@HelloProject said in A Constructive Thread About People We Might Not Like:
@ThatGuyThere Except that you're entirely marrying yourself to the technicalities of how the words should work rather than how the words are actually used, which is pretty much a gross misunderstanding of language.
I no doubt agree that "America" is not technically the name of the country, and yet I'm going to continue to refer to the US as "America", because it's a commonly accepted way to refer to the country, to the point that "America" is a commonly accepted word for the US in multiple languages. Getting bogged down by such a technicality to the point that it "irks" you would be like me being irked by the fact that you're colloquially using the word "hell" in a way that technically makes no sense, which would be a real argument I could make if I decided to entirely ignore how language works too.
This is wrong. If you had read my earlier post about this very same thing, you'd know a lot of other languages use a completely different term for people who live in the United States. In fact, most of the languages that use 'American' to refer to people from the U.S. are used predominantly in countries that 1) have no cultural interest in America as a continent, and 2) primarily do business with the United States, and not the rest of America, and thus have absolutely no need to respect any sort of linguistics that would take into account those appropriative boundaries.
You know what does irk me?
When people who have no clue how language works talk about technicalities that don't actually apply to everyday dialogue all the time, as if suddenly having complete and utter cultural blindness to their own language, for reasons that could only be described as "no goddamned reason", or "I like to think I'm a really smart dude, surely no one can deconstruct what's wrong with my argument, it's not like languages are a science or anything".
You know damned well how the term African-American is commonly used, just like you know damned well how the terms "America" and "American" are commonly used. You can be irked all you want, and I'll just be irked by the fact that you don't seem to understand the fundamentals of what I assume is your native language.
What I know damn well is that the term 'African-American' is commonly used to refer to black people in the United States by people from the United States. This sort of thing you just posted just goes to show that you're still thinking that 'common use' applies only based on your country's, not, you know, the rest of the world. So while I understand your point, I'd be remiss if I didn't point out it's based entirely on an imperialistic mindset foisted on you by your own society.
You constantly talk about how you're reevaluating your life, exploring your roots, trying to open up to other experiences--okay, this is a good opportunity for you to stop, back up a bit, and try to see this particular issue from someone else's point of view.
@Wolfs said in A Constructive Thread About People We Might Not Like:
"American" has always applied to the United States by default, not the North/South American continents themselves. This dates back to the American colonies when the English crossed the Atlantic.
If you use "African-American," the vast majority of people out there know and understand this to be talking about a US Citizen.
If you really want to differentiate it that much, you need to be using "Americas" or "the Americas." By itself, "America" is understood to mean the USA.
Again, this is essentially just based on your own perspective. People in other countries--especially South American countries that have actually clashed or been the victim of the U.S.'s imperialistic and interventionist policies, will disagree. Your version of history isn't right just because it occurred around you.
@Wolfs said in A Constructive Thread About People We Might Not Like:
@ThatGuyThere Okay, maybe not always, but at this point you're pissing into the wind (and apparently content to do it) because you know exactly what the meaning is now to the majority, yet you insist on trying to tell people it really doesn't mean that. Sometimes, the usage of words and their meanings does change.
There's trying to argue a point, and there's being willfully stubborn. Guess which one you fall under?
Do you also go around trying to tell people "gay" really ought to mean someone's just happy?
Again, what majority? Your majority. Not my majority.
Languages, especially living languages that are used, grow and expand and change. This is natural, this is linguistics. But there is a very big difference between "gay" having two definitions (happy, homosexual) than the appropriative and exclusionary nature of one country, who's had political and military dominance over a continent for a century or more, using a demonym that should be inclusive to dozens of countries around it.
P.S. @HelloProject, I am an English teacher, and in fact, I am an English as a Foreign Language teacher, which means I was trained in Received Pronunciation, which is the internationally accepted proper English accent and semantic, syntactic, and grammatical form of the language (and by this, I mean by every country that isn't the U.S., which, I am sure will shock you, is a lot of people, I might dare say, a 'majority'). So when I tell you @ThatGuyThere has better talking points, linguistically speaking, than you do in this sense, I would hope (but not expect) that this carries some weight.
Please stop tossing around accusations that people don't know how language works. You don't have a monopoly on it yourself and in fact, haven't shown you know anything about linguistics beyond being able to type without glaring errors (which isn't very difficult at all). Stop. Backtrack. Reassess. Please. Especially when you're resorting to ad-hominem attacks. You were doing so well compared to other times you've popped up on this board (or WORA). I was rooting for you.
P.P.S. This conversation is not just about how language works, but how politics and imperialism affect language use, so your constant harping on linguistics seems like a simple and, in my case, ineffectual attempt at side-lining the political aspects of the discussion that you don't have any solid knowledge in. Especially since, being African-American (and I am using this term the way you do, to denote the specific culture of black people in the U.S.) you should be well-aware of how language and politics intersect to create borders, prejudice, descrimination, and segregation.
P.P.P.S. God fucking damn you guys for making me agree with @ThatGuyThere. Assholes. -_-
