USAians?

[AmateurScientist]

This is a relatively trivial issue, but one about which I simply wish to express my annoyance.

What's up with employing the awkward, downright goofy term "USAians?"

As convention has clearly labeled residents of the US "Americans," and therefore no confusion results from the use of the term, the only possible reason I can fathom for using "USAians" to describe those whom have nearly always been called "Americans" (except when certain Brits still refer to us as "colonists") is a bow to political correctness.

I remember on these very forums a certain poster who said she was from Mexico engaged in some heated exchange with me about three years ago, basically accusing me of some form of racism and Americentrism, simply because I used the term "Americans." I responded that nearly everyone refers to residents of her country as "Mexicans" and to residents of Canada as "Canadians." Where's the confusion? Where's the slight or insult?

Yes, all three nations comprise North America. Yes, there is a continent called South America. So?

The term "Americans" is employed due to convention and nothing more. "USAians" is an annoying and awkward substitute and does not belong in usage.

No one ever called residents of the former USSR "USSRians." They were "Russians," whether that term was geographically accurate or not. No one calls residents of the UK "UKians." By convention, we say "the British," even though I suppose to unusually sensitive persons that might slight some Scottish persons or some Welsh persons or many of those who live in Northern Ireland.

I suggest that "USAians" is equally awkward and unnecessary. Its usage should stop. It's not going to replace convention, and it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.

This sort of political correctness serves little purpose and undermines honest discourse by chilling speech (in this case, placing certain words like "American" off limits). Further, it seems to instill some sort of misguided guilt in its adherents and proponents. Those employing terms like "USAians" seem to be doing so out of a kind of redress for perceived slights against others, such as Mexicans and Canadians, and I suppose all South Americans. The perceived slights are unintentional, however, just as the conventional usage of British is not meant to slight residents of the UK outside of England or what was until only recently called "Great Britain."

Please stop saying "USAians."

AS

[Mercutio]

I had heard it "united statesians", which while longer is more natural to pronounce.

I figure the people who are calling us that are doing so in their own language (usually spanish, in the contexts I have seen), so it does not matter one iota to me what they call me. Their language, their label. It is a lot less stupid than "freedom fries".

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by Mercutio
I had heard it "united statesians", which while longer is more natural to pronounce.

I figure the people who are calling us that are doing so in their own language (usually spanish, in the contexts I have seen), so it does not matter one iota to me what they call me. Their language, their label. It is a lot less stupid than "freedom fries".

I disagree about the claim that it's simply "their language, their label." Those are not the ones I'm complaining about.

There are some posters in this politcs forum--I've noticed only British and Canadian posters, who are presumably native Anglophones--who routinely refer to Americans as "USians." I think it's silly, that's all.

AS

[aerocontrols]

USAians doesn't bother me.

Where's the confusion? Where's the slight or insult?

[Darat]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist
...snip...
I suggest that "USAians" is equally awkward and unnecessary. Its usage should stop. It's not going to replace convention, and it seems to be a solution in search of a problem.

...snip...

Please stop saying "USAians."

AS

I only noticed it here a few weeks ago and I quite like it. And given my pet peeve of people using "European" to mean "The EU" I think it is only fair and right I try to avoid doing the same by not using the term "American" when I am only referring to the citizens of the United States of America.

(Edited to add)

You PC fanatics, never satisfied, anyway it's your fault - you shouldn’t have picked such a long but still ambiguous name for your country, I mean "United States of America", what's wrong with a nice short snappy name like "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland"? You PC fanatics, never satisfied!

[BPSCG]

My issue with it is that it's almost unpronounceable.

yew-ess-AY-ee-enz ?

I suppose we could go with the Mexican preference, gringos.

Whoops, sorry; I meant norteamericanos.

Which I suppose would/should annoy the Canadans (not "Canadians", since there's no such country as "Canadia"); after all, they live in norteamerica, too. So do the Mexicans, come to think of it; why don't they consider themselves to be norteamericanos?

Frankly, I wouldn't consider it offensive if you called us "Wretched Refuse." Badge of honor, in fact.

[slingblade]

I don't care what you call me, as long as you don't call me late for supper. :D

Seriously, I can see some good points on both sides of the debate, and would have to give it some more thought.

As a student of English, I know that new terms enter the language constantly, but only a certain number of them actually remain in the language, long-term. For myself, I'll have a wait and see attitude. If it sticks, I may need to begin using it.

