|
| Science Forum Index » Languages Forum » Why is "Latin America" called that |
|
Page 1 of 3 Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Richard Fangnail |
 Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:38 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Apparently the name was suggested by Napolean and it had to do with the
way a Mexican leader wanted to call himself emperor. But the name
could have been Roman America then. So many other areas besides Spain
had spoken Latin.
"Latino" is derived from Latin America and perhaps that's why some
people think it's not accurate. "Hispanic" was a more sensible term
but it got PC-ed.
No one complains about "Asian" though it could also be used for
Afghanis but no one complains that. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Herman Rubin |
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:44 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <1120671498.614546.243810@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Richard Fangnail <richardfangnail@excite.com> wrote:
[quote:03044cce4a]Apparently the name was suggested by Napolean and it had to do with the
way a Mexican leader wanted to call himself emperor. But the name
could have been Roman America then. So many other areas besides Spain
had spoken Latin.
"Latino" is derived from Latin America and perhaps that's why some
people think it's not accurate. "Hispanic" was a more sensible term
but it got PC-ed.
No one complains about "Asian" though it could also be used for
Afghanis but no one complains that.
[/quote:03044cce4a]
Considering that all of the independent countries south
of the US before WWII spoke Romance languages, and the
largest one Portuguese, why is "Latin" not more accurate
than "Hispanic"? This way, French in Haiti and Portuguese
in Brazil are included.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels |
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:28 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Richard Fangnail wrote:
[quote:d821af0e07]
Apparently the name was suggested by Napolean and it had to do with the
way a Mexican leader wanted to call himself emperor. But the name
could have been Roman America then. So many other areas besides Spain
had spoken Latin.
"Latino" is derived from Latin America and perhaps that's why some
people think it's not accurate. "Hispanic" was a more sensible term
but it got PC-ed.
[/quote:d821af0e07]
"Hispanic" and "Latino" are used in different parts of the US for the
same referents. Of course Brazilians aren't Hispanic.
[quote:d821af0e07]No one complains about "Asian" though it could also be used for
Afghanis but no one complains that.
[/quote:d821af0e07]
Are you suggesting that Afghanistan isn't in Asia?
In the US "Asian" _tout court_ usually refers to East Asians; in the UK,
to South Asians.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| piotrpanek |
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:49 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Herman Rubin napisa³(a):
[quote:ed93417dff]In article <1120671498.614546.243810@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Richard Fangnail <richardfangnail@excite.com> wrote:
No one complains about "Asian" though it could also be used for
Afghanis but no one complains that.
Considering that all of the independent countries south
of the US before WWII spoke Romance languages, and the
largest one Portuguese, why is "Latin" not more accurate
than "Hispanic"? This way, French in Haiti and Portuguese
in Brazil are included.
[/quote:ed93417dff]
In Polish handbooks it is pronounced that Guyana, Surinam (former Dutch
Guyana), Belize, Jamaica and some minor islands are not a part of Latin
America, which is a reason to separate geographical classification
(Middle America, South America) from cultural classification (Latin
America). (I've once even saw a map, which divided the world into large
cultural blocks, and Phillipines was joined with Latin America as more
similar to it, than to East-Southern Asian countries.) Anyway, nowadays
French Guyana, Guadelupe etc. are parts of the EU and their relations
with the rest of Latin America are weakened, I suppose. On the other
hand, no one includes St. Pierre et Miquelon or even Quebec into Latin
America ;-)
BTW, the thing that amazes me is the term of "Middle East". From my,
Central European point of view Middle East=¦rodkowy Wschód refers to
Middle Asia, ie. Afghanistan, Kazakhstan etc., maybe also Caucasus, Iran
and Xingjang. The region called Middle East (Egypt-Iran) is in Poland
called Bliski Wschód=Near East. Does it mean, that from Anglo-Saxon
point of view, Near East is Poland? ;-)
piotrek |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter Dy |
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 3:25 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Richard Fangnail" <richardfangnail@excite.com> wrote in message
news:1120671498.614546.243810@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
[...]
