this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025
-1 points (49.1% liked)

No Stupid Questions

39922 readers
1828 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

They should be called United Statesians in English. I know États-Uniens is the official name in French.

What is it in other langages? How can we promote such use?

Why am I asking? The US administration is currently a disgrace on the world stage, and I am thinking how it unjustly hurts people from the rest of the American continent.

top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] eezeebee@lemmy.ca 29 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I am thinking how it unjustly hurts people from the rest of the American continent.

Here in Canada, we call people from the USA "Americans". There's no confusion, and if you called a Canadian "American" they would correct you immediately. If you explained you meant it in reference to the continent of North America they would still insist that you don't. It may be technically correct, but it would be frowned upon. We appreciate your consideration, but the word is firmly their word, at least to us. "North American" would be fine, though.

[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 6 points 4 days ago

I used to work with a Canadian (From Vancouver, iirc) who used to emphasize "North American" when people made the wrong assumption. I guess it makes sense once the focus is on region/continent instead of country.

[–] Perhapsjustsniffit@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Also Canadian. Europeans are weird about this. They've always been Americans to us and it doesn't refer to the continent.

[–] palordrolap@fedia.io 2 points 4 days ago

This may be a proximity thing. A word can have a different meaning in context, and when the context spans a continent-length border, it can be easy to see it as a global default.

Take the example of the word "Asian": An Australian using the term (advisedly, because it's often (mis)used or interpreted as a pejorative) is probably talking about someone from South East Asia. A Brit using the same word usually means someone from the Indian subcontinent.

I realise there's no border proximity with that example, but if you consider immigration and the percentage of population each Asian group makes up in each place, that physical proximity is why the word means what it does where it does.

[–] AyuTsukasa@lemm.ee 20 points 5 days ago (1 children)

There's literally no reason to. Colloquially, nobody thinks American refers to both continents, plus the other countries already have something else to call themselves to differentiate.

[–] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

For now. I figured we ought to start somewhere, and now is probably the best time after yesterday

[–] BombOmOm@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Don't fix things that aren't broken. There are plenty of broken things to actually work on instead.

[–] Ziggurat@jlai.lu 12 points 5 days ago

Note shat while États-uniens is sometimes used in French, it's not really used beside some left wing intellectual wanting to brag about America being the continent and sometimes sounds mildly anti American but not too much

While it's indeed a better word than American, one can also argue that USA aren't the only United States as a larger federation e.g United Mexican states so you can make the same argument about états uniens

[–] klu9@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 days ago

I mean, "Yanks" is right there.

Or "septics", if you wish to be politically correct.

/jk

Writer H. L. Mencken collected a number of proposals from between 1789 and 1939, finding terms including Columbian, Columbard, Fredonian, Frede, Unisian, United Statesian, Colonican, Appalacian, Usian, Washingtonian, Usonian, Uessian, U-S-ian, Uesican, and United Stater.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonyms_for_the_United_States

[–] _NetNomad@fedia.io 3 points 4 days ago

i definitely agree with the sentiment, but "USians" looks very awkward and "youessians" is even more awkard to say. i'd rather get rid of the name america altogether, both for the country and the two continents, and use indigenous names for everything instead of honoring someone involved in early colonization. granted there are many indigenous languages between both continents so finding something that works for and respects everyone might be difficult but if we could it's two birds with one stone

Probably just need an executive order from the current U.S. president to rename the country "United States of Trump". Going forward citizens would be called Trumpians.

Google will happily go ahead and update Google Maps with the new name.

Realistically? The breakup/balkanization of the US. Which is a nonzero and growing possibility by the look of things here.

[–] bitofarambler@crazypeople.online 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I say "US Americans" to differentiate while traveling, works well.

easy to say, easy to understand.

[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 4 points 4 days ago

Similarly in Spanish OP, we say estadounidense as the demonym for something from USA. We often use americano interchangeably though, but that gives room for confusion sometimes.

I think you should have posted this in Unpopular Opinions hah. I don't give much weight to it and, as long as everyone knows what you mean by American when you say it is fine, so I don't necessarily agree with your opinion that it hurts the rest of the continent. But as far as semantics go we both know the question is about as old as the country itself.

We're gonna get downvoted to hell. See you there :)

[–] Oberyn@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago (3 children)

"USian" just sounds better and not horrid to me . Normalise calling them USians

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Does that make the rest of the world Themians?

[–] LunarLoony@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 days ago

After all, we're only ordinary men

[–] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 4 days ago

Already is normal on mastodon

[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

I'm pronouncing it like Asian, but with a U. How about everyone else?

