NationStates Jolt Archive

The commonwealth war thread led me to curious thoughts about:

Which wrong usage about geographical terms irks you the most???

Feel free to add your own.

I will mention that my own pet peeve is Georgia, because many (especially on Internet) assumes first that it is state of USA first. I visited this beautiful country last Spring and often in discussions with people about countries visited, when i mention Georgia, first answer is: oh, you didn't tell that you visited also USA. Damn it, I didn't, we were talking about countries not USA states. It is annoying.

Once, I met a nice guy from Costa Rica, who was very annoyed when I used term Americans describing inhabitants of USA. He intensively disliked USA (for political/personal/nationalistic reasons) and while he considers himself American as inhabitant of America, he wouldn't like that term associated with USA and correct term for USian would be Yank.

I want to know more problematic geographical problems! :)

I hate when people on the other side of the pond refer to Canadians as Americans. Ew! We're NOT Americans. We're a distinct nation with our own unique heritage and being next door to America does not make us the goddamn 51st state.

I hate when people on the other side of the pond refer to Canadians as Americans. Ew! We're NOT Americans. We're a distinct nation with our own unique heritage and being next door to America does not make us the goddamn 51st state.

You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile. :D

I hate when people on the other side of the pond refer to Canadians as Americans. Ew! We're NOT Americans. We're a distinct nation with our own unique heritage and being next door to America does not make us the goddamn 51st state.
Yeah, but with Harper, you may as well be.:p

I don't like it when people (in England and abroad) refer to the entire UK as England. Well, I can forgive foreigners (even if they need to be corrected) but when I hear Englishmen and women doing it I boil inside. Bloody arrogance...

As a Scot, I hate it when people assume that England = the UK. England is only one of 4 countries within the union of the United Kingdom.
I think the Waterboys say it best in their song "Islandman"

"Of my body England is the spine
the backbone and the trunk
My shoulders span the mighty Tyne
London sprawls across my rump
Cornwall my crooked ancient leg
Wales two hands held apart
Scotland is my dreaming head
Ireland is my heart"

Yeah, but with Harper, you may as well be.:p

I don't like it when people (in England and abroad) refer to the entire UK as England. Well, I can forgive foreigners (even if they need to be corrected) but when I hear Englishmen and women doing it I boil inside. Bloody arrogance...

He has a bloody goddamn minority government. Surely you Brits understand what that means. It means he can't act like a damn authoritarian like little Bushy in the south.

As for your complaint, can you clarify the difference. I usually refer to the entire UK as the UK, but I've also seen Britain as an option.

I generally use "America" when speaking to another American and some variation of "the States" when speaking to non-americans. My way of being polite to the furriners.:p

Lets see:
1. I user Native American or First Nations (thanx to a trip into Canada a few years ago) instead of Indian. Indians are persons from India.

2.Never had any problem with the two Georgias. Sadly most American are not even aware that there is a nation called Georgia, and most would probably assume it was named after our State.

3. The UK refers to a nation, while England or Great Britian refer to a part of that Union.

Disclaimer: I have a better than american average knowledge of world geography. See, collecting coins can be educational.:)

He has a bloody goddamn minority government. Surely you Brits understand what that means. It means he can't act like a damn authoritarian like little Bushy in the south.

As for your complaint, can you clarify the difference. I usually refer to the entire UK as the UK, but I've also seen Britain as an option.

United Kingdom = Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) + Northern Ireland

Britain ( minus the "Great") tends to be used as an alternative for the UK

The United Kingdom refers to England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (A soveriegn state, not a nation.

Britain (or Great Britain) Refers to England, Scotland and Wales.

The British Isles refers to all the Islands lying immediately west of France (including the whole of Ireland).

He has a bloody goddamn minority government. Surely you Brits understand what that means. It means he can't act like a damn authoritarian like little Bushy in the south.
We don't seem to have minority governments these days, but we know what they are. Doesn't stop him from being a Conservative prat though.

As for your complaint, can you clarify the difference. I usually refer to the entire UK as the UK, but I've also seen Britain as an option.
Britain's fine, (British sounds better than UKish anyway) it's just refering to the whole country as England that gets me, even if I've lost by nice Scottish accent now. The only people that mght get pissed off are the Northern Irish Catholics, but nobody really cares.

As a Scot, I hate it when people assume that England = the UK. England is only one of 4 countries within the union of the United Kingdom.
I think the Waterboys say it best in their song "Islandman"

"Of my body England is the spine
the backbone and the trunk
My shoulders span the mighty Tyne
London sprawls across my rump
Cornwall my crooked ancient leg
Wales two hands held apart
Scotland is my dreaming head
Ireland is my heart"

Nice little ditty, but what does it say about London?

I know Wales is a country with the United Kingdom but isn't the official name of the United Kingdom; The United Kingdom of England Scotland and Northern Ireland? No mention of Wales the reasoning behind it is that Wales is not a Kingdom but rather a Principality and has for a very long time been a part of "England" as England did conquer it a long time ago, unlike Scotland, where the King James VI of Scotland became King James of England in 1603 which became official with the Act of the Union in 1707. It also explains why Wales is not represented on the Flag of the United Kingdom, which comprises of the flags of England (St Georges Cross), Scotland (St Andrews Cross) and (now Northern) Ireland (St Patrick's Cross).

*Awaits to be gutted alive and head to be placed on a pike on the border of Wales by Welsh nationalists*

Nice little ditty, but what does it say about London?

I know Wales is a country with the United Kingdom but isn't the official name of the United Kingdom; The United Kingdom of England Scotland and Northern Ireland? No mention of Wales *

It's the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

I think that the British Isles should be called something like; The Celtic Islands, the Hibernian Islands. Individually the countries should be called;

Scotland - New Ireland (the Scots were originally an Irish tribe)
England - Celtica (it was stolen by the Anglo-saxons)
Wales - Celtica (they were shunted there by the Anglo Saxons)
Ireland - Of course should remain as Ireland.

I think that the British Isles should be called something like; The Celtic Islands, the Hibernian Islands. Individually the countries should be called;

Scotland - New Ireland (the Scots were originally an Irish tribe)
England - Celtica (it was stolen by the Anglo-saxons)
Wales - Celtica (they were shunted there by the Anglo Saxons)
Ireland - Of course should remain as Ireland.
Which is hilarious, because the Anglo-Saxons outnumber the Celts about 5 to 1.

The commonwealth war thread led me to curious thoughts about:

Which wrong usage about geographical terms irks you the most???

