21–30 of 39 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The USAians are largely seemingly already convinced the name of their country starts with an A, those that live elsewhere generally have better geography chops, so you're correct - it's unlikely any minds will change.
It's possible for a name to refer to both a country and a continent (or two). Just as "New York" could mean the state or the city.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mandarin and Cantonese are distinct, mutually unintelligible languages that sound as different to each other as Spanish and French.
Cantonese is a language, yes, but mutual intelligibility and similarity to other languages is hardly relevant unless the languages are very similar indeed. For example, there are spoken varieties of English that are mutually unintelligible, while speakers of different Slavic languages are often capable of having a good conversation by speaking slowly and listening carefully. In practice the main criterion for being a…
Which? I have travelled to, worked in, or lived in multiple countries with English speaking populations (by which I mean some people speak English as a first language, though it may be a small minority) on five continents and never had a serious problem understanding people. Some slang and idiom and loan words, but thing much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The USAians are largely seemingly already convinced the name of their country starts with an A, those that live elsewhere generally have better geography chops, so you're correct - it's unlikely any minds will change.
It's possible for a name to refer to both a country and a continent (or two). Just as "New York" could mean the state or the city.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's possible for a name to refer to both a country and a continent (or two). Just as "New York" could mean the state or the city.
Are there any countries named after continents though? Aside from Australia?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cantonese is a language, yes, but mutual intelligibility and similarity to other languages is hardly relevant unless the languages are very similar indeed. For example, there are spoken varieties of English that are mutually unintelligible, while speakers of different Slavic languages are often capable of having a good conversation by speaking slowly and listening carefully. In practice the main criterion for being a…
> For example, there are spoken varieties of English that are mutually unintelligibl Which? I have travelled to, worked in, or lived in multiple countries with English speaking populations (by which I mean some people speak English as a first language, though it may be a small minority) on five continents and never had a serious problem understanding people. Some slang and idiom and loan words, but thing much.
When you say you "never had a serious problem understanding people", do you mean you could understand them when you overheard them speaking to each other? Because that, of course, is the real test of how intelligible their language is to you. They may well speak a bit differently when speaking to an outsider. Also, you may be particularly skillful at understanding spoken English. I feel I have got better at understanding British dialects as I got older and gained experience of them. I was terribly confused by some dialects as a child.
With compulsory education almost everyone today has some knowledge of a standard language besides whatever dialects they have learnt. If you want to find someone who only speaks dialect X of language Y you might have to look in places where Y is neither official nor widely taught, or among very old people who never went to school.
You know there are 34 countries in America other than the United States.
You are welcome to remind people of this, but don’t expect that you’ll change anyone’s habits on an English-speaking USA-based forum.
It’s like reminding someone they shouldn’t say “bicycle” but should instead say “fahrrad”.
You know there are 34 countries in America other than the United States.
In English that would be "the Americas". I am quite surprised no one is bothered by the fact that the name is that of a colonialist and slave trader (he personally took part is slave raiding).
If you asked a random person what Columbus discovered, what would they answer? Round here I think most people would say that Columbus discovered America. By landing in San Salvador and then Cuba.
By the way, I don't strongly object to people using "America" as an abbreviation for "The United States of America" in contexts in which it is obvious that a country is being referred to, and "American" is even less objectionable in an appropriate context. At the same time, "American" obviously doesn't mean "of or pertaining to the USA" if someone is talking about "American species of conifer" or "American dialects of Spanish" or "American tortilla recipes".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For example, there are spoken varieties of English that are mutually unintelligibl Which? I have travelled to, worked in, or lived in multiple countries with English speaking populations (by which I mean some people speak English as a first language, though it may be a small minority) on five continents and never had a serious problem understanding people. Some slang and idiom and loan words, but thing much.
I have personally been baffled by some Scottish and Indian speakers of English, particularly when I was younger and less experienced. And Singapore English is said to be particularly hard for someone with no previous experience. And I know of a case in which someone from London sat at a table with some in-laws who were speaking a traditional native dialect of southern England to each other and found they understand a…
I have heard Singaporeans, Indians and others speaking to each other and had no difficulty understanding them.
A problem I have come across in South Asia is people mixing languages. At that point are the speaking English? It can be quite disconcerting when someone changes language mid-conversation.
I have found Geordies and some Scots difficult to understand, but I think "mutually unintelligible" over stating it. There are reasons why Scots is sometimes classified as a different language. Other than that I have had difficulty with any form of British English.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In English that would be "the Americas". I am quite surprised no one is bothered by the fact that the name is that of a colonialist and slave trader (he personally took part is slave raiding).
Apart from The Economist, I don't know anyone who says "the Americas". If you asked a random person what Columbus discovered, what would they answer? Round here I think most people would say that Columbus discovered America. By landing in San Salvador and then Cuba. By the way, I don't strongly object to people using "America" as an abbreviation for "The United States of America" in contexts in which it is obvious th…
Do they actually know where he landed? I think that other than your Columbus example it would be very rare for people to say "America" to mean either or both continents.
Most people I know would say America for the US, North America, South America, or the Americas as appropriate. when referring to the continents.
Other than The Economist's usage, "The Americas" is used by other publications and books, its the name of a TV series, its the title of most wikipedia articles relating to the two continents.
It appears to be "open to uncertainties" but is the commoner usage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas#cite_note-oxfordc-3