Guns, Guns Guns

So every citizen of our English speaking country is wrong, and you are right because you have read it in a few dictionaries in Sweden. I could cut and paste many major newspaper articles that use the word Americans to refer to citizens of the USA, but if you have a closed mind it probably wouldn't register.

I wouldn't presume to lecture you on how Swedish is spoken or written, so show the same courtesy to us. Friends in NZ and the UK also use Americans to refer to citizens of the USA (when they aren't using less polite terms).







[Daryl wrote:
Sorry Tenshinai, but speaking as someone who grew up in an English speaking country that is not the USA, we use the term American to refer to a citizen of the USA. We would never use american to refer to a Canadian or Brazilian.

I don´t care what you´re used to, because in this case, as i mentioned before, i actually had to look this up because i was doing a translation job.

What i said was 100% fact. That lots/most people doesn´t know this, that´s another matter.}









[Daryl wrote:
The English language has many irregularities and loves to break rules. I know no Swedish and respect your knowledge of our language, but you are incorrect in this case.

Nope. I checked with 5 dictionary publishers and a few other translators, i KNOW i´m right in this.

And i had to check exactly because it was impossible to be certain if it was an irregularity that should translate over without change.

An error is an error no matter how many people use it.]



To the last sentence - bullshit. If everyone else in your Company is marching left-right, left-right; and you alone are marching right-left try explaining to the Warrant Officer that you know that you are right & all the others are wrong.
Incidentally I just checked in my newish Collins Australian Dictionary (couple of kg weight), and it says "referring to the inhabitants of the USA"

Tenshinai wrote:

Zakharra wrote:The North and South American continents are identified as the Americas, not 'America'.

Actually, it´s either ( as my earlier link also indicated ).

Zakharra wrote:And please, no one calls other nationalities in lower case.

That´s the whole point you´re missing. "american" isn´t the NAME or NATIONALITY.

Zakharra wrote:American is a commonly and -widely- accepted nomenclature meaning a citizen of the United States of America.

Ask a decent linguist about that. The meaning is someone from America...

It´s commonly used and accepted as by default referring to people from USA, but that isn´t what it specifically MEANS.
And it IS used to refer to people from ANY part of America, just less common.

Zakharra wrote:But there is only one nation in the world with the name America in it

"OF AMERICA"... And if you don´t understand that distinction, then please drop it.

USA is capitalised because that is the name of the nation.

It was incorrect to use "Soviet" as a name for the nation for the same reason, as the name in that case was properly the "Soviet Union" or USSR.

The correct short form for USA is "United States", or semicorrectly, "US".

Zakharra wrote:To keep denying that it is a proper use of the name is being unusually stubborn.

If i did a professional translation based merely on common usage, i would probably never get another job.

Heck, if i did it according to what is accepted online, since the arrival of internet, i wouldn´t get paid at all, because then quality would be sucktastic.

Not my fault that so many English speakers are unable to speak(or more commonly, write) their own language properly.

Zakharra wrote:Even the foreign media and governments use it. It's common usage, accept it.

And if media was actually lingustically reliable, or at least as much as it was when i was a kid, that might actually be a viable argument.

Not really, but there would have been at least a theoretical possibility.

It comes down to commonly used and accepted terms. It doesn't matter if the 'official' usage is something else. To everyone in the world. American and American means a citizen of the USA. It's common usage. And despite what the 'official' dictionaries and language programs say, if everyone (pretty much world wide) is using it, that means it IS an accepted and proper form of the word. How else do you think new words and meanings to words are added to dictionaries? By people making new words and changing the meanings of older words.

America and Americans have been describing the US citizens for at least 40 years. I remember hearing it on the news in the early 80s. It's only become more common place since then. Back when there was a USSR, Soviets was a commonly used and accepted short name of the USSR. Words change, names change and failure to keep up with or to accept it, is a failure on your part. You're just coming off as being unusually stubborn resisting the tides of the world here.

smr wrote:If the Ukrainians were stealing were stealing oil and gas from Russia or were they collecting the taxes that they charge for going through their Country? Ahhh!!!! Propaganda who is telling the truth the Russians or the Ukrainians?

Independent 3rd party arbitrators and courts have already fined Ukraine several times due to their theft of gas.

Ukrainian ministers even admitted in live TV that they took gas they didn´t pay for.

And what they whined so much about earlier was that Russia started charging Ukraine the same pricetags that Russians and Germans paid for the gas.

smr wrote:So, what do you think of your good friends now?

What good friends would that be?

smr wrote:How would you resolve this crisis. It's a EU problem right?

EU/USA/NATO are the main parties behind the crisis.

Easy way to resolve it? Tell the Ukrainian facists to bugger off and stop supporting them would be a good start.