Feel free to add your own.

I will mention that my own pet peeve is Georgia, because many (especially on Internet) assumes first that it is state of USA first. I visited this beautiful country last Spring and often in discussions with people about countries visited, when i mention Georgia, first answer is: oh, you didn't tell that you visited also USA. Damn it, I didn't, we were talking about countries not USA states. It is annoying.

Once, I met a nice guy from Costa Rica, who was very annoyed when I used term Americans describing inhabitants of USA. He intensively disliked USA (for political/personal/nationalistic reasons) and while he considers himself American as inhabitant of America, he wouldn't like that term associated with USA and correct term for USian would be Yank.

I want to know more problematic geographical problems! :)

I hate when some people still think that Spain is part of Africa. Unbelievable but true.

It's the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

OK sure, but still Wales was invaded by England and taken possession of so doesn't that mean that Wales is really apart of England rather than a separate country. Hence why the heir to the throne since they took possession being know as the Prince of Wales

I hate when some people still think that Spain is part of Africa. Unbelievable but true.
:eek:

I hate when some people still think that Spain is part of Africa. Unbelievable but true.

Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot - over.

UK vs. England

really Who cares ? If someone from there has an issue with it I will accommodate them, but in common speech I find many UK citizens using the term interchangeably.

USA citizen vs. American

Us citizens like to be called Americans. American is the terminology we use for ourselves kind of pointless to correct people on the name for themselves don't you think? I would also avoid the term Yank or Yankee to say it to an American who is from the South is treated as an insult on honor, expect a response similar to calling a black person the Nword.

Georgia vs. Georgia

The state is more likely to be visited then the country so you should mention something that gives it away such as visiting the black sea.

Indians vs. Native Americans

A tricky one. The vast majority of native Americans I have met actually prefer the term Indian in common speech. even if it is caused by an error on Columbus's part the Native Americans seem to prefer Indian for spoken English.

World vs. Earth

thats really silly. sure world is an anthropocentric view but its not like animals and plants are offended by the usage of world. Earth really is only not interchangeable when your dealing with papers being written for science.

All of these really are fine and the person with the Pet Peeve needs to pull the stick out of their ass, and not be so anal so long as the meaning is understood in spoken english.

Now if someone is writing a paper then yes he needs to be more nitpicky.

It's the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern IrelandThat's true, the Great Britain part being of course England, Scotland and Wales.

Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot - over.

Nani ka?

:eek:

Yeah, I make the same face when I'm told that.:p

USA citizen vs. American

Us citizens like to be called Americans. American is the terminology we use for ourselves kind of pointless to correct people on the name for themselves don't you think? I would also avoid the term Yank or Yankee to say it to an American who is from the South is treated as an insult on honor, expect a response similar to calling a black person the Nword.

Perhaps we should stick with Seppos then ;)

OK sure, but still Wales was invaded by England and taken possession of so doesn't that mean that Wales is really apart of England rather than a separate country. Hence why the heir to the throne since they took possession being know as the Prince of Wales
Wales is now recognised as being separate to England, but shares the same legal system. Hence the term 'England and Wales'.

UK vs. England

really Who cares ? If someone from there has an issue with it I will accommodate them, but in common speech I find many UK citizens using the term interchangeably.
No, many English use it interchangeably. Incorrectly.

I hate when some people still think that Spain is part of Africa. Unbelievable but true.

It is so funny here. with the exchange students from Spain.
They will say I am Spanish, and the normal response from the American will be which country are you from? Or saying wow so your Latin American.

Which is hilarious, because the Anglo-Saxons outnumber the Celts about 5 to 1.
Actually, that's not quite true. It seems that genetically, there's probabnly more Celtic blood in the average Anglo saxon. This suggest that while the Anglo Saxons invadeed the Islands, they were still assimilated in the larger genetic pool. Unfortunately, the Anglo Saxons dominated the Islands politically and economically. That's why it'e known as England (Angle Land)

No, many English use it interchangeably. Incorrectly.

So the English are not UK citizens???

Actually, that's not quite true. It seems that genetically, there's probabnly more Celtic blood in the average Anglo saxon. This suggest that while the Anglo Saxons invadeed the Islands, they were still assimilated in the larger genetic pool. Unfortunately, the Anglo Saxons dominated the Islands politically and economically. That's why it'e known as England (Angle Land)

thats normal people have tended to choose the last name and identity of the conquers in order to advance in society.

So the English are not UK citizens???

And Peruvians aren't Americans?

It is so funny here. with the exchange students from Spain.
They will say I am Spanish, and the normal response from the American will be which country are you from? Or saying wow so your Latin American.

What truly suprises me is that some people stay rooted in ancient geography. I swear. At one point, during the Roman Empire, yes, Spain was considered to be part of Africa. But the Roman Empire fell a thousand years ago so...

I have a friend from Extremadura who always gets mistaken for an Argentinian. It's hilarious because our collective accents couldn't be any more different.:p

Wales is now recognised as being separate to England, but shares the same legal system. Hence the term 'England and Wales'.
Scotland has it's own Government, Wales & Northern Ireland have their own Governing Assemly, while England doesn't have anything similar. As a Scot, I find this is unfair to England.

And Peruvians aren't Americans?

It's funny that you bring that up because, as far as I'm concerned, American should be anyone that comes from the Americas, extending from Greenland, Canada and the US all the way to the Patagonia. But it's curious because only people from the US use American as a gentilicium for themselves. I've always been intrigued by that.

No, many English use it interchangeably. Incorrectly. I agree, if you identified a Welsh, Scot or Irish Person as "English", they would be mightily offended.

And Peruvians aren't Americans?

no they arent. there is no political unit called america except the united states of america

but they are south americans in the same way that the english are europeans.

USA citizen vs. American

Us citizens like to be called Americans. American is the terminology we use for ourselves kind of pointless to correct people on the name for themselves don't you think? I would also avoid the term Yank or Yankee to say it to an American who is from the South is treated as an insult on honor, expect a response similar to calling a black person the Nword.

Georgia vs. Georgia

The state is more likely to be visited then the country so you should mention something that gives it away such as visiting the black sea.


World vs. Earth

thats really silly. sure world is an anthropocentric view but its not like animals and plants are offended by the usage of world. Earth really is only not interchangeable when your dealing with papers being written for science.

All of these really are fine and the person with the Pet Peeve needs to pull the stick out of their ass, and not be so anal so long as the meaning is understood in spoken english.