[quote:7020995f0a]No one complains about "Asian" though it could also be used for
Afghanis but no one complains that.
[/quote:7020995f0a]
I dunno. Iranian-Americans I've met complained about it--we're Asians too!
Peter |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| piotrpanek |
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 4:41 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Richard Fangnail napisa³(a):
[quote:c791c7ce9f]
No one complains about "Asian" though it could also be used for
Afghanis but no one complains that.
[/quote:c791c7ce9f]
The term "Asians" seems to be more safe than Yellows or Mongoloids, so
if you want to avoid being accused of racism, you'd better use this
"geographical" name instead of antropological one 
But Afganis, Indians, Arabs, Persians and Siberian Russians are rather
Whites (Europeids) (so are most Latinos, depsite the popular
classification of whites and coloured) than Yellows, so it might be
strange to classify them with Chinese, Kazakhs, Japanese etc.
(And term Mongoloids refers to Native Americans too, so term "Asians"
excludes this subgroup).
piotrek |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Paul J Kriha |
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 6:14 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
[quote:4fecef79c0]In article <1120671498.614546.243810@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Richard Fangnail <richardfangnail@excite.com> wrote:
No one complains about "Asian" though it could also be used for
Afghanis but no one complains that.
[/quote:4fecef79c0]
And it could also be used for Australians and New Zealanders. 
After all, they both live in a part of the world called Australasia.
pjk |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels |
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 6:51 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
piotrpanek wrote:
[quote:828333df1f]BTW, the thing that amazes me is the term of "Middle East". From my,
Central European point of view Middle East=|rodkowy Wschód refers to
Middle Asia, ie. Afghanistan, Kazakhstan etc., maybe also Caucasus, Iran
[/quote:828333df1f]
The usual name for the 'stans region is "Central Asia"; Denis Sinor
introduced the term "Inner Asia" decades ago to refer to it as a
cultural region. It doesn't include the Caucasus, which is in Europe,
and Iran only when Iran is considered in its relation to Inner Asia.
Confusingly, one of Richard N. Frye's general volumes on "Central Asia"
covers only the Iranian-speaking peoples, in Iran, Afghanistan, and
Tajikistan.
[quote:828333df1f]and Xingjang. The region called Middle East (Egypt-Iran) is in Poland
called Bliski Wschód=Near East. Does it mean, that from Anglo-Saxon
point of view, Near East is Poland?
[/quote:828333df1f]
"Middle East" and "Near East" refer to the same area, the former as a
modern entity, the latter as a premodern entity ("ancient Near East,"
not "ancient Middle East").
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Des Small |
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 6:56 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> writes:
[quote:2c5b96930e]"Middle East" and "Near East" refer to the same area, the former as a
modern entity, the latter as a premodern entity ("ancient Near East,"
not "ancient Middle East").
[/quote:2c5b96930e]
Niall Ferguson, of whose _The Pity of War_ we read a brief extract
last week, holds that "Near East" once meant the Balkans, and then
fell out of use.
Des
was planning to revive that sense |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels |
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 7:17 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Des Small wrote:
[quote:9103a202a2]
"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> writes:
"Middle East" and "Near East" refer to the same area, the former as a
modern entity, the latter as a premodern entity ("ancient Near East,"
not "ancient Middle East").
Niall Ferguson, of whose _The Pity of War_ we read a brief extract
last week, holds that "Near East" once meant the Balkans, and then
fell out of use.
[/quote:9103a202a2]
I may have seen that somewhere, but Niall Ferguson is not the most
reliable of "historians." Is he still occupying a chair at NYU?
[quote:9103a202a2]Des
was planning to revive that sense
[/quote:9103a202a2]
Not a useful plan.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Ken |
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 9:45 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
The term Latin America refers to more that just people of Spanish descent.