It's likely it will pass out of the language fairly quickly. It does strike me as awkward, I can agree with that. But then, new shoes are also awkward, at first, until one wears them for a while.

We'll see.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist
Yes, all three nations comprise North America. Yes, there is a continent called South America. So?

You've forgotten Central America, which is part of North America. Geographically, residents of both North and South America are Americans. But nobody uses the geographic sense of the word, any more than an American would call an Iranian "Asian" (although the British do) despite its geographical accuracy. People are generally named ethnically or politically, not geographically.



No one ever called residents of the former USSR "USSRians." They were "Russians," whether that term was geographically accurate or not.

You can hardly complain about disliking an accurate term for yourself while announcing yourself willing to deliberately mislabel others. I triple dog dare you to visit Chechnya and call them Russians. The USSR occupied a vast area and dozens if not hundreds of non-Russian peoples were part of it. A Uighur, an Armenian, and a Kazakh are not Russians. Calling them such is just plain lazy, as well as rude. People ought to be called what they are, not what is convenient for foreigners to remember.

Although I agree with you about USAian. It's linguistically ugly and awkward. Over time, "American" has come to mean "United States" simply because "United States" doesn't lend itself to an easy term for people, in English anyway. If anything, it's Americans who should feel slighted by the term American, because our country name is so awkward that we had to default to the continent's name for a term for ourselves rather than having our own unique country name.

eta: to correct a plural, that made it unintentionally hilarious.

[Tricky]

I've always thought that "Yanks" worked perfectly well. True, it is primarily British, but it is widely known and even the minor confusion with "Yankees" is hardly an issue. I know it has been occasionally used as a term of minor derision, but it is also used as a term of endearment (as in the song "Over There").

I agree that USAians is unweildy and unnecessary. Plus, when I first saw it I read it as USAsians, which would indicate Asian/Americans to me.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by Tricky
I've always thought that "Yanks" worked perfectly well. True, it is primarily British, but it is widely known and even the minor confusion with "Yankees" is hardly an issue.

Argh! The problem is that American Southerners, like myself, get murderously resentful when mislabelled as Yankees. The word "Yank", however innocently intended by ignorant foreigners, is "fightin' words" because it implies "Yankee", and that is indeed an issue. And has been since the War of Northern Aggression.

[The Don]

I find that "Septics" works pretty well ;)

[Underemployed]

Simple economy: shorter than 'North American' and geographically correct. How about some alternatives based on the same principles:

USAns (YEW-sans)

Namans (North Americans) (NAY-mans)
(Also Namericans)

Unians (YEW-ni-ans)

We can combine these into:

Unamericans (Yew-nuh-MER-ih-kans)

or

Unimans which contracts into:

Unims, which may over time turn into the phonetic root Yoons (or perhaps Yoonies).

Then there are the 'States' derivatives:

Staters, Statesians, Statters, Stats, Statists (taken already), Statizens, Statniks, Stanians, Staners, Statesmen/women/people (taken) Stazers, Stazi (taken).

If you insist on sticking with 'America' somewhere, we can all do better:

Amen (taken), Amercs, Amerians, Merricks, Mercs (taken), Americs, Amers, Ames, Amish (taken).

We can easily combine a few of these and still come up with something short, yet descriptive that will satisfy even the PC brigade:

Ustaziamen (Yoo-stah-zi-A-men)

Unstamers (Un-STAY-mers)

Unistamicks (Yoo-ni-STAY-miks)

It can only be a matter of time before one of these is adopted.

[CapelDodger]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
Argh! The problem is that American Southerners, like myself, get murderously resentful when mislabelled as Yankees. The word "Yank", however innocently intended by ignorant foreigners, is "fightin' words" because it implies "Yankee", and that is indeed an issue. And has been since the War of Northern Aggression. A question that's never occurred to me before : had Southern folk successfully resisted the forces of progress, what would they have called themselves? Rebs? (Over here, of course, we still refer to US "citizens" as Rebels, between ourselves.)

Capel "Try poking it with a stick" Dodger

[slingblade]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
A question that's never occurred to me before : had Southern folk successfully resisted the forces of progress, what would they have called themselves?

Slave owners.