Well regarding terms of Yank and American, I see that Yanks have no problem with that. But as I told in my example citizens of other American countries may have problems with that. And it is not nice to offend people with your errors.


Georgia vs. Georgia it depends of community - in which more people will have visitew more one or another. For a trip to USA i need 6 hour flight, 1000$ ticket and a visa, for a ticket to Georgia i need just 3 hour flight and a hundred dollar ticket :).

And Earth vs. World is silly, because it is a joke option. And they are allowed to be silly. Right?

And regarding your last qouted sentence - problem is when these are not understood in common english, e.g., when speakers have different backgrounds or just knowledge: When I use word Georgia (without reference to the state of USA), I will mean the country. Person from USA using word Georgia (without other references) will mean the state. Difference is not in the common english, but in our backgrounds. Confusion regarding many those terms may be inevitable, but sometimes it can grow to be highly annoying (due to repetition, or nationalistic reasons).

It is so funny here. with the exchange students from Spain.
They will say I am Spanish, and the normal response from the American will be which country are you from? Or saying wow so your Latin American.

I have to admit living in Canada, when I meet someone who says they are French, I automatically assume they're from Quebec. It has happened once where the person turned out to be from France. Fortunately the guy wasn't offended.

no they arent. there is no political unit called america except the united states of america

but they are south americans in the same way that the english are europeans.

Yes, Peruvians are American, Ash. They come from the Americas (South America), therefore, American is a right way to refer to them too.

no they arent. there is no political unit called america except the united states of america

but they are south americans in the same way that the english are europeans.

I daresay it's not so much a question of political units, more of geographical correctness. There are a good few cases of goegraphy giving name to a group of people without there being anything like a political unit attached. Think of the Celts, think of the Corse, think of the Sorbes, think of the Quebecois...

Scotland has it's own Government, Wales & Northern Ireland have their own Governing Assemly, while England doesn't have anything similar. As a Scot, I find this is unfair to England.

Now that is a surprise coming from a Scot. I don't know about you but I also find it unfair the English MP's can't vote for issues that exclusively affect Scotland, but Scottish MP's can vote on issues exclusively affecting England

So the English are not UK citizens???

No, you have it the wrong way around because not all UK citizens are English.

Poor form Cabra West.

Poor form Cabra West.

:confused:

Now that is a surprise coming from a Scot. I don't know about you but I also find it unfair the English MP's can't vote for issues that exclusively affect Scotland, but Scottish MP's can vote on issues exclusively affecting England
That's not quite the whole story the "West Lothian Question" has its antithesis too. as an example, back in the 1980's a English Conservative dominated Government imposed the hated "Poll Tax" upon Scotland a year before they did in England. They used Scotland as the "Lab rat", which wasn't surprising as at the time there were less than 5 Conservative Members of Parliament in Scotland, after the "Poll Tax" there were none.

England has had 300 years of imposing English rule and influence upon Scotland. It wasn't a problem for England then, so why bleat about the "west Lothain Question" now?

Indians vs. Native Americans...that annoys me, Native Americans should be called Native Americans or Aboriginals instead of taking the word "Indian" from us.

It's funny that you bring that up because, as far as I'm concerned, American should be anyone that comes from the Americas, extending from Greenland, Canada and the US all the way to the Patagonia. But it's curious because only people from the US use American as a gentilicium for themselves. I've always been intrigued by that.

Now you see... this is what irritates me. Typical. How horribly misinformed.

No one but those in the USA are American. The rest are whatever their respected nationality or ethnicity is. ie: a Canadian is NOT under any stretch of the imagination an "American".

:confused:

The fact that you used sarcasm, rather then correcting him, he would never have learnt his error that way. I am sure you don't agree but you know what I don't really care, and I suppose neither do you.

ok... why not? they come from the America's - seems to make them American to me...

It's funny that you bring that up because, as far as I'm concerned, American should be anyone that comes from the Americas, extending from Greenland, Canada and the US all the way to the Patagonia. But it's curious because only people from the US use American as a gentilicium for themselves. I've always been intrigued by that.

True, though I don't see what is so intriguing about it. It's 'the United States of America' hence we are 'American'. We are the only country on this continent that has 'America' as its official name. Now that may makes us look like pretensious pricks...but I'm not complaining. American is far better sounding than Usian. If the Mexicans or Canadians have a problem with us calling dibs on American then they can take it up with the United States government. (Or the United Nations... I don't know how much help that would be though, might make it worse.)

Now you see... this is what irritates me. Typical. How horribly misinformed.

No one but those in the USA are American. The rest are whatever their respected nationality or ethnicity is. ie: a Canadian is NOT under any stretch of the imagination an "American".

Misinformed in what way? Yes, Canadians do not call themselves Americans, but Canada is in what is known as North America. Hence, they're American too, from a geographical perspective. Now, tell me, are you not in North America?

The fact that you used sarcasm, rather then correcting him, he would never have learnt his error that way. I am sure you don't agree but you know what I don't really care, and I suppose neither do you.

Meh, I prefer to let people correct themselves by making them pause and think. Doesn't always work, though.

True, though I don't see what is so intriguing about it. It's 'the United States of America' hence we are 'American'. We are the only country on this continent that has 'America' as its official name. Now that may makes us look like pretensious pricks...but I'm not complaining. American is far better sounding than Usian. If the Mexicans or Canadians have a problem with us calling dibs on American then they can take it up with the United States government.

What's curious is that no one else uses the gentilicium. Someone from Colombia is an American, a South American to that. And yet, they don't use American when they refer to themselves in a wider perspective.

I'm Spanish, but in a wider sense, I'm European. If you come from the Americas, why not use American to refer to yourself too?

Misinformed in what way? Yes, Canadians do not call themselves Americans, but Canada is in what is known as North America. Hence, they're American too, from a geographical perspective. Now, tell me, are you not in North America?

Yes, in NORTH America, but I'm not American. NORTH American would be closer, but without the "NORTH" part, it doesn't work. because Americans are Americans; they are not any other group of people in any part of North, Central or South America.

Saying NORTH American would be correct; calling anyone from this area 'American' would be like calling someone English because they're in the UK (see other parts in the thread). There is a big difference.

True, though I don't see what is so intriguing about it. It's 'the United States of America' hence we are 'American'. We are the only country on this continent that has 'America' as its official name. Now that may makes us look like pretensious pricks...but I'm not complaining. American is far better sounding than Usian. If the Mexicans or Canadians have a problem with us calling dibs on American then they can take it up with the United States government. (Or the United Nations... I don't know how much help that would be though, might make it worse.)

