Racist, funny or who cares?Follow

It's refreshing to hear you acknowledge that you're unable to consider the possibility of yourself being wrong.


Saves me the time, I guess. Either way, I'm done here. History has shown that you'll take even the most trivial of points to 10+ pages just to avoid conceding to simple reason.

Alma's going on ignore from here on out.

Edited, Mar 24th 2011 12:09am by Eske

Sure, only if you teach the big bang theory (or any other relevant explanation) as mythology as well.

???

You're doing the exact same thing that you're accusing me of. The only difference is, you haven't provided anything to support your claim.

History has shown me acknowledging inaccuracies, errors, ignorance, etc. throughout every single thread, so you can put that card away. It wont work here. That's just some pitiful final attempt to avoid admittance. There is not a single 10+ page thread where I haven't admitted to being wrong or ignorant on something.

I mean, our country is The United States OF America, not United States America. The "of" denotes that we are part of the American continent. To accept the fact that the U.S. picked a general broad name to describe their citizens, yet still believe that it isn't indicative of not having an identity is quite silly.



This page describes the history of the term "American" and how other countries view and refer to it. As I've been stating all of the along, non American countries will simply say some form of "America", but Latin Americans often make differentiations as they are also Americans.

I'll give into your provocation. I made sure that my two options were actually different given the similarity of the two. Once again, your failure to understand is your own personal problem, but I'll assist you.

"Not understanding my argument" is specific to my argument, while "not comprehending the concept" is referring to the bigger picture. In other words, it's possible to comprehend the concept but failed to understand my argument potentially due to a failure on my explanation. This is why Eske said that she didn't misunderstand me, she just didn't agree.

My options, which were obviously over your understanding, were attacking the notion that it's possible to understand the concept and disagree with my argument. Her prior response was stating that it was possible.

Edit: Who are you fooling? You're not "ignoring" me. You responded to statements that weren't even quoted by anyone else. Besides, if you're going to ignore me, why even respond to me?

Edited, Mar 24th 2011 2:00pm by Almalieque

Yeah, seriously.

It is nice. Wow. Like a whole new forum.

Edited, Mar 24th 2011 10:19am by Eske

Uh, yes I am.

What I responded to was quoted by Eske.


Because sometimes, when I feel like being abusive to myself, I open up your posts and read them. But for the most part, they automatically made to be skipped by. Basically, it comes down to what's convenient for me at the time. If you say something I feel like responding to in the 30-40 characters that I can see, I'll open it up. Most times, I get to skip right by though.

He said something about role reversal, but by that point he was eyeing up my bull, too, and I thought it best to leave.

I don't know, maybe this indoor petting zoo wasn't such a great idea after all.

As I'm enjoying my time in the P.I, I noticed how everyone is speaking "Tagalish". As a result, I;m asking everyone who don't see the term "American" as not unique, do you feel the same way about the terminology of "Speaking American"?

I read the relevant part of the thread, and also have no idea what he's asking.

The US doesn't have a language.

The US has a language only spoken in the U.S.



You're making the argument that the term "America" is a matter of convenience of less words, yet you would rather ADD a word saying, "American English", instead of simply saying "American". It's not like people wont know what you're talking about since the term "American" is primarily reserved for the US. So what's the difference?

So, it's ok to call the people "American", the food "American", the music "American", but not the language? Why do you have to further distinguish the language but nothing else?

The answer is because we don't speak "American" as "America" isn't a country, we speak an American dialect of the English language. This holds true for everything else we call "American", but it's just that we only recognize it with language. America isn't a country, so it's silly to label a language that isn't unique to two entire American continents as a spoken language. Under the same logic, that applies to everything else we call "American".

This is why this supports the argument of the lack of identity, because not only do we not have an official language, we don't have a name that uniquely identifies our citizens.

To be fair, you would be right about the term "American" not being related to having an identity IF we actually had one. Given the fact that one can easily make the argument of the lack of an identity, then not having an unique name for your citizens completely supports that argument.

Are you back to being a massive retard? Not every country has a unique language. Many of them have dialects of different languages. This is not a semantic difference, it's a linguistic one. Please stick to subjects where you're at least subjectively wrong.

I believe "English, mother@#%^er, do you speak it?" is the correct colloquialism for American English.

I'm not really a linguistic scholar, persay.

Canada has two and they aren't Canadian and Newfanesse. They're English and French.

tl;dr Even Simpler Version:

We call English spoken here in the States "English" because it hasn't changed enough from its origin to be a new language. It's just a dialect. Just as Spanish spoken throughout Mexico, Central & South America is "Spanish", French spoken in Canada, Haiti or Congo is "French", Portuguese spoken in Brazil is "Portuguese", English spoken in Canada, Australia or Liberia is "English", the Dutch spoken in Suriname or Antigua is "Dutch", etc.