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 3 points 4 days ago

The only one country and citizen name used in Japan outside of very formal contexts is 'America' アメリカ. You will occasionally see 米 (bei = rice) used in some contexts, particularly with the kanji of another country as an abbreviation for things regarding those two countries (日米野球... Japanese-American baseball...). Finally, you have アメリカ合衆国 which is the formal name and used on paperwork and means something more like 'America peoples together country' somewhat literally, but stands in for the US of A. Technically, there's also 亜米利加 which is the old way to write it phonetically using kanji without really meaning something about the system of government or anything (it's just a me ri ka).

Each of the 50 states has a somewhat unique name, and residents of the state therefore have a unique demonym. Use those instead?

If that's too many names, Colin Woodward has identified 11 culturally-distinct nations in the US. That would actually promote a lot better understanding of why the country is the way it is. I'd be a Yankee.

Changing the collective name demonym Americans would be confusing during the transition, and for what benefit? Is this really a concern for residents of other countries in the Americas? Are Colombianos really scrambling to be called Americans?

Instead, I suggest taking Pres. Sheinbaum's suggestion, if you want to do something: Call the continent Mexican America. Everybody would know what you mean from context right away. No confusion, no need to get anybody else to play along.

[–] Harlehatschi@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

"americans" is a bad name but it's more specific than "united statesians". But I would fully support dissolving that country and founding a new one (or multiple) with a better name.

[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm not OP. As someone whose native language isn't English, I agree with OP that something like "united statesians" would be more specific than just "american" to refer to someone belonging to the US. A united statesian would be only from US, whereas someone just american could be referring to anyone in the American continent - both North and South.

And that's exactly how Spanish language deals with the issue. Native Spanish speakers understand that colloquially, american means someone from US and wouldn't call a Canadian or a Brazilian an American. However it does lend itself to confusion, it is a question often raised by children when learning adjectives, and as far as adjectives go, things other than people (animals for example) usually follow the regular rules of language. Finally, Spanish speakers also say "united statesians" ( * estadounidense* ) instead of "american" when referring to people living in US.

[–] BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

There are other united states than the United States of America, for example The United Mexican States (Mexico)

[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Mexicans call themselves mexicans in Spanish, and refer to their country as just Mexico even if it is formally " united mexican states". Also note is "mexican" and doesn't say "american" anywhere, so I still don't see where the confusion would be, at least not in Spanish language ( which mexicans also speak). The only country in the world that refers to itself as a continent (that also comprises other countries) both formally and colloquially is USA.

Edit: "that also comprises other countries" because yes Australia fits the bill.

[–] litchralee@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I've not known any USA residents that call the continent as "America". Instead, the continent -- which in this case basically just means USA + Canada -- would be "North America". And if they meant the whole post-1490s "New World", it would be "The Americas" for both North and South America together.

[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Agree, I also don't know of any USA residents doing so. But outside it's a very different story especially in places where the language isn't English.

What is the demonym for something that can be found or belongs to "The Americas", comprising both North and South America (and potentially Central if you go by the Three Americas way of splitting the continent)?

Why is it that you have terms such as "North American" to describe something related to USA+anything north in the continent, then you have another term such as "South American" for anything Mexico and south of it in the continent, but when you say American , that's right, the generic one that doesn't specify and encompasses it all then it is presumed to be exclusively USA? I understand the history that explains that, but as far as semantics go, it's still a legitimate question. Languages other than English have different answers for it.

[–] litchralee@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

But outside it's a very different story especially in places where the language isn't English.

What is the demonym for something that can be found or belongs to "The Americas", comprising both North and South America (and potentially Central if you go by the Three Americas way of splitting the continent)?

This is a fair question, and I suspect there simply is no generally accepted demonym in English. One could be introduced, but contrast that fairly simple exercise with the replacement of the broadly-recognized demonym for USA residents: "American". Quickly, it becomes apparent that replacement is far harder than introducing a new demonym, even if the to-be-replaced demonym itself isn't very logical within the English language.

English is the same language that calls people from Deutschland as "German", and then American English specifically might also call them "Dutch", as in, the Pennsylvania Dutch, whom immigrated from Germany. Consistency is not strong in the English language, even over only a few hundred years.

[–] davidgro@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 2 points 4 days ago

True but it has no other countries in it. Which is the whole point OP is making.

[–] stinky@redlemmy.com 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

There are bigger issues right now. We can't afford food and you want the administration to spend time taking away names? It's hypocritical. The administration you're trying to punish is doing exactly the same thing, moron. Begone.