, just not
    specific enough.
    
    PBT.
     

    
    George Bush sent Dan Quail on a fact finding trip to Central America.
    Dan was found a week later wandering around Iowa.

.14>                      -< Though I'm a Red Sox fan myself >-
.14>
.14>    ... several South and Central American groups differentiate
.14>    citizens of the US of A by calling then Yankees -- as in "Yankee, go
.14>    home."

That could be confusing for Latin Americans who play for the New York Yankees.
How should one of them react if he sees such grafitti while on a trip back to
his birthplace?


Possibly he should take it as a suggestion to try to score more often.

	Someone asked what to call UKers a couple of notes back.  To 
	combine that with the USers question, just do what my office does.
	We are in the US, but have a large sister office in the UK.  They
	call us "Yanks"; we call them "Brits."

		-- Cliff

    O sea ``ambigua''
    

    How 'bout translating for some of us ignorant gringos.

The Chinese characters for the United States of America translates as Beautiful
Country.  In Korean, the characters are roughly pronouced "Meegook".  It's
interesting that the name has nothing to do with America or being united.

Wook

    The Japanese characters for the U.S.A. translate as Rice Country.
    (Presumably that's why they're so afraid to let rice in. :-)
    
    The ADJECTIVE "American" is usually accepted (even by Canadians)
    to mean USAic because there's no "USAic" or other adjective.
    The NOUN is usually a bit offensive.  However, a lot of poorly
    informed countries also use the word "America" to mean "U.S.A."
    -- and further assume that Canada is part of the U.S.A.
    
    Well, around 200 years ago, for a short time, all of the STATES
    in America were united, though of course the non-states were not
    included.  So the name U.S.A. was unambiguous for a short time.

    
    You hear the word, "North American" in sporting events when a Canadian
    is doing particularly well (i.e. Steve Bauer, when leading the Tour de
    France) and no "real" Americans are in the top ten.  When the "North
    American" drops off the pace, U.S. sports reporters revert to reporting
    on "Americans".
    
    Latinos report that "gringo" translates most closely to "hoser".
    
    Life is so difficult for Americans, they can't get Canadian bacon in
    Canada and they can't get English Muffins in the U.K.
    
    Jeff
     

    I thought a yankee was the one sitting in a dentist's chair.

    Re: .26
    
    ... and that makes a "yank" what the yanker does to the yankee.

    Just to put a little more mud in the water, I'd like to add that while
    for most Americans (in the most extended meaning of the word) there are
    TWO continents named America (i.e. North and South), for most
    Europeans, there is only ONE continent named America, which happens to
    be very narrow in its middle part.
    			Denis.

    That's all right.  We all know that Eurasia is a single continent
    without even a waistline.