Talk:American (word)

message: While pointing out the origin of the 'controversy' in misapplication of foreign (particularly Spanish) usage to English, the article still has several flaws aside from the general need for cleanup and formatting. First (and less importantly) yanqui and gringo are not simple synonyms for norteamericanos (and, I'm just curious here, do Canadian Hispanophones get in such a huff over that usage?) but are pejoratives, albeit sometimes used lovingly or jokingly. -LlywelynII (talk) 23:41, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a consistent or absolute way of saying something is pejorative or not? To most latins I know the terms yanque and gringo are not at all pejoratives.LtDoc (talk) 14:36, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding is that the term can be used in an affectionate way.  Even when used negatively, it doesn't rise to the level of a curse.  There are parts of the world where the term American is viewed very negatively due to political or other conflict.--MoebiusFlip (talk) 20:24, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: See Real Academia's gringo definition to realize that usage varies from country to country. HaŋaRoa (talk) 20:15, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Page needs some cleanup: Spanish terms

message: First, I have no idea why this should fall under the United Nations usage category.  Second, two of the sub-sections "Spain and Hispanic America" and "Portugal and Brazil" cite nothing relevant to the political and cultural views of the English word "American" which is what this page is about.  These two sections should be moved into a new category regarding American (word) in foreign languages.  Otherwise its acts on the assumption that American = Americano which these two sections refute as a false friend.--Extrabatteries (talk) 21:12, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is quite well answered in the last thread. As for the foreign-language usages, they fit perfectly as a subsection to this same "word-defining" article. Methinks. Salut, --IANVS (talk | cont) 21:20, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, and in word defining wouldn't these two sections fit better in the "US national in other languages" section?--Extrabatteries (talk) 21:30, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

text: No, because the usages of the word exceed the "US national" definition. Salut, --IANVS (talk | cont) 21:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly you can read the section Spain and Hispanic America and agree that it is only talking about the Spanish usage and not English usage, and that the Portugal and Brazil section talks about Portuguese usage of americano.  Both of these sections are talking about the US national definition and not a more broad definition.  How can it be argued that either of these sections fit into the Usage at the United Nations section better than the US national  in other languages section?  --Extrabatteries (talk) 21:47, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

text: This article probably needs a cleanup for the sake of the coherence of its organization. You are probably right. Salut, --IANVS (talk | cont) 22:09, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the Political and cultural views section 

message: Why was the reference to Richard Amerike removed?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcchat66 (talk • contribs) 04:58, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably because America comes from the Italian Amerigo Vespucci, not Amerike. 69.125.249.6 (talk) 19:05, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Richard Amerike 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on American (word). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060501220632/http://buscon.rae.es/ntlle/SrvltGUILoginNtlle to http://buscon.rae.es/ntlle/SrvltGUILoginNtlle
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070205081049/http://www.getcustoms.com/2004GTC/Articles/oag_11.html to http://www.getcustoms.com/2004GTC/Articles/oag_11.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:05, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on American (word). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150120193458/http://wortschatz.uni-leipzig.de/cgi-bin/wort_www.exe?site=1&Wort=US-Amerikaner to http://wortschatz.uni-leipzig.de/cgi-bin/wort_www.exe?site=1&Wort=US-Amerikaner
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:51, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I remember coming to this debate back in the 2000s as a native English speaker and being flummoxed to find out that non-native speakers were trying to redefine words in someone else's language, lol. They managed to cause much angst and wrangling for a long time, as the history for this page attests, but it's nice to know that, as is always the case in life, the troublemakers eventually tired and went away, and when they did, simple fact was able to prevail.
This page, in its current form in 2019, now strikes all the right notes. It acknowledges that this tempest in a teapot exists, while also being intellectually honest about the fact that, endogenously within the native-speaker community, THERE IS NO CONTROVERSY. It was only when non-natives tried to speak someone else's language in a culturally illiterate way that there was ever a problem to begin with.
This is the English wiki, and as such, it simply DOES NOT MATTER what people in other languages say or think. If it bothers you, feel free to go add the relevant info on those respective languages' wikis -- and leave this one alone! =P  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.61.13.126 (talk) 11:16, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Gratifying to see that, a decade on, common sense has prevailed

message: :This diff inserts two things that are flatly incorrect - the use of American is not a misappropriation - that idea doesn't appear in the cited reference, and even if it did such a fringe position would need to be attributed to whoever was arguing it rather than using Wikipedia's voice; and it's not incorrect to use American to refer to " to refer to people connected to the United States when intending a geographical meaning" - that isn't assert in the reference (the author does imply that other people might believe it and he's not interested in arguing with them, but he doesn't assert him, and again for such a fringe position it would need to be attributed to him if he held it, but he doesn't.  It's also the case that basically every linguist would assert English-language usage can't be right or wrong, merely more common/standard or less common/standard, so we probably can't ever call usage an error in this way with an authoritative voice.  this diff is also veering into original research-y territory (and is probably wrong to boot); in at least some contexts there is a widely used alternative (US as an adjective; it's use cases are somewhat limited, but US President and American President are both widely used, and are synonyms).  A few of the other changes might be plausible, but when you stick in wrong information and misuse sources to push a fringe POV, you should expect the whole edit to get reverted, rather than expect people to devote a lot of time to see if there's anything worth salvaging. WilyD 08:28, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rollback conflict, redux 

message: This is an article where posters from the USA have been going berserk. Even if in the USA a American denotes a person from the USA, is that the usage in all English speaking countries? Pointing to a sources that provides "Standard American English" is a bit absurd, because that denotes only part of the English speaking world and Wikipedia is an international Encyclopedia.
I do not find the definition of an American as a citizen of the USA as the only definition in for example the Britannica or Merriam-Webster. The Definition of American as being from the Americas, or South and North America, or simple America comes always before the indication of an USA citizen.
It seems to me that it is quite a bit of arrogance  behind claiming that an American denotes an citizen of the USA only.
One also has to look at the usage of American in different languages and countries and not only in the limited area of the USA.Jochum (talk) 06:01, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This is English Wikipedia, so it's written from the point of view of how words  are primarily used in the English language in all majority-English speaking countries, not just the USA. This article also mentions how other languages and cultures use the term "American", especially Latin America, which is where most of the objections to how the word is used come from. (I certainly don't go to Spanish Wikipedia and try to tell them what names they can call themselves in their own language, but there's certainly a lot of them doing so in English Wikipedia.) If you've read the article, then you should know all that already, so I'm really not sure why you're still going on about it. I guess words in your native language only have one meaning, which must be nice. It's certainly not that way in English! BilCat (talk) 06:39, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: OP just needs to review the sources in this article to have a basic understanding of the term. Time sink trying to explain any further. Moxy- 00:33, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

text: I agree. A good example is the term «Native American». It includes people from South America, Canada, and Central America, not just the USA. Verdlanco\talk 11:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  American denotes a person from America not a citizen of the United States of America.