[HN Gopher] The Naming of America (2023)
___________________________________________________________________
The Naming of America (2023)
Author : dadt
Score : 48 points
Date : 2024-10-06 18:04 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.jonathancohenweb.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.jonathancohenweb.com)
| dang wrote:
| Anybody know the year of this essay? I put 2001 above because
| it's the latest date I could find in the text.
| alehlopeh wrote:
| At the bottom of the article it says "An early version of this
| essay appeared in The American Voice (1988) and a section in
| Encounters (1991)."
| jolmg wrote:
| I think they know, but the problem is that they wouldn't be
| able to cite 2001 in 1991/1988.
| JohnKemeny wrote:
| 1988 according to Google Scholar.
|
| https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=related:KEG9SnudRCsJ:...
| madcaptenor wrote:
| Might be 2023. A look through the author's list of publications
| (https://www.jonathancohenweb.com/jc-pubs.html) gives a
| citation under 2023:
|
| "Why Do We Call It 'America'?" [C]. American Heritage 68.7."
|
| That links to an essay at https://www.americanheritage.com/why-
| do-we-call-it-america which says in an editor's note that
| "Portions of this essay originally appeared in The American
| Voice." The americanheritage.com version looks very similar to
| this one.
| dang wrote:
| I guess that's the best evidence we have so I went with 2023
| above. Thanks!
|
| (Seems likely to me that it was written earlier, or the most
| recent reference wouldn't have been 2001, but that's only a
| hunch.)
| madcaptenor wrote:
| I agree it seems unlikely. On the other hand there's a
| reference to " the current (fifth) edition of Webster's New
| World College Dictionary" and that seems to be from 2016 -
| so perhaps the article was mostly done in the late eighties
| / early nineties but got some updates here and there.
| cjs_ac wrote:
| A less rigorous but more entertaining treatment of this topic is
| available here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfXoUaeLcDU
| danesparza wrote:
| Map men! I love these guys. I have only recently discovered
| them, but thoroughly enjoy their back catalog of short
| educational (and humorous!) videos.
| meiraleal wrote:
| Intersting. In Brazil we argue that the US isn't America. Great
| to know that Brazil was first called America, not the US :)
| samatman wrote:
| The USA, you mean?
| meiraleal wrote:
| Nobody would be taken seriously calling the US "America" in
| South America.
| bentley wrote:
| The source of this terminology difference is that
| continents have no universal definition, only societal
| convention. Romance language-speaking countries tend to
| teach the six-continent model with a single America,
| whereas Anglophone countries like the UK, Australia, and
| USA teach the seven-continent model with North and South
| America. Neither side is wrong, since there's no
| universally agreed upon idea of what the continents are,
| only convention (and neither convention matches the current
| geological consensus either). The equivalent term to
| Spanish "America" in English is "the Americas," not
| "America." My Brazilian friends consider themselves
| "American," but I've never met a Canadian who did.
| gerdesj wrote:
| That's fine. You have your terminology and others have
| theirs.
|
| It might (not) surprise you to learn that what I call
| Cyprus is called "Zypern" by Germans and there are a lot
| more copper related names for the place.
|
| Closer to my home, what I call London is Londres in France
| and London in German. The city in question was named by a
| bunch of what would become Italians (Romans) - Londinium
| was named by a murderous bunch of colonial invaders.
|
| I have insinuated an awful lot from your comment and
| "replied" to those insinuations as best I can.
|
| I am somebody and I use the term America routinely to
| describe the USA and the term Americas for the entire
| continent. North America is US + CA and Southern America is
| Brazil, Argentina, Peru, Paraguay, Chile, Uruguay and ...
| oh there are rather a lot more. There is also Central
| America which is the countries that join the north to the
| south.
|
| I get that you have an axe to grind about which America is
| which and who owns which name. I have some sympathy for
| Brazil getting pissed off about Amazon (the company) too.
|
| I try to understand all points of view - its quite
| interesting.
| meiraleal wrote:
| > I have some sympathy for Brazil getting pissed off
| about Amazon (the company) too.
|
| I never met a Brazilian that cares about it tho. There
| was a big national uproar a few decades ago when some
| Japanese company tried to patent the use of the Acai
| fruit and trademark.
|
| now about America and Americans. South Americans and
| North Americans are as much "Americans" as Northern and
| Southern Europeans are Europeans. Calling themselves THE
| Americans and the rest latinos (what do they call
| Canadians? I guess just Canadians) lowers our history and
| culture. North-Americans or US-Americans or whatever-
| Americans shouldn't be the ones defining who is American,
| who is Latino-American, who is Native-American, Afro-
| American. Not surprising, there isn't a Euro-American
| tag.