None of the European colonized places have taken their European language and renamed it after their own nation. With globalization, it's unlikely that any language will deviate enough to linguistically count as a new tongue any time soon. Bizarrely, this somehow means America alone has an identity crisis.

Edited, Mar 29th 2011 8:29am by Jophiel

Whoops, I meant to say Aruba speaks Dutch. They speak English in Antigua. Or, as they call it there, "Antiguaese".

Also? They speak English in Australia, as well. I guess they don't have an identity, either.

Defining American English could be a real problem. Mainers still give me a blank look when I ask them what kind of pop they have?

I purposely edited my post to specifically point out what I was referring to and you still overlooked it. YOU said the following:

"I'd call it American English as its a variant of the older and more universal English language."

"The United States of America being condensed to "America" is a matter of convenience and the fact that the US was the first recognized "Western" nation in the Americas "

You did not mention "simply English" in any of those phrases. You did, however, in the phrase,
"But simply saying "Do you speak English?" is sufficient since, dialects aside, the different variants can generally communicate without much trouble. It's also shorter. ".

Except, my question was about the term "American", not "English". This is how you tried to turn the discussion on "English", when it was always on "American". I saw the potential innocent confusion, so that's why I edited my post to tell you the exact phrase I was responding to.



I know you corrected yourself later down in the thread,but I had already anticipated that response, do you have a problem with "Do you speak the American language?".



Uhhh. you missed the point. "American" is MORE specific than "English" in reference to language, because the term "American" is primarily exclusive to the U.S. Most people outside the U.S are actually taught British English, not U.S. English. So if you were to simply say "English", that would be less specific than simply saying "American".


Look at China, there is no such language, "Chinese", the two main dialects are Mandarin and Cantonese, but people often say "Chinese". In this case, it makes sense as the term "Chinese" refer to the single country "China" and they are not using a term like "East", "Oriental" or "Asia" that can represent multiple countries.



You mean like the people, you know who are based off a single origin? Weren't the settlers European who spoke English? I didn't know that there was an "America" in Europe.



Wow, did you completely over look my first sentence? Argentina has an official language. Argentia said "Our official language is 'Spanish'". The language could have easily been called "Fairy Cow Goldenese" with absolutely no change and that would be the name of the language.

If you actually study different languages, you'll see many countries actually do that. Their language or dialect will greatly resemble another language, but instead of just simply calling it a derivative of it's parent's name, they will call it another language all together. Hmmmm... I wonder why....?!?!




Read above...



You do realize that's how we have so many languages now? Once you learn one foreign language, the rest are typically much easier to learn. No one is really creating their own language. What have been done are derivations of already existing languages.

Besides, having an official language has nothing to do with declaring an established language as our own. The U.S. can simply say "English" is the official language.

I wont beat a dead horse since most of this was already addressed. Bottom line up front is that we name languages what we want to name them. We don't have an official language, so I'm not asking if you're ok with changing the official language. I'm asking about your acceptance of the unofficial terminology "American" being used to represent our language as it does everything else.

Oh, FFS. The CULTURE we choose to call "American" (including its food, music, etc.) did not exist before the creation of the U.S.A. The LANGUAGE spoken here DID exist. In England. Hence, English.

And we base that "want" on some actual reasons rather than casual whims. You've yet to present any reasons why we should have wanted to change the name of the language.

If you didn't ignore an entire post, you would have realized that I explicitly said that I was not arguing for a change of name of the language. I'm asking if you accept the unofficial terminology of "American" to refer to the spoken English here. You argued against the dangling modifier "American", so do you accept the terminology "Do you speak the American language"?

There really needs to be a rule about posting without reading posts...I posted a link of South America/Latin America expressing dislike of the term "American" being exclusively to the U.S., hence their terminologies that refer to U.S. citizens....


Edit: Doing a little research, from the same link I provided earlier, it stated that the term "America" referred to the "New World", all of the masses to include North and South America, but had evolved throughout time to simply refer to the U.S.

Thank you..

Edited, Mar 30th 2011 1:11am by Almalieque

It's not more grammatically correct. "American" is a dialect of the English language, it is not a language in of itself.

Saying "I speak the American language" is like saying "I have a Skyline tree" rather than "I have a Skyline honeylocust" or "I have a honeylocust tree".

I skipped the post because it's not addressing anything that hasn't been addressed.