[The idea]

Originally posted by Underemployed
It can only be a matter of time before one of these is adopted.
How about a word based on "Sam" as in "Uncle Sam."
For example,

Sammers

Samicans

Sammishers

Samafarians

[CapelDodger]

Originally posted by slingblade
Slave owners. I didn't want to stir things up that much. :eek:

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
A question that's never occurred to me before : had Southern folk successfully resisted the forces of progress, what would they have called themselves? Rebs? (Over here, of course, we still refer to US "citizens" as Rebels, between ourselves.)

"Confederates", perhaps, after the name of the nation they tried to create. Although they would also have claim to "American", but I imagine they'd want to distinguish themselves from their neighbors.

Someone's only a rebel until they succeed, in which case anyone still fighting is then the rebel.

Ditto with revolutions; it always irritated me that the Soviets accused reformers of being "counter-revolutionaries" when the revolution had been over for decades.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
Argh! The problem is that American Southerners, like myself, get murderously resentful when mislabelled as Yankees. The word "Yank", however innocently intended by ignorant foreigners, is "fightin' words" because it implies "Yankee", and that is indeed an issue. And has been since the War of Northern Aggression.

Well, maybe you can bear it if you recall that Yanks are different from Yankees. Do you have any confusion differentiating between Turks and Turkeys? If so, I think I'll skip Thanksgiving at your house.


(And as for the War of Southern Stupidity, get over it. Though I'm "born an bred" in Alabama, as far as I am concerned, there are no words worth fighting over. Actions, yes, words, no.)

[CapelDodger]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
"Confederates", perhaps, after the name of the nation they tried to create. Although they would also have claim to "American", but I imagine they'd want to distinguish themselves from their neighbors.In that light, I suppose they'd have called themselves Georgians, Virginians, Carolinans (Carolinians?) and so on.

eta: Or Alabamans.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by Tricky
Well, maybe you can bear it if you recall that Yanks are different from Yankees. Do you have any confusion differentiating between Turks and Turkeys? If so, I think I'll skip Thanksgiving at your house.

I have an excellent recipe for Mustafa Kemal with stuffing. Served in a fez for irony.



(And as for the War of Southern Stupidity, get over it. Though I'm "born an bred" in Alabama, as far as I am concerned, there are no words worth fighting over. Actions, yes, words, no.)

Not even to defend ya honah, sah, as a gennelman? Shocking!

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
In that light, I suppose they'd have called themselves Georgians, Virginians, Carolinans (Carolinians?) and so on.

You're probably right. Back then, everyone, North and South, seemed to place more emphasis on their states than we do today. I wonder if, over time, we'll switch back the other way, and it will suddenly be more significant to be a Wisconsonianiteian than an American? I doubt it. The world has gotten bigger.

[Ryokan]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist
By convention, we say "the British," even though I suppose to unusually sensitive persons that might slight some Scottish persons or some Welsh persons or many of those who live in Northern Ireland.

The perceived slights are unintentional, however, just as the conventional usage of British is not meant to slight residents of the UK outside of England or what was until only recently called "Great Britain."


I'm surprised anyone hasn't mentioned this yet, but the Scots and the Welsh are British. Britain is an island that consists of England, Wales and Scotland.

And the full name of the UK is United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, so I'm not sure what you mean by 'only recently called Great Britain'.

Edit : Typo :(

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by Ryokan
I'm surprised anyone hasn't mentioned this yet, but the Scots and the Welsh are British. Britain is an island that consists of England, Wales and Scotland.

And the full name of the UK is United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, so I'm not sure what you mean by 'only recently called Great Britain'.



I'd be willing to be called "Usaian" by the British if I can call them "Uks" in return.

[Ryokan]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
I'd be willing to be called "Usaian" by the British if I can call them "Uks" in return.

The completely correct would be to call them UKoGBaNRians.

By the way, doesn't the Spanish word for 'person from USA' translate back into English as something like 'Unitedstatesian'?

[mummymonkey]

USAians is a new one to me. Never heard it spoken. I've seen Leftpondians but I'm not sure if that includes Canadians.

Mostly you get called Yanks or Merkins.

[Underemployed]

Merkins???? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkin)

Now there's an insult!