I have no problem with people from the USA calling themselves Americans. That's fine. My problem is people who lump Canadians under the same umbrella as Americans.

Once, I met a nice guy from Costa Rica, who was very annoyed when I used term Americans describing inhabitants of USA. He intensively disliked USA (for political/personal/nationalistic reasons) and while he considers himself American as inhabitant of America, he wouldn't like that term associated with USA and correct term for USian would be Yank.


In Italian it's very easy: "americano" means "from Northern or Central or Southern America", while "statunitense" means "from the USA".

"Yank" or "Yankee" would be proper just for the inhabitants of those US states who weren't CSA during the Civil War, afaik. Also, here in Italy is considered somewhat derogatory (like in "Yankee go home" slogans).

except... i was taught it as "The America's" not specifically north, south and central... And it was considered legitimate to call it as one continent - similar to Eurasia, giving Eurasia, Africa, Australia, Antarctica and America.

Yes, in NORTH America, but I'm not American. NORTH American would be closer, but without the "NORTH" part, it doesn't work. because Americans are Americans; they are not any other group of people in any part of North, Central or South America.

Saying NORTH American would be correct; calling anyone from this area 'American' would be like calling someone English because they're in the UK (see other parts in the thread). There is a big difference.

I'm referring to THE AMERICAS, and these are North, Central, South and the Caribbean. It is NOT the same as talking about someone, just by being in the UK is English (there are a lot of people from other ethnicities living there). I completely understand that.

Yes, in NORTH America, but I'm not American. NORTH American would be closer, but without the "NORTH" part, it doesn't work. because Americans are Americans; they are not any other group of people in any part of North, Central or South America.

Saying NORTH American would be correct; calling anyone from this area 'American' would be like calling someone English because they're in the UK (see other parts in the thread). There is a big difference.


Wikipedia disagrees with you. It says that world Americans are used both for inhabitants of USA and Americas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas#American

Holland vs. the Netherlands

Just like England is only a part of the UK, Holland is only a part of the Netherlands.

I think that the British Isles should be called something like; The Celtic Islands, the Hibernian Islands. Individually the countries should be called;

Scotland - New Ireland (the Scots were originally an Irish tribe)
England - Celtica (it was stolen by the Anglo-saxons)
Wales - Celtica (they were shunted there by the Anglo Saxons)
Ireland - Of course should remain as Ireland.

Celtica? What's wrong with Cymru?

Wikipedia disagrees with you. It says that world Americans are used both for inhabitants of USA and Americas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas#American

And this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas

It's funny that you bring that up because, as far as I'm concerned, American should be anyone that comes from the Americas, extending from Greenland, Canada and the US all the way to the Patagonia. But it's curious because only people from the US use American as a gentilicium for themselves. I've always been intrigued by that.


There is no arbiter of word correctness other than popular usage.

Therefore, if the inhabitants of a land generally refer to themselves as English, Americans, Peruvians, or People of the Cheese, that is what they are, live with it.

In Italian it's very easy: "americano" means "from Northern or Central or Southern America", while "statunitense" means "from the USA".


We have "étasunien" for "from the USA" in French, but most people use "américain" nonetheless.

French, Spanish and Italian all have a specific word for someone from the US, different to the word for someone from America in general. Paradoxically, the English language hasn't.

To reply to the thread, as a Brit of English and Welsh descent, I get annoyed when the French media continuously say "Angleterre" when what they actually mean is "Royaume-Uni". Do they think Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are in England, or what?

Celtica? What's wrong with Cymru?

Noswaith dda! Shw mae? Nid yw'r defnyddiwr 'ma yn medru'r Gymraeg...

There is no arbiter of word correctness other than popular usage.

Therefore, if the inhabitants of a land generally refer to themselves as English, Americans, Peruvians, or People of the Cheese, that is what they are, live with it.

I don't care whatsoever if someone from the US refers to him/herself as American, Usian or Heffer. It makes no difference to me. But I'm curious about the reason why others do not refer to themselves as Americans when they come from the Americas and neither you nor anyone else here will tell me not to ask the questions I want to ask. You don't feel like answering nor taking them into consideration, you don't have to. So live with it.

In Italian it's very easy: "americano" means "from Northern or Central or Southern America", while "statunitense" means "from the USA".

"Yank" or "Yankee" would be proper just for the inhabitants of those US states who weren't CSA during the Civil War, afaik. Also, here in Italy is considered somewhat derogatory (like in "Yankee go home" slogans).

It is quite easy in English too. We have the word American for people from any of the Americas, and burger-munching invasion monkey to describe people from the USA.

I don't care whatsoever if someone from the US refers to him/herself as American, Usian or Heffer. It makes no difference to me. But I'm curious about the reason why others do not refer to themselves as Americans when they come from the Americas and neither you nor anyone else here will tell me not to ask the questions I want to ask. You don't feel like answering nor taking them into consideration, you don't have to. So live with it.
Because, IMHO, they have other more proper and specific names to refer to themselves, e.g., "Colombian", "Canadian", "Argentinian", "Costa Rican", etc. People in the United States of America don't. "Staters"? "Uniteders"? "United Staters"? [BTW, there can be other "United States" out there too, whch makes the name non-specific.] So I deem it justifiable for them to use Americans as their gentilic.

And also, there seems to be no a collective "American" (continental-wide) sense of identity just like Europeans (continent-wide) do. America the continent has North America, Central America, and South America. Now, if a person from Paraguay would like to express a burst of love for the continent, it would most likely be "South American", not "American". Geographically speaking, "America" is not even a continent - it is two continents: North and South America.

Wikipedia disagrees with you. It says that world Americans are used both for inhabitants of USA and Americas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas#American

Wikipedia can kiss the darkest side of my ass. I don't care; it still irritates the crap out of me. Wikipedia is not an infallible source unless I'm citing it. :p

Because, IMHO, they have other more proper and specific names to refer to themselves, e.g., "Colombian", "Canadian", "Argentinian", "Costa Rican", etc. People in the United States of America don't. "Staters"? "Uniteders"? "United Staters"? So I deem it justifiable for them to use Americans as their gentilic.

I'm aware of that. There's also the United States of Mexico (Estados Unidos Mexicanos).