| shiroiushi wrote:
| >Calling themselves THE Americans and the rest latinos
|
| "Latinos" are what Spanish and (to a much lesser extent)
| Portuguese-speaking people living in the USA call
| _themselves_ (and their relatives still living in other
| Latin-American countries). They seem to prefer it to
| "Hispanics". And the term only applies to people speaking
| Latin-derived languages (i.e., Spanish and Portuguese).
| So the people living in Belize, for instance, are not
| "Latinos" at all.
|
| Similarly, African-Americans were named that way by
| themselves, to distinguish themselves from the majority
| white Americans, since they had a very different and
| unique culture and history. It wasn't some kind of
| pejorative they were stuck with by outsiders; they came
| up with it on their own because they were tired of being
| called "negroes", "colored", or much worse.
|
| You seem to have a very warped perception of who thinks
| what, and as the other poster said, you obviously have an
| ax to grind.
|
| People in the USA are called "Americans" because it's
| (part of) the name of their country, and there's no other
| convenient and pronounceable demonym to describe them,
| and there's no other country in the world that has the
| word "America" in it.
| jaimebuelta wrote:
| According to surveys, most people in the US prefer to
| refer themselves as "Hispanic", though there's a
| generational change
|
| https://www.pewresearch.org/race-and-
| ethnicity/2024/09/12/u-...
| SllX wrote:
| They generally prefer to be called what they are:
| Mexicans, Salvadorans, Cubans, etc. The ones born here in
| the US of A even often just prefer _Americans_ sometimes,
| although that differs from person to person.
|
| Pan-ethnic terms are the creatures of demographers,
| political scientists and others of the social sciences.
| We don't really need that crap and it's just there to
| make their jobs easier.
| jaimebuelta wrote:
| Interestingly, there's a word in Spanish for people from
| the USA that's "Estadounidense", literally
| "Unitedstatian" which is widely used (at least in Spain)
|
| I find it a fascinating word and a way of precisely
| naming to keep the "American" word to be more broadly
| applicable, at least in theory
| bentley wrote:
| Do people of Estados Unidos Mexicanos count as
| estadounidense?
| yulker wrote:
| Mexico is part of North America, interesting you left it
| out.
| throaway89 wrote:
| as is Greenland
| marcosdumay wrote:
| > I have some sympathy for Brazil getting pissed off
| about Amazon (the company) too.
|
| I have never seen anybody pissed about that one. But
| then, I have never seen anybody insisting that "Amazon"
| means the company and the geographic region better shut-
| up and forfeit its name.
| samatman wrote:
| The name of our country is the United States of America.
| Sometimes we call it the US, or United States, sometimes we
| call it America.
|
| Much as yours is called la Republica Federativa do Brasil,
| which you call Brasil for short. Do you ever call it the RF
| I wonder? Real question, I have no idea.
|
| Whatever you call America, the country, in your language,
| that's up to you. The Chinese call us Mei Guo , the few of
| us aware of that are not even slightly bothered by it. Your
| language, your rules.
|
| You have no right, and no ability, to dictate to Americans
| how we refer to ourselves and our nation, in our main (but
| not official) language. We do not care what your name for
| us is, and we do not care _at all_ what you think about how
| we refer to ourselves.
|
| For the record, in America we do not think of the Americas
| as one continent, but rather, two. So Brazilians, as we
| style you, are South American. Canadians, Mexicans, and
| Americans, are North Americans. If we need for some reason
| to refer to the people of _both continents_ we might say
| "people of the Americas" but this doesn't come up much,
| just as we might say "Old Worlders" to refer to the
| megacontinent of Europe, Asia, and Africa.
|
| The chip you carry around on your shoulder does you no
| credit at all. The notion that because we use a word _in
| the name of our nation_ to refer to ourselves in some way
| denigrates the other inhabitants of the two continents,
| North and South America, which happen to share that word
| with the name of our nation...
|
| That is 100% a you problem, not an us problem, and not a US
| problem. Get over it. Or don't.
| philwelch wrote:
| Brazil? Do you mean the Federative Republic?
| jecel wrote:
| Note that the country's full name has been "Republica
| Federativa do Brasil" only since 1968. Between 1889 and 1967
| it was "Estados Unidos do Brasil".