[Ryokan]

Why use USAian, when there are so many terms that could easily substitute 'American'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offensive_terms_per_nationality#Offensive_terms_fo r_citizens_of_the_United_States_of_America

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by Ryokan
Why use USAian, when there are so many terms that could easily substitute 'American'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offensive_terms_per_nationality#Offensive_terms_fo r_citizens_of_the_United_States_of_America

From that site:

Shatner-stealing Mexico touchers – coined in the "Catch 'Em If You Can" episode of The Simpsons. Includes a reference to the fact that popular Star Trek actor William Shatner was born in Canada, the fact that the USA shares a border with Mexico, and further lobs offense at Mexico by the implication that "touching" it is somehow unpleasant.

I'd love to be called a Shatner-Stealing Mexico Toucher! It's both classy, and true!

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by Ryokan
Why use USAian, when there are so many terms that could easily substitute 'American'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offensive_terms_per_nationality#Offensive_terms_fo r_citizens_of_the_United_States_of_America

Shouldn't you be insulted that there aren't any derogatory names listed for Norwegians?

They do list some for Swedes. Oh well. Same thing I guess.

AS

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist
They do list some for Swedes. Oh well. Same thing I guess.


The 1919 edition of "The Hardy Boys" books I inherited, and read as a child, the term "Swede" was an insult in itself.

The older editions of those books are hilariously racist against everybody. Especially the Irish, which is funny since they were written by an Irishman.

[Ryokan]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist
Shouldn't you be insulted that there aren't any derogatory names listed for Norwegians?

They do list some for Swedes. Oh well. Same thing I guess.

AS

Haha, thank you! That made me smile :)

Of course there aren't any derogatory terms for Norwegians, we're all so nice and pleasant :)

[CapelDodger]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
You're probably right. Back then, everyone, North and South, seemed to place more emphasis on their states than we do today. I wonder if, over time, we'll switch back the other way, and it will suddenly be more significant to be a Wisconsonianiteian than an American? I doubt it. The world has gotten bigger. And scarier. I'm of the opinion that people will come to identify more with their locales than with nations, but since that accords with the way I prefer to see things I don't give the opinion much credence.

[Ryokan]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
And scarier. I'm of the opinion that people will come to identify more with their locales than with nations, but since that accords with the way I prefer to see things I don't give the opinion much credence.

Quite the opposite from me, then. I hope we all one day identify ourselves as Human :)

[epepke]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist
What's up with employing the awkward, downright goofy term "USAians?"

A few years ago, it was USians.

The argument, when stated, was that since there are either 3 or 2 1/2 continents called "America," "Americans" was inspecific.

However, there is only one country in the Americas with "America" in its name, and there are two with "United States" in their names.

"USAians" is kind of awkward because there's no one obvious way to pronounce "aia."

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by epepke
"USAians" is kind of awkward because there's no one obvious way to pronounce "aia."

I think "Oo-SAY-ans" sounds kind of cool.

I'd drop my objections if they'd only capitalize the first letter and make it Usaians, rather than the mishmash of USAians.

Plus it makes us sound like some kind of cool aliens or demons or something! "Buffy! The Usaians have the Key of Tardacktylos! You must slay the Usaian Queen before she opens the Gates of Korash!" or "Captain! We're picking up an Usaian vessel approaching at warp speed! Should I change into something skimpy and meet you in your quarters?"

[slingblade]

Originally posted by Ryokan
Quite the opposite from me, then. I hope we all one day identify ourselves as Human :)

Overheard on campus:

"I'm so confused about what to call you; do you prefer Native American, Indian, American Indian, Indigenous Person, or what?"

"Actually, I prefer Michael."

:D

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by slingblade
Overheard on campus:

"I'm so confused about what to call you; do you prefer Native American, Indian, American Indian, Indigenous Person, or what?"

"Actually, I prefer Michael."



They'll call him Mike, whether he wants them to or not.

[CapelDodger]

Originally posted by Ryokan
Quite the opposite from me, then. I hope we all one day identify ourselves as Human :) I'm for that. It does leave us rather rootless on its own, though, and I think that's a problem. What I find disastrous is identification with "nation", which is usually artifical and beyond the human scale. Ditto such ideas as "the Islamic World" or "the Christian World". It's much easier to mislead people as to the interests of such transcendent units than to mislead them about the place they live in.

[Ladewig]

I generally use the term to refer to those who people who have never travelled beyond the borders of the U.S. yet consider the United States as being the greatest country in the history of the world. I picked up the usage from the USENET. It's kind of like cow-orker; only different.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by Ladewig
I generally use the term to refer to those who people who have never travelled beyond the borders of the U.S. yet consider the United States as being the greatest country in the history of the world.