And federalise Ukraine, as that was what the so called "separatists" demanded already over 15 years ago. The Kiev regime has abused most of the country almost from start so it´s either federalisation or allowing indepence for the dissenting parts that are the realistic choices.

smr wrote:War is coming, I hope your Country is prepared to fight.

After having had a conservative government for the last 7 years?
Incompetent idiots, all they care about is lowering taxes.

Fortunately, if needed there are ways around the mess they´ve created.

smr wrote:Who is the big bad wolf or should I say Bear? Are you willing to fight?

I have no reason to expect a war with Russia, sorry to burst your bubble.

smr wrote:Remember the Americans are a fascist police state to the rest of the world?

Yes, isn´t it amazing how the son of the US vice president all of a sudden found himself as the bigwig of the largest energy company of Ukraine. What a coincidence.

Daryl wrote:So every citizen of our English speaking country is wrong, and you are right because you have read it in a few dictionaries in Sweden.

I´m a translator, if i need to check something i do so at the source, UK publishers of dictionaries. And there is a network of/for translators specifically to deal with uncertainties and the like.

Daryl wrote:I wouldn't presume to lecture you on how Swedish is spoken or written, so show the same courtesy to us.

Are you educated as a linguist?
Are you a translator?
Are you a proofreader?

This has nothing to do with courtesy or lack of it.

Noone else in this thread has shown themselves to have any greater understanding of the English language, why should i go along with something i know is wrong?

Daryl wrote:To the last sentence - bullshit. If everyone else in your Company is marching left-right, left-right; and you alone are marching right-left try explaining to the Warrant Officer that you know that you are right & all the others are wrong.

That does not affect who is wrong.

Daryl wrote:Incidentally I just checked in my newish Collins Australian Dictionary (couple of kg weight), and it says "referring to the inhabitants of the USA"

Well then i´m sad that the error is apparently becoming even more common and accepted.



#####

Zakharra wrote:and language programs say

Language programs, spellcheckers etc are hideous abominations that should be dragged into an alley and shot, repeatedly.

Back when there was a USSR, Soviets was a commonly used and accepted short name of the USSR.

No, "Soviet/s" was an acceptable way of defining something of or from USSR. But that has another background that differs from USA. You did not use "Soviet" to refer to the nation as a whole.

Words change, names change and failure to keep up with or to accept it, is a failure on your part. You're just coming off as being unusually stubborn resisting the tides of the world here.

Things change yes, that does not mean that something changes from wrong to right until someone with the power to do so states that such a change has happened.

As there is still no official change stated by anyone who has a clear right to define the proper use of English, the previously stated usage remains.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... untry.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Names ... Dictionary

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... q=American

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=America


Yes indeed, noone but me is saying aaanything about it. Oh noes!


It´s you folks who are not properly, informed.

Your biggest complaint about the United States of American and its citizens is that you feel that it and they dictate what is correct and incorrect to the rest of the world. That's exactly what you're doing RIGHT NOW.

The Oxford English Dictionary and the Merriam-Webster Dictionary define American as "Relating to or characteristic of the United States or its inhabitants" and "a person born, raised, or living in the U.S." respectively. Those are the primary dictionaries for British English and American English respectively.

The other thing you don't seem to understand is that there is not a definite authority of English, unlike French for example. English is one of the most adoptive and changing languages. It has absorbed words for tens if not hundreds of other languages and different geographic areas have absorbed different words. For example in the Northwestern US Native American words have been integrated (mostly as names for places). One of the give aways that someone hasn't spent much time in the Northwest is how they pronounce place names like Yachats, Willamette, Siuslaw, and Coquille.

Tenshinai wrote:Things change yes, that does not mean that something changes from wrong to right until someone with the power to do so states that such a change has happened.

As there is still no official change stated by anyone who has a clear right to define the proper use of English, the previously stated usage remains.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... untry.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Names ... Dictionary

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... q=American

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=America


Yes indeed, noone but me is saying aaanything about it. Oh noes!


It´s you folks who are not properly, informed.

You didn´t even notice that i already linked to the Oxford dictionary, exact same adress?

How perceptive of you...



And you simply ignore that that page also includes:
1.1Relating to the continents of America

1.1A native or inhabitant of any of the countries of North, South, or Central America.

And what does the Merriam-Webster dictionary REALLY say, if we do not exclude something, like you seem to have done?


: a person born, raised, or living in the U.S.

: a person born, raised, or living in North America or South America


Full Definition of AMERICAN
1
: an American Indian of North America or South America
2
: a native or inhabitant of North America or South America
3
: a citizen of the United States
4
: american english


American
adjective

: of or relating to the U.S. or its citizens

: of or relating to North America, South America, or the people who live there

Your biggest complaint about the United States of American and its citizens is that you feel that it and they dictate what is correct and incorrect to the rest of the world. That's exactly what you're doing RIGHT NOW.

Right... So the fact that you try to use links to claim my error, which just happens to clearly show that as far as they go, i am correct, what does that say about you then?