And also, there seems to be no a collective "American" (continental-wide) sense of identity just like Europeans (continent-wide) do. America the continent has North America, Central America, and South America. Now, [B]if a person from Paraguay would like to express a burst of love for the continent, it would most likely be "South American", not "American". Geographically speaking, "America" is not even a continent - it is two continents: North and South America.

But they're American too. Of course, don't get me wrong. I'm not contesting that people from the US call themselves Americans (as someone else posted, it is in their country name). But it has always been an oddity, at least to me, that no one else from the continent uses it to refer to themselves. I thank you for your explanation.

What truly suprises me is that some people stay rooted in ancient geography. I swear. At one point, during the Roman Empire, yes, Spain was considered to be part of Africa. But the Roman Empire fell a thousand years ago so...

What's your basis for this, exactly? In the Roman Empire, Spain was the region of Hispania, divided into the provinces of Tarraconensis, Baetica and Lusitania. Africa was divided into Mauretania and Numidia. The Romans were very much aware of the Atlantic Ocean and that Spain and Africa were not connected by land. I'm just curious where you've seen that Rome considered Spain to be part of Africa.

Once, I met a nice guy from Costa Rica, who was very annoyed when I used term Americans describing inhabitants of USA. He intensively disliked USA (for political/personal/nationalistic reasons) and while he considers himself American as inhabitant of America, he wouldn't like that term associated with USA and correct term for USian would be Yank.
I usually call it US citizenship.

What's your basis for this, exactly? In the Roman Empire, Spain was the region of Hispania, divided into the provinces of Tarraconensis, Baetica and Lusitania. Africa was divided into Mauretania and Numidia. The Romans were very much aware of the Atlantic Ocean and that Spain and Africa were not connected by land. I'm just curious where you've seen that Rome considered Spain to be part of Africa.

I'm talking about the Second Punic Wars. Hispania had a period of being Carthaginian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Punic_War). For reasons I can't understand, some people think (and I want to think that these people know squat about geography) consider Spain to be or that it was part of Africa. Also, this could be garnered from the proximity of Gilbraltar to Africa.

But, I don't remember stating that Rome considered Spain to be a part of Africa. If that was the impression I gave, I apologize.

Noswaith dda! Shw mae? Nid yw'r defnyddiwr 'ma yn medru'r Gymraeg...

Good Evening. Unfortunately, i don't know much Welsh (yet). All i know is a bit of grammar & a few words. Fortunately, there are a lot of resources on the web, but even they do not help me to completely translate your message...

True, though I don't see what is so intriguing about it. It's 'the United States of America' hence we are 'American'. We are the only country on this continent that has 'America' as its official name. Now that may makes us look like pretensious pricks...but I'm not complaining. American is far better sounding than Usian. If the Mexicans or Canadians have a problem with us calling dibs on American then they can take it up with the United States government. (Or the United Nations... I don't know how much help that would be though, might make it worse.)

On the contrary, I believe that people from the USA are showing a lesser degree of being pretentious than calling themselves USians would be. Generally, using a specific implies eminence over the general.

The British Isles refers to all the Islands lying immediately west of France (including the whole of Ireland).

THAT is MY biggest geographical pet peeve. The "British Isles" haven't existed as a single entity in almost 90 years, and referring to them as the "British Isles" would be like referring to the United States as "British America".

Many people here in Ireland take a lot of offence to being referred to as the British Isles. Even in official British documents relating to British-Irish relations nowadays the Archipelago is referred to as "these Isles".

I've always thought that 'USAian' sounds retarded, plus it looks like you've misspelled 'Asian' for some odd reason.

As for the whole 'American' debate, there's a reason that people think of the U.S. when they say 'American' and not some banana republic south of the equator.

Indians vs. Native Americans...that annoys me, Native Americans should be called Native Americans or Aboriginals instead of taking the word "Indian" from us.

did the people of what would become india refer to themselves as indians in 1500?

when the peoples living in the americas started being called indians, were the people of what would become india the only other people called indians?

THAT is MY biggest geographical pet peeve. The "British Isles" haven't existed as a single entity in almost 90 years, and referring to them as the "British Isles" would be like referring to the United States as "British America".

Many people here in Ireland take a lot of offence to being referred to as the British Isles. Even in official British documents relating to British-Irish relations nowadays the Archipelago is referred to as "these Isles".

As a political entity there has never been a "British Isles", it was "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland". British Isles is the correct geographical term.

I'm talking about the Second Punic Wars. Hispania had a period of being Carthaginian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Punic_War). For reasons I can't understand, some people think (and I want to think that these people know squat about geography) consider Spain to be or that it was part of Africa. Also, this could be garnered from the proximity of Gilbraltar to Africa.

But, I don't remember stating that Rome considered Spain to be a part of Africa. If that was the impression I gave, I apologize.

I find it hard to believe that there could be people out there intelligent enough to know that Hispania was once ruled by Carthage, yet simultaneously be dumb enough to believe that that equates to Spain being part of Africa.

I think you need to stop talking to morons, if this is the case.

The old England/UK thing. Naturally, non-English persons think of it as a pro-English bias, but the reality is that the government sees England as just "the part of Britain that isn't Wales, Scotland or Northen Ireland". They're not happy for it to have its own identity.

Ah, can't get away without mentioning this one, of course:

This country:
http://www.europeetravel.com/images/maps/holland-physical-large.gif
is called The Netherlands, all you dumbasses out there, Holland is only a part of it.

/rant :D

Washington vs. Washington.
I grew up in the state, and went to school on the east coast. Whenever I said "washington" I HAD to add "state" or it was automatically assumed I meant the city. There are more than ten times as many people who live in the state than in the city, so it always irked me.
That and people who add the "r" sound to "washington" and pronounce Oregon "Or-eh-gone." Sorry, those are just pet peeves.

Once, I met a nice guy from Costa Rica, who was very annoyed when I used term Americans describing inhabitants of USA. He intensively disliked USA (for political/personal/nationalistic reasons) and while he considers himself American as inhabitant of America, he wouldn't like that term associated with USA and correct term for USian would be Yank.

Same thing here. I am a spanish/venezuelan who consider herself american. I describe myself in my native language as "americana", a more direct translation to american. Here in Venezuela, we call citizens of the United States "Estadounidenses", a loose term more likely translated to "unitedstater" than to "american", but somehow "americans", tend to get offended at this, and even better, here in the forums they claim that noone else call themselves "americans". (I don't intensively dislike the US).