|
| https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estados_Unidos_do_Brasil
| jandrewrogers wrote:
| "America" is the only name the country has. Other countries are
| also called "United States of $FOO", so the USA does not own
| title to "United States" in the same way no one owns
| "Democratic Republic" as the name of their country.
|
| Regardless, in most languages and countries, it is just
| "America" so that ship has sailed. Either way, America or
| United States, everyone knows which country is being
| referenced.
| jltsiren wrote:
| The name of the country seems to be the equivalent of either
| "United States" or "United States of America" in pretty much
| every language I can read. "America" is an informal name
| people usually understand, much in the same way they
| understand when you call the UK "England".
| yulker wrote:
| England is not the UK.
| arethuza wrote:
| I think that's the point?
| dleary wrote:
| Calling the UK "England" is a different class of error,
| though. England is a part of the UK.
|
| Analogous would be calling the USA "Texas".
|
| Calling the UK "Britain" is a much more direct
| comparison.
|
| United States of America -> America
|
| United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ->
| Britain
| rgblambda wrote:
| It's not helped when England, Britain and United Kingdom
| have been viewed as interchangeable terms by UK
| politicians, famous writers and the general public.
|
| Boris Johnson: "If I am ever asked on the streets of
| London, or in any other venue, public or private, to
| produce my ID card as evidence that I am who I say I am,
| when I have done nothing wrong and am simply ambling
| along and breathing God's fresh air like any other
| freeborn Englishman..."
|
| Rupert Brooke: "If I should die, think only this of me:
| That there's some corner of a foreign field That is for
| ever England."
| standardUser wrote:
| No individual US state has anywhere near the economic,
| historic, political or social hegemony over the rest of
| the nation state as is seen with England in the UK. In a
| lot of contexts outside of the UK, saying "England" is
| completely comprehensible as meaning the UK, regardless
| of correctness. No one is going to say "England invaded
| Iraq" and be confused.
| chihuahua wrote:
| Let's be logical about this:
|
| (United States of) America -> America
|
| (Federal Republic of) Germany -> Germany
|
| (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern) Ireland ->
| Ireland
| throaway89 wrote:
| England annexed Wales and Ireland and would have annexed
| Scotland if it didn't use marriage instead.
| meiraleal wrote:
| America being the name of the country isn't a problem, the
| problem is the people from this country calling Americans
| "latinos". Or Native-Americans, or Whatever-Americans because
| the only Americans are themselves.
| gotoeleven wrote:
| The main reason people call themselves $HYPHENATION-
| americans is because they want some free stuff from the
| government for their particular $HYPHENATION
| blovescoffee wrote:
| What free stuff do Jewish Americans, Italian Americans,
| Asian Americans, get?
| rgblambda wrote:
| Spare a thought for the poor Scots-Irish who didn't think
| to add American to their hyphenated identity. I'm sure
| they're missing out on so much free stuff.
| allknowingfrog wrote:
| There was a time when "Black" was considered offensive and
| "African-American" was the generally-approved nomenclature.
| You seem to be implying that the "-American" pattern
| emerged as some sort of white conspiracy to paint everyone
| else as less American, but my understanding is that the
| opposite is true. Language and social preferences evolve
| over time, and that one has simply come and gone as the
| "correct" option of the day.
|
| As a generally "white" person (of roughly western European
| descent), I will happily use any set of labels that keeps
| people from glaring at me. I feel pretty strongly that
| unpleasant language is a symptom of prejudice, not a cause.
| If changing words could change hearts and minds, I think we
| would have seen it happen by now.
| JohnMakin wrote:
| > There was a time when "Black" was considered offensive
| and "African-American" was the generally-approved
| nomenclature.
|
| Eh, this is a little inaccurate - I don't think anyone
| but white people worked themselves up about this, and the
| distinction between "black" and "african american" was
| made because Americans with slave ancestry are not the
| only people who have dark skin color. It's also still in
| use and hasn't gone anywhere. AFAIK you've always been
| able to refer to a black person as black without offense,
| but of course, people have used that as a mild slur or
| with insulting connotations.
| cyberax wrote:
| There are two countries with the words "United States" in the
| name: the USA and Mexico. There is only one country with the
| word "America" in it. So "America" as an informal name for the
| USA is appropriate.
| sbassi wrote:
| it is not appropriate for non-US people since the name
| "America" clash with how they name the continent (America),
| so they believe that Americans are "stealing" the name of the
| continent for themselves. While Americans don't think so
| because they don't even think there is such a continent,
| there are 2 continents for them.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| i'm from the united states of america, mid 50s, and i always
| thought it's pretty random "america" implies the united states
| too.