I mean seriously, don´t you even look at links you post yourself?

And what i´m "doing" is having studied your language a whole lot more than you and most other native speakers, have done.

I´m not telling you how your language should be used. I´m telling how your own authorities say your language should be used.

I got tired of reading your arrogance.

Most words have multiple definitions. In both sources the first (aka primary) definition is someone from the US.

100 years ago you would have had a point about the word American. But English has changed in the last hundred years, American has now come to primarily mean people from the US.

Your primary claim to being correct is that you've done professional translation. Professionals screw up all the time and it looks like you did too.

Tenshinai wrote:You didn´t even notice that i already linked to the Oxford dictionary, exact same adress?

How perceptive of you...



And you simply ignore that that page also includes:
1.1Relating to the continents of America

1.1A native or inhabitant of any of the countries of North, South, or Central America.

And what does the Merriam-Webster dictionary REALLY say, if we do not exclude something, like you seem to have done?


: a person born, raised, or living in the U.S.

: a person born, raised, or living in North America or South America


Full Definition of AMERICAN
1
: an American Indian of North America or South America
2
: a native or inhabitant of North America or South America
3
: a citizen of the United States
4
: american english


American
adjective

: of or relating to the U.S. or its citizens

: of or relating to North America, South America, or the people who live there

Your biggest complaint about the United States of American and its citizens is that you feel that it and they dictate what is correct and incorrect to the rest of the world. That's exactly what you're doing RIGHT NOW.

Right... So the fact that you try to use links to claim my error, which just happens to clearly show that as far as they go, i am correct, what does that say about you then?

I mean seriously, don´t you even look at links you post yourself?

And what i´m "doing" is having studied your language a whole lot more than you and most other native speakers, have done.

I´m not telling you how your language should be used. I´m telling how your own authorities say your language should be used.

Tenshinai wrote:You didn´t even notice that i already linked to the Oxford dictionary, exact same adress?

How perceptive of you...



And you simply ignore that that page also includes:
1.1Relating to the continents of America

1.1A native or inhabitant of any of the countries of North, South, or Central America.

And what does the Merriam-Webster dictionary REALLY say, if we do not exclude something, like you seem to have done?


: a person born, raised, or living in the U.S.

: a person born, raised, or living in North America or South America


Full Definition of AMERICAN
1
: an American Indian of North America or South America
2
: a native or inhabitant of North America or South America
3
: a citizen of the United States
4
: american english


American
adjective

: of or relating to the U.S. or its citizens

: of or relating to North America, South America, or the people who live there

Your biggest complaint about the United States of American and its citizens is that you feel that it and they dictate what is correct and incorrect to the rest of the world. That's exactly what you're doing RIGHT NOW.

Right... So the fact that you try to use links to claim my error, which just happens to clearly show that as far as they go, i am correct, what does that say about you then?

I mean seriously, don´t you even look at links you post yourself?

And what i´m "doing" is having studied your language a whole lot more than you and most other native speakers, have done.

I´m not telling you how your language should be used. I´m telling how your own authorities say your language should be used.

But you're saying that those same sources, which do identify America and American as someone from the USA is incorrect. You're flat out saying that America and American do not and cannot identify as a US citizen. CAse in point, from you earlier:
That´s the whole point you´re missing. "american" isn´t the NAME or NATIONALITY.


It´s commonly used and accepted as by default referring to people from USA, but that isn´t what it specifically MEANS.


If i did a professional translation based merely on common usage, i would probably never get another job.

Heck, if i did it according to what is accepted online, since the arrival of internet, i wouldn´t get paid at all, because then quality would be sucktastic.

Not my fault that so many English speakers are unable to speak(or more commonly, write) their own language properly.


That's just in the last few replies of yours. As others have pointed out, America and American, used to describe a citizen of the USA IS an accurate description. We are using the language properly. Yet you've been consistent in saying we are not. For whatever reason you've been deliberately applying your own narrow view of what is acceptable and what isn't. How can you say America and American as a description of US citizens isn't accurate when there are sources, the Webster's and Oxford dictionaries, that include the description I and others have been saying IN their description and usege of the words?

Common usage rules.

Decimation used to mean loss of one in ten, now it is taken as total destruction. The king of the time described St Pauls Cathedral as awful, meaning being full of awe, now it means horrible.

Whether American is common usage or not as referring to a citizen of the USA may not seem important, but it is important to the 100s of millions including journalists and authors who know they are correct in using it in that context.

The absolute indicator defining the difference in our mind set is your saying "That does not affect who is wrong.". To me that reeks of the "Rules are Rules" mentality that I loathe. To most thinkers rules are meant to be examined and tested to verify them. If wrong they should then be changed, and if possible disobeyed in the meantime.

Are you really safe at home?

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/07/19/shocking-home-break-caught-camera