Actually, that's not quite true. It seems that genetically, there's probabnly more Celtic blood in the average Anglo saxon. This suggest that while the Anglo Saxons invadeed the Islands, they were still assimilated in the larger genetic pool. Unfortunately, the Anglo Saxons dominated the Islands politically and economically. That's why it'e known as England (Angle Land)
Yeah, but most people don't consider themselves celtic, and don't partake in celtic culture and language.

So the English are not UK citizens???
Yes. All English are UK citizens, but not all UK citizens are English.

Scotland has it's own Government, Wales & Northern Ireland have their own Governing Assemly, while England doesn't have anything similar. As a Scot, I find this is unfair to England.
That's a separate issue. England and Wales still form one administrative legal unit, despite the existance of the Welsh Assembly.

Calling people 'Asian' only if they are exclusively from East Asia.
And that people don't realize that the Middle East is part of Asia.

Now you see... this is what irritates me. Typical. How horribly misinformed.

No one but those in the USA are American. The rest are whatever their respected nationality or ethnicity is. ie: a Canadian is NOT under any stretch of the imagination an "American".

Your forefathers were the misinformed ones when they picked your country's name

What's curious is that no one else uses the gentilicium. Someone from Colombia is an American, a South American to that. And yet, they don't use American when they refer to themselves in a wider perspective.

I'm Spanish, but in a wider sense, I'm European. If you come from the Americas, why not use American to refer to yourself too?

What? Of course people use it, at least abroad Laitn America, when speaking about the entire continental population, in a broader sense. Congrats, you have been lied to.

Wikipedia can kiss the darkest side of my ass. I don't care; it still irritates the crap out of me. Wikipedia is not an infallible source unless I'm citing it. :p

Typical idiotic "american" attitude.

GRINGO: "Noone else call themselves American"

"But we do"

"And we do"

"And we also do"

"Count us in"

GRINGO: "As I said, noone call themselves American. What was that noise?"


As for the whole 'American' debate, there's a reason that people think of the U.S. when they say 'American' and not some banana republic south of the equator.

Yeah, they remember those stupid tourists from last summer...

The unconscious arrogance in assuming the English is equivalent to British whereas Welash, Scottish and Irish are distinct from it does grate.

And that people don't realize that the Middle East is part of Asia.

Which, of course, depends on your actual definition of "the Middle East", as it may also include parts of Africa and Europe.

I hate when some people still think that Spain is part of Africa. Unbelievable but true.
Who the hell does that...?

The unconscious arrogance in assuming the English is equivalent to British whereas Welash, Scottish and Irish are distinct from it does grate.
I'd concur, but from north of the border.

The old England/UK thing. Naturally, non-English persons think of it as a pro-English bias, but the reality is that the government sees England as just "the part of Britain that isn't Wales, Scotland or Northen Ireland". They're not happy for it to have its own identity.

That's because, after roundly abusing the notion for 40 years and running scared from the slightest whiff of patriotism beyond supporting a team, we're now supposed to rally about the Union Jack and celebrate being "British". Quite how this amorphous notion, never particularly relevant, is to be resurrected and reconciled to a multifarious society is beyond me.

I find it hard to believe that there could be people out there intelligent enough to know that Hispania was once ruled by Carthage, yet simultaneously be dumb enough to believe that that equates to Spain being part of Africa.

I think you need to stop talking to morons, if this is the case.

I don't talk to morons, excuse me. I avoid them like the plague, they are far too many for my liking. But I've been told that Spain is part of Africa, oddly and stupidly enough.

Quite how this amorphous notion, never particularly relevant, is to be resurrected and reconciled to a multifarious society is beyond me.
Citizenship tests and Brown staring dourly at us all.

*nods*

I'd concur, but from north of the border.

I imagine most would. The shaven headed, tatooed, England shirt wearing fuckwits who do see England as defining Britain are an embarressment.

Who the hell does that...?

Stupid people, that's who.

Citizenship tests and Brown staring dourly at us all.

*nods*

I can't wait to see an Eton and Oxford educated Bullingdon club member worth several million pounds extolling the compelling merits of Britishness. I can just imagine how the Irish, Welsh, Scottish and north will take to it.

I imagine most would. The shaven headed, tatooed, England shirt wearing fuckwits who do see England as defining Britain are an embarressment.
Quite.

I imagine its the same sort of embarresment many Scots felt after watching the debacle on the streets of Manchester a few nights back.

I can't wait to see an Eton and Oxford educated Bullingdon club member worth several million pounds extolling the compelling merits of Britishness. I can just imagine how the Irish, Welsh, Scottish and north will take to it.
With the drubbing the Tories have had in Scottish elections since Thatcher, combined with Salmond's 2010 referendum, it may just be possible that Cameron won't have much of Britain to make British.

Stupid people, that's who.
But... there's water between the two... never mind.

And Peruvians aren't Americans?

yes they are American. If the conversation requires that it be differentiated, I will switch to something like from the states or US citizen if i am writing a paper. but the whole point of spoken language is in general you do not have to be so formal.

ot in spoken english i will use the Spanish name for America for Latin American countries

But... there's water between the two... never mind.

Sure... but let it be know that I wasn't naming anyone in particular.:p

With the drubbing the Tories have had in Scottish elections since Thatcher, combined with Salmond's 2010 referendum, it may just be possible that Cameron won't have much of Britain to make British.


Not good. Britain has to stay together! I don't want to pay import taxes on Whisky!

Not good. Britain has to stay together! I don't want to pay import taxes on Whisky!
Well, there'll be Scottish referendum on independence in 2010, and if the Tories (who are pretty much despised in a Scotland still smarting from Thatcher's economic policies) get into power in Westminster, I don't think it's ahuge leap of the imagination to see Scots wanting to distance themselves from a Conservative-controlled government.

Well, there'll be Scottish referendum on independence in 2010, and if the Tories (who are pretty much despised in a Scotland still smarting from Thatcher's economic policies) get into power in Westminster, I don't think it's ahuge leap of the imagination to see Scots wanting to distance themselves from a Conservative-controlled government.

Of course, but the real concern is how that will affect Whisky prices in England.

It seems to me that 'American' has never developed as a description of the continent because the populations have never considered themselves as a homogeneous group in the way Europe has. The US and Canada are so large and diverse that to group them as 'North American' would be unnecessary; similarly in including Central and South American countries. The only group that seems acceptable in this way is 'Caribbean', but I don't know whether that is used by the people living/from there or not.

Quite.

I imagine its the same sort of embarresment many Scots felt after watching the debacle on the streets of Manchester a few nights back.