The US is pretty great, but it'll always be second to the Kingdom of Trebizond. And possibly Mitanni, before it got all trashy when they let the tourists in.

[CapelDodger]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
The US is pretty great, but it'll always be second to the Kingdom of Trebizond. And possibly Mitanni, before it got all trashy when they let the tourists in. Troy must have been the place to pick up world news in its heyday. (Trebizond was an Empre, not a Kingdom. According to Dorothy Dunnet, and that's good enough for me.)

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
(Trebizond was an Empre, not a Kingdom. According to Dorothy Dunnet, and that's good enough for me.)

If memory serves, it was called both at different times. I follow the rule that anything that small can't be an empire.

[Zep]

RWANDA - Red White AND Another-colour-that-looks-like-blue.

[CapelDodger]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
If memory serves, it was called both at different times. I follow the rule that anything that small can't be an empire. You're never too small to be an Emperor (Haile Selassie, Emperor of Ethiopia, was a tiny chap), so the same should surely apply to an Empire. The Comneni dynasty never settled for being a mere kingdom, but were recognised by Christians and Ottomans as Emperors. Who are we to take issue with diplomats?

[aerocontrols]

USAians:

Pronounced as U-http://tapion62240.free.fr/saiyan/famili.jpg

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
USAians:

Pronounced as U-http://tapion62240.free.fr/saiyan/famili.jpg

We're not that gay.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by Zep
RWANDA - Red White AND Another-colour-that-looks-like-blue.

Azure? That's a bit highfalutin'.

How about FF0000FFFFFF0000FF? Same principle. Pronounced "Fooooo FOOF". Has a nice ring to it. At least, we'll be noticed.

[Cylinder]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
The word "Yank", however innocently intended by ignorant foreigners, is "fightin' words" because it implies "Yankee", and that is indeed an issue.

I cannot stress enough how correct this interpretation is. I'm sure TM meant it a bit tongue-in-cheek, but suggesting to a redneck that he or she should answer to the Yank moniker at a local deer club or honky tonk could very well be dangerous to one's health.

[Mercutio]

Originally posted by Cylinder
I cannot stress enough how correct this interpretation is. I'm sure TM meant it a bit tongue-in-cheek, but suggesting to a redneck that he or she should answer to the Yank moniker at a local deer club or honky tonk could very well be dangerous to one's health. I heard a (not very humorous) humor bit about the term "Yankee" once while here in the heart of where Yankees exist...paraphrasing from memory...

To the world as a whole, a Yankee is someone from the western hemisphere.


To people from the western hemisphere, a Yankee is someone from North America.

To people from North America, a Yankee is a citizen of the US.

To US citizens, a Yankee is someone from north of the Mason-Dixon line.

To folks from north of the Mason-Dixon line, a Yankee is someone from New England.

To someone from New England, a Yankee is someone from Maine, New Hampshire, or Vermont.

To someone from ME, NH, or VT, a Yankee is someone who has pie for breakfast.


(I told you it wasn't really funny.)

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by Cylinder
I cannot stress enough how correct this interpretation is. I'm sure TM meant it a bit tongue-in-cheek, but suggesting to a redneck that he or she should answer to the Yank moniker at a local deer club or honky tonk could very well be dangerous to one's health.

No more dangerous than striding into the same place and declaring that you're dying for a fag, and could anyone help you out.

Transatlantic terminology can get you into trouble sometimes.

[Underemployed]

And that while you're there, you need some rubbers for your daughters schoolwork.

[Blue Bubble]

Originally posted by Ladewig
I generally use the term to refer to those who people who have never travelled beyond the borders of the U.S. yet consider the United States as being the greatest country in the history of the world. I picked up the usage from the USENET. It's kind of like cow-orker; only different.

That's pretty much the reason I refer to "them" as USofAns (pronounced as yew-sofans).

And to re-iterate: The Scots (I'm one of them), the English and the Welsh are all British (I'm one of them also). The Northern Irish are not (despite what some of them may claim).

[David Carroll]

If the conservatives continue to succeed in shifting this country to the right you will be soon able to refer to all of us USAzians (how's that for a compromise?) as "Republicans".
;)

[CBL4]

It makes sense only if the word "American" is ambiguous which it occassionally is.