| freetime2 wrote:
| > Not surprisingly, the notion that America was named for
| Vespucci has long been universally accepted, so much so that a
| lineal descendant, America Vespucci, came to New Orleans in 1839
| and asked for a land grant "in recognition of her name and
| parentage."
|
| I found this little aside in the opening paragraph interesting.
| Who did she ask? And was she successful?
|
| A quick google search didn't turn up much about America Vespucci.
| I did find one article about her that makes her sound very
| interesting [1], but no mention of the above request. I'm
| guessing from the way she moved around after 1839 her request was
| not granted, though.
|
| [1]
| https://jeffcowiki.miraheze.org/wiki/Marie_Helene_America_Ve...
| xVedun wrote:
| There doesn't seem to be a ton of information easily accessible
| about America Vespucci, but this [1] except from the Washington
| Democratic Review for February 1839 notes the following:
|
| > The object for which she had specially come to America, was
| to obtain, if possible, a grant of land from the Congress of
| the United States, as a means of honourable and independent
| support and the failure of her application, as well as the
| grounds on which it was deemed necessary to decline compliance
| with the request, are fully and fairly stated in the following
| Report made to the Senate of the United States, by Mr. Walker,
| of Mississippi.
|
| Where a report names that she seems to be worth of the name,
| but fails to mention any actual land grant, which I would
| assume is a nice way to say no.
|
| > She feels that the name she bears is a prouder title than any
| that earthly monarchs can bestow; She asking us for a small
| corner of American soil, where she may pass the remainder of
| her days in this land of her adoption. She comes here as an
| exile, separated for ever from her family and friends; a
| stranger, without a country and without a home; expelled from
| her native Italy, for the avowal maintenance of opinions
| favourable to free institutions, and an ardent desire for the
| establishment of her country's freedom. That she indeed is
| worthy of the name of America --that her heart is indeed imbued
| with American principles, and fervent love for human liberty,
| is proved in her case, by toils, and perils, and sacrifices,
| worthy Of the proudest days of antiquity, when the Roman and
| the Spartan matrons were ever ready to surrender life in their
| country's service.
|
| [1] http://portraits.allenbrowne.info/Vespucci/Buckingham/
| robertclaus wrote:
| Interesting that the article is so rigorous/long even though
| there turns out to be clear historical evidence showing where the
| name came from.
| o11c wrote:
| It's not particularly rigorous in places. One that I'm familiar
| with is the names: German "Amal-" is completely unrelated to
| Latin "[A]emil-". And for _both_ of them the original meaning
| is at best _suspected_ , not "known".
| jmclnx wrote:
| >A black African discovery of America, it has been argued, took
| place around 3,000 years ago , and influenced the development of
| Mayan, Aztec, and Inca civilizations
|
| This is a new one on me. Maybe it could it have happened, but I
| very much doubt it. This seems to go back to the usual thing of
| "Native Americans were too dumb to build a civilization".
|
| If anyone got to the Americas before people crossing the
| Atlantic, it would have been the Polynesians. That I could
| believe.
| thechao wrote:
| This is due to the Olmec heads.
| psunavy03 wrote:
| "It is argued" is a weaselly phrase that means nothing. It is
| argued that the Earth is flat, too. What's the evidence and
| what is the academic consensus?
| adventured wrote:
| Academic consensus is nearly as bad to rely upon as "it is
| argued." There may be more honesty in "it is argued."
| Academia has been overloaded with fraud for many decades.
| What's the value of a consensus of weasels?
| laurencerowe wrote:
| There is DNA evidence of contact between Polynesians and
| Pacific coast South Americans around 1200.
|
| https://sci-hub.se/https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-02...
| n4r9 wrote:
| > to hear Armorica, the ancient Gaulish name meaning place by the
| sea
|
| This line gave me synchronicity shivers. There's a recent SMBC
| comic that's been linked a few times on HN recently:
| https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/arthur. The other day it sent
| me down a minor rabbit hole reading about Brittany, where I
| stumbled upon this map:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brittany#/media/File:Britonia6....
| I (a Brit) thought that "Armorica" sounds exactly like "America"
| and looked up the meaning: "place by the sea". I realised I'd
| never looked up the origin of the name America but this must be
| it. So I googled around and was disappointed when I found the
| story about Vespucci. Cool to know that it's still somewhat in
| dispute.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-10-07 23:00 UTC)