That was quite nasty actually. Especially the CCTV footage of a lone police officer being kicked on the floor; I'm ashamed to say this, but CCTV does have certain merits.

On the up side, at leats it will have strung higher still the nerves of the Russian police serving on wednesday. I suspect that might be debacle.

With the drubbing the Tories have had in Scottish elections since Thatcher, combined with Salmond's 2010 referendum, it may just be possible that Cameron won't have much of Britain to make British.

Meh. Partition might be no bad thing, and frankly, it would deprive Labour of more seats than the Conservatives.

What do you mean Indians vs. native Americans????????
If no-one has said it yet, they are BOTH wrong!!!!!
They are neither Indian or American! I really hate that one.
They are indeginous people... I can't remember the name they used for the land before Columbus helped to destroy the country, but it's something like 'Okun'.
Everyone who calls themselves 'American' is an immigrant. Illegal at that, in my opinion.
Grrr *gets off high horse*

me: "i'm from jersey."

idiot: "you don't sound american."

me: "i'm from jersey, not new jersey."

idiot: "you mean there's an old jersey??!" or "oh, in england?"

me: *smack*

Meh. Partition might be no bad thing, and frankly, it would deprive Labour of more seats than the Conservatives.
Yup, the Tories would be the dominant force in UK-without-Scotland politics for years to come. Moreover, Scotland would get an influx of ex-Westminster Scots, so we'd perhaps see the likes of Gordon Brown, Alistair Darling, Charlie Kennedy, and many more debating in Holyrood.

Of course, but the real concern is how that will affect Whisky prices in England.
Uisge beatha price goes up!

Yup, the Tories would be the dominant force in UK-without-Scotland politics for years to come. Moreover, Scotland would get an influx of ex-Westminster Scots, so we'd perhaps see the likes of Gordon Brown, Alistair Darling, Charlie Kennedy, and many more debating in Holyrood.


Uisge beatha price goes up!

You're welcome to them all.

is the united kingdom the only country that doesnt have a single name for its people?

You're welcome to them all.
I couldn't think of a prominent Scottish Tory MP.

Not that I would welcome the above MPs with open arms, but, as you say, partition might be no bad thing.

is the united kingdom the only country that doesnt have a single name for its people?
I doubt it, but the UK is such a strange hodge-podge of different people's, cultures and nations, while strong association along national lines (Scottish and English, especially) has become more popular in recent years.

I couldn't think of a prominent Scottish Tory MP.

Not that I would welcome the above MPs with open arms, but, as you say, partition might be no bad thing.

erm....no, I'm stumped too.

What? Of course people use it, at least abroad Laitn America, when speaking about the entire continental population, in a broader sense. Congrats, you have been lied to.

Yes, I´ve been lied to. But people from the US do get extremely touchy when you refer to someone other than them as an American. Which annoys me because I´m not contesting their right to refer to themselves as such.

What do you mean Indians vs. native Americans????????
If no-one has said it yet, they are BOTH wrong!!!!!
They are neither Indian or American! I really hate that one.
They are indeginous people... I can't remember the name they used for the land before Columbus helped to destroy the country, but it's something like 'Okun'.
Everyone who calls themselves 'American' is an immigrant. Illegal at that, in my opinion.
Grrr *gets off high horse*

pardon me but that is just silly.

there was no ONE word used for the americas. there were hundreds of indian nations/tribes/bands with hundreds of very different languages.

the most appropriate word for indians is the name of their nation--cherokee, navajo, iroquois, etc or that word in their own language.

lumping them together makes little sense. they werent one people 500 years ago and they arent one people now. as such the nonsensical term "indian" is as good as any.

USian is incorrect. The country is the United States of America. A person from there is an American.

Oh, and I hate it when people refer to my state as "Cali." That sounds fucking lame, why not just use the damn abbreviation: CA

Is it really so hard? It's a little thing, but that really fucking annoys me.

pardon me but that is just silly.

there was no ONE word used for the americas. there were hundreds of indian nations/tribes/bands with hundreds of very different languages.

the most appropriate word for indians is the name of their nation--cherokee, navajo, iroquois, etc or that word in their own language.

lumping them together makes little sense. they werent one people 500 years ago and they arent one people now. as such the nonsensical term "indian" is as good as any.

Canada's "First Nations" makes a bit more sense, since it implies that they were multiple nations, if you are going to lump all the tribes together. I agree that the most correct is obviously being specific and saying the specific name of their nation.

is the united kingdom the only country that doesnt have a single name for its people?

British is most applicable.

As a political entity there has never been a "British Isles", it was "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland". British Isles is the correct geographical term.


I know the British Isles has never existed as a political entity in name, but the UK of GB and Ireland back in the day covered the British Isles, however following the Irish War of Independence and the Anglo Irish Treaty in 1921 it has become INCREDIBLY politically incorrect to refer to Ireland as a part of the "British" Isles.

The term British Isles is an archaic term which is NOT the correct geographical term, and that is not just the case in Ireland. If it were, the UK Government would refer to these isles as the British Isles, but they do not anymore, indeed there is an ongoing debate at the moment as to a replacement term, i quite liked the ring to the Hiberno-British Archipelago myself.

So basically don't lecture me on what is the correct geographical term when you don't know you're facts and are contradicting the point of this thread. It's quite ignorant and a bigotted when someone refers to your nation which fought for its independence under a term which compromises said independence and implies that it is not fully sovereign, which is what the term "British Isles" does. British culture is not native to Ireland, it is native to Britain.

I know the British Isles has never existed as a political entity in name, but the UK of GB and Ireland back in the day covered the British Isles, however following the Irish War of Independence and the Anglo Irish Treaty in 1921 it has become INCREDIBLY politically incorrect to refer to Ireland as a part of the "British" Isles.

The term British Isles is an archaic term which is NOT the correct geographical term, and that is not just the case in Ireland. If it were, the UK Government would refer to these isles as the British Isles, but they do not anymore, indeed there is an ongoing debate at the moment as to a replacement term, i quite liked the ring to the Hiberno-British Archipelago myself.

So basically don't lecture me on what is the correct geographical term when you don't know you're facts and are contradicting the point of this thread. It's quite ignorant and a bigotted when someone refers to your nation which fought for its independence under a term which compromises said independence and implies that it is not fully sovereign, which is what the term "British Isles" does. British culture is not native to Ireland, it is native to Britain.

Geographically, the islands are still considered the "British Isles".