For example, in the TV show based on Guns, Germs and Steel, the word "American" could mean either aboriginal Americans or USians. I found this particularly confusing because the book did not care about the United States (the people are just Eurasians) and therefore American always meant aboriginal Americans. In contrast, the TV show was USian-centric and constantly talked about USians.

CBL

[CapelDodger]

In Cockney, a US citizen is known as a Sherman. A "J. Arthur" is something else entirely.

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by David Carroll
all of us USAzians (how's that for a compromise?) Well, if we don't stop them hordes of immigrants coming in from countries east of Istanbul, it might work...

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by Cylinder
I cannot stress enough how correct this interpretation is. I'm sure TM meant it a bit tongue-in-cheek, but suggesting to a redneck that he or she should answer to the Yank moniker at a local deer club or honky tonk could very well be dangerous to one's health. Riddle:

Q) What's the difference between a Yankee and a damn Yankee?
A) A Yankee is someone from north of the Mason-Dixon line.

A damn Yankee is one that won't leave.

(I'm one of the latter...)

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
In Cockney, a US citizen is known as a Sherman.

Good God in heaven! For your own health, never, ever call anyone a "Sherman" if you're in the southern United States, especially Georgia.

[kalen]

How about "Do-as-we-say-and-not-as-we-do-ians?"

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by kalen
How about "Do-as-we-say-and-not-as-we-do-ians?"

What country doesn't that apply to?

[Cleon]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
In Cockney, a US citizen is known as a Sherman. A "J. Arthur" is something else entirely.

I've always found the whole cockney rhyming thing to be incredibly clever and really hard for me to follow. I'm extremely proud of myself that I was able to get Sherman. :)

(J. Arthur I had to look up, though. Of course, on this side of the pond nobody, including myself, ever heard of J. Arthur Rank.)

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by Cleon
I've always found the whole cockney rhyming thing to be incredibly clever and really hard for me to follow. I'm extremely proud of myself that I was able to get Sherman. :)

(J. Arthur I had to look up, though. Of course, on this side of the pond nobody, including myself, ever heard of J. Arthur Rank.) ??? I don't get it. Either of them.

'Splain, Lucy.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by BPSCG
??? I don't get it. Either of them.

'Splain, Lucy.

Sherman tank --> Yank

J. Arthur Rank --> Yank

just as

septic tank --> Yank

[CapelDodger]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
Good God in heaven! For your own health, never, ever call anyone a "Sherman" if you're in the southern United States, especially Georgia. I'm glad you pointed that out. It hadn't struck me before (but may well have done after).:eek:

[CapelDodger]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
Sherman tank --> Yank

J. Arthur Rank --> Yank

just as

septic tank --> Yank A "J Arthur" is an act of onanism. "Sherman" tank somehow took precedence over "Lee-Grant" tank, probably because it wasn't such a death-trap.

eta : It's such happenstances that can really screw up trans-Atlantic understanding. History expects, and contingency dictates.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
A "J Arthur" is an act of onanism.

My bad. I know what the term "wank" means, and probably most Americans would get it from context, but it's not a term used here at all. Why do British sexual terms make everything sound grosser than it is? Like "snog". It conveys to me not just making out, but wet smacky mouth noises, the sort of kiss you have to wipe your chin after.

On our side, though, we did find those WWII motivational posters the British had up very amusing. "Keep your pecker up!" Apparently Americans would burst out laughing and nobody knew why they'd laugh at such a patriotic poster.

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
On our side, though, we did find those WWII motivational posters the British had up very amusing. "Keep your pecker up!" Apparently Americans would burst out laughing and nobody knew why they'd laugh at such a patriotic poster. I like "cock-up." :D

[CapelDodger]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
My bad. I know what the term "wank" means, and probably most Americans would get it from context, but it's not a term used here at all.Phil Collins had a part in,IIRC, [/i]Miamia Vice[/i] or some such. During the read-through he finally asks "Do you really want all these 'wankers' on prime-time?". Turns out the writers thought it just meant "idiot". There was a re-write. I think "toe-rag" featured more than it had previously.

On our side, though, we did find those WWII motivational posters the British had up very amusing. "Keep your pecker up!" Apparently Americans would burst out laughing and nobody knew why they'd laugh at such a patriotic poster. On the British side the motivation was "The sooner we end the war, the less chance your wife gets shagged by a Sherman". "The Bridge Too Far" in a nutshell.