Re: CHAT: silly names, prepositions

LOL  Now *that's* a capital *snicker* bit of humour!

Adam

>From: Padraic Brown <pbrown@...>
>Reply-To: Constructed Languages List <CONLANG@...>
>To: CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU
>Subject: Re: CHAT: silly names, prepositions
>Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 09:38:21 -0500
>
>All right, here's the solution: We start calling ourselves Columbia
>(an old poetic name for the US) and Columbians. This way, us oh so
>prideful Americans - oops, sorry, Rob - Columbians won't be coopting
>the name of a whole continent; and has the added benefit of only
>ticking off the Colombians. But then again, we had the name by the
>1790s, and they only got started in 1810; and we have the District of
>Columbia, so all's fair. Thus, in retaking a name that's rightfully
>ours, we won't be stepping on all your toes. And you crackerjacks
>that can't leave well enough alone boxes marked "Pandora's Emporium"
>can end this thread. Has the added benefit also of keeping Conlang
>as free as possible from political rubbish like has been dumped here
>recently. So, speaking as a _REAL_AMERICAN_ - oh, sorry, a _REAL_
>COLUMBIAN_: CAN IT, YOU PEOPLE!!!!!!
>
>On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Robert Hailman wrote:
>
> >David Peterson wrote:
> >>
> >> In a message dated 3/23/01 2:25:43 PM, robert@APEXWOOD.COM writes:
> >>
> >> << You've got three good words in the name of your country (if we
>ignore
> >> "of", that is) that you can use, and the other two wouldn't cause as
> >> much trouble as "American", so there are other terms available. I agree
> >> that it's not deliberatly arrogant. I don't think the people who came
>up
> >> with the term said "How many people can we piss off today?" - but to
> >> outsiders, especially American outsiders (the real Americans) it seems
> >> especially arrogant. >>
> >>
> >> I'm sorry, you just have no basis.  This should really stop.  Someone
>already
> >> said there's a "United States of Mexico", because there is.  So, again,
>we
> >> can't use either "United" or "States" or "of", for that matter.  It
>remains
> >> that "American" refers to people in the U.S., "Southern American" is
>for
> >> people from the South, "South American" is for anyone from South
>America
> >> (though who on Earth would prefer to be called "South American" as
>opposed to
> >> the country they're from?), and if you've got a problem with it, it's
>your
> >> problem.
> >
> >I'm not saying people would prefer to be called "South American" as
> >opposed to their nationality, but as a blanket term "South American"
> >means citizens of South American nations, no?
> >
> >"South American States" - if "American" means "of the USA" then Texas
> >should be one, where as Brazil should not. But it's the other way
> >around.
> >
> >Anyways, there may be a United States of Mexico. Granted. So there are
> >two countries that are "United States". There are more than two
> >countries that are part of America. For great justice, go with the
> >lesser of to evils, IMHO.
>
>By the way, there are also the United States of Brasil, if I'm not
>entirely mistaken. So that's _THREE_ countries with "United States"
>in the name, but - hmm - only _ONE_ with "America" in the name. Looks
>like a winner to me.
>
> >
> >But, after all this, moot it is and moot it shall stay.
> >
>
>THEN DROP IT ALREADY!!!!!!
>
>Regards,
>The American - oh sorry - the _Columbian_.
>
> >--
> >RJEH.
> >
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com