Incidentally, simply labelling something as "INCREDIBLY politically incorrect" does not qualify as refuting it. It is simple minded, unthinking genuflection to a vacuous modern concept at the essence of which isthe fraudulent notion that one has the right not to be insulted.

Geographically, the islands are still considered the "British Isles".
Not by the Irish.

Incidentally, simply labelling something as "INCREDIBLY politically incorrect" does not qualify as refuting it. It is simple minded, unthinking genuflection to a vacuous modern concept at the essence of which isthe fraudulent notion that one has the right not to be insulted.

In general this argument over the geographical name is a retarded one. And no one wins in a retarded shouting match, mmkay?

I know the British Isles has never existed as a political entity in name, but the UK of GB and Ireland back in the day covered the British Isles, however following the Irish War of Independence and the Anglo Irish Treaty in 1921 it has become INCREDIBLY politically incorrect to refer to Ireland as a part of the "British" Isles.

The term British Isles is an archaic term which is NOT the correct geographical term, and that is not just the case in Ireland. If it were, the UK Government would refer to these isles as the British Isles, but they do not anymore, indeed there is an ongoing debate at the moment as to a replacement term, i quite liked the ring to the Hiberno-British Archipelago myself.

So basically don't lecture me on what is the correct geographical term when you don't know you're facts and are contradicting the point of this thread. It's quite ignorant and a bigotted when someone refers to your nation which fought for its independence under a term which compromises said independence and implies that it is not fully sovereign, which is what the term "British Isles" does. British culture is not native to Ireland, it is native to Britain.

I find it so much easier, and this is just me, to refer to the British Isles as either England or the UK, or Great Britain (but I use the latter not too often). When I´m referring to Ireland or Scotland, I don´t include them in the overall UK reference and I just call those two countries by their respective names.

It's quite ignorant and a bigotted when someone refers to your nation which fought for its independence under a term which compromises said independence and implies that it is not fully sovereign, which is what the term "British Isles" does.
Does it really?

I mean, the term 'Australasia' doesn't mean that all islands are under the sovereignty of Australia, or the term 'Americas' doesn't mean that all countries in the continent are under the sovereignty of an imaginary country called America.

British culture is not native to Ireland, it is native to Britain.
It's debatable whether the UK has a culture at all.

Not by the Irish.



In general this argument over the geographical name is a retarded one. And no one wins in a retarded shouting match, mmkay?

erm...I really couldn't care less. Anybody of any intellectual capacity should be able to detatch geographical from political terminology. It really is not that difficult.

I hate the use of the word Yankee by southerners and those overseas. Those overseas because they have decided that it refers to all Americans, and southerners because they think it refers to all northerners.

Yankee is a term for New England (Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine). You may be able to sneak New York in too, but not really.

Quite.

I imagine its the same sort of embarresment many Scots felt after watching the debacle on the streets of Manchester a few nights back.

Yes it was rather terrible. But Manchester should learn something from it, Don't invite a bunch of crazy Scots into a Northern City to watch a game and then don't have the screen running.

Yes it was rather terrible. But Manchester should learn something from it, Don't invite a bunch of crazy Scots into a Northern City to watch a game and then don't have the screen running.

Really? So, the hooliganism and bestial behaviour evidenced on CCTV is not, in fact, the fault of Scottish hooligans, but the criminal negligence of Manchester Council?

Personally, I'd have had no problem, if they were advancing in police lines, driving an armed reposnse vehicle into them, or firing at them. Scum.

Does it really?

I mean, the term 'Australasia' doesn't mean that all islands are under the sovereignty of Australia, or the term 'Americas' doesn't mean that all countries in the continent are under the sovereignty of an imaginary country called America.

I hate the term Australasia! The name of the continent is Australia! The region is know as Oceania! People from New Zealand are not Australasian they are New Zealanders or Kiwis, Those from Indonesia are not Australasian they are Indonesians

I'm talking about the Second Punic Wars. Hispania had a period of being Carthaginian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Punic_War). For reasons I can't understand, some people think (and I want to think that these people know squat about geography) consider Spain to be or that it was part of Africa. Also, this could be garnered from the proximity of Gilbraltar to Africa.

Yes it could be, might people also think that it is part of Africa as the Moors had control of Spain for a while. Wouldn't your countrymen and other people know more on that topic rather than the Punic Wars? Especially as you have a lot of Muslim architecture in the south.

Yes it could be, might people also think that it is part of Africa as the Moors had control of Spain for a while. Wouldn't your countrymen and other people know more on that topic rather than the Punic Wars? Especially as you have a lot of Muslim architecture in the south.

Yeah, but I live in the North, and in the North, for some reason, people tend to make more reference to the Punic Wars than to the Moorish dominion because this stayed almost rooted in Southern Spain.

me: "i'm from jersey."

idiot: "you don't sound american."

me: "i'm from jersey, not new jersey."

idiot: "you mean there's an old jersey??!" or "oh, in england?"

me: *smack*

nothing wrong with that...in the US, jersey is perfectly legitimate short hand way to refer to new jersey

Before I say this, as a disclaimer, this comment isn't meant to flame Americans, and I recognise that most Americans wouldn't do this. Still, it's a humorous anecdote.

This thread reminds me of a biology teacher back in the day (well, about 6 years ago or so, when I was in secondary school), who told us in casual conversation that she had at one point gone to the USA to teach there. Apparently in one class she had been asked about where she came from, and had told them she came from the UK. This led to her having to explain to them that the UK is actually a country of its own, and that Europe is not one big state...

If anyone was wondering, no, I don't know which part of the USA she was in when that happened.

Edit: Saying that, though, I also remember a couple of years back there was a TV program here about putting a group of GCSE schoolkids through a 1950s state education. They had a geography class in it, and many of the children there couldn't even point to London on a map of the UK...

Edit: Saying that, though, I also remember a couple of years back there was a TV program here about putting a group of GCSE schoolkids through a 1950s state education. They had a geography class in it, and many of the children there couldn't even point to London on a map of the UK...

I saw that show, it really showed how poor and easy the education system has become, all of the kids were top of their class, but after taking the exams at the end of the year all of them failed at least one topic and they all finshed about average

I saw that show, it really showed how poor and easy the education system has become, all of the kids were top of their class, but after taking the exams at the end of the year all of them failed at least one topic and they all finshed about average

They weren't all top of their class as I recall. I think quite a few of them scored C grades. But yeah, very disappointing. Myself, I really only know maps because I too have a fascination for them.