Brasil speaks Portugese and there is a huge Italian population in Argentina.
Since Spanish, Portugese and Italian are the languages directly derived from
Latin, the region got the nickname Latin America. Much like England got
it's name as the land of the Angles or Angland and then England. Hispanic
would have been less descriptive since it only suggests a Spanish origin.
Ken
"Richard Fangnail" <richardfangnail@excite.com> wrote in message
news:1120671498.614546.243810@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
[quote:df6b3588cf]Apparently the name was suggested by Napolean and it had to do with the
way a Mexican leader wanted to call himself emperor. But the name
could have been Roman America then. So many other areas besides Spain
had spoken Latin.
"Latino" is derived from Latin America and perhaps that's why some
people think it's not accurate. "Hispanic" was a more sensible term
but it got PC-ed.
No one complains about "Asian" though it could also be used for
Afghanis but no one complains that.
[/quote:df6b3588cf] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Mike |
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:13 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Ken" <elrajo@magma.ca> wrote in message
news:Ue-dnV5RMaxh0FDfRVn-pg@magma.ca...
[quote:e0c0a5bfa2]The term Latin America refers to more that just people of Spanish descent.
Brasil speaks Portugese and there is a huge Italian population in
Argentina.
Since Spanish, Portugese and Italian are the languages directly derived
from
Latin, the region got the nickname Latin America. Hispanic
would have been less descriptive since it only suggests a Spanish origin.
[/quote:e0c0a5bfa2]
I'd call it 'Romantic' America, but I doubt there are many Romanian speakers
south of San Diego (referencing the four great romance languages).
How about Iberian America? Doesn't quite bring up the idea of mustachioed
cocaine runners in the jungle, though.
Any toponymists out there who can tell us when these geographical names were
first applied? Probably date to before the time when the whole world was
charted.
I am interested why you don't see online~ more Latinos or non-American
Asians. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Mike |
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:33 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Mike" <bakerdivert@lava.net> wrote in message
news:11cs6dhekqm8rcf@corp.supernews.com...
[quote:e773ab74e4]How about Iberian America? Doesn't quite bring up the idea of mustachioed
cocaine runners in the jungle, though.
[/quote:e773ab74e4]
I know... we can call it mustachioed cocaine runners in jungle land!
[quote:e773ab74e4]I am interested why you don't see online~ more Latinos or non-American
Asians.
[/quote:e773ab74e4]
I've conversed with a South African once online, but poverty is probably the
reason why you don't see Africans online (Nigerian emails excepted, of
course). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| piotrpanek |
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 3:37 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Paul J Kriha napisa³(a):
[quote:c7f831318f]
If you have a look at the map displayed in
http://www.state.gov/p/nea/
you will be amazed at what countries are handled by the Bureau of
Near Eastern Affairs (US Dept of State). Everything from Iran and
going West along the African coast and up to and including Morocco
and West Sahara.
[/quote:c7f831318f]
If sth is westward Poland it cannot be called East!
(Especially Morocco, whose name is "The Kingdom of the West" AFAIR)
:-)
Anyway, I still claim, that it is quite logical to divide this part of
the world into: Near East, Middle East and Far East (of course, while
you are a Tibetian, your nearest east neighbour is South China or when
you are a Hawaian, Japan is rather westward, so these names are
completely illogical ), than to divide into Middle East and Far East
without the Near one...
(Of course, the logics is not the feature of geographical nomenclature...)
[quote:c7f831318f]pjk
pp[/quote:c7f831318f] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| piotrpanek |
| Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 4:15 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Mike napisa³(a):
[quote:44eab10bb5]
How about Iberian America?
[/quote:44eab10bb5]
What about French Guyana and Haiti then?
Of course, as I wrote before, Francophone countries may have closer
relations with France than with the rest of the region. And I think that
these exceptions may be neglected. However, I don't find the name of
"Latin America" problematic, so I won't vote for changing it ;-)
pp |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:39 pm
|
|
