But, I prefer being called Canadian. Just so we're differentiated from residents of the USA. Not that we (or at least I) don't like you. Just that we like to think we different (probably because we aren't really...).
So, to get back to Steve's initial post, North Americans? Not a problem. Don't call us Americans, though. Because, even though everyone in this hemisphere is "American", the reality around the world is that if one says "American", one is referring to the USA. So, just so there's no ambiguity, Canadian works better.
But, really, it's not such a big deal for me. I've always said that culture runs along north/south lines. Vancouver is like LA. Lunenberg, Nova Scotia is like Gloucester, Mass. Calgary is like Dallas. Toronto is like Chicago. The prairies are the prairies, both north and south of the 49th parallel.
The exeption is Quebec and those parts of Canada that are francophone. Even then, Acadian Canada has ties to Cajun Louisiana - but that's a long and interesting story for another time.
cheers, frank
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: North Americans Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 15:11:04 -0800
Paul Stenquist wrote:
>
> It has nothing to do with Hubris. It's the name of the country: United States
> of America. or America for short. The continent is North America, and we're all
> North Americans.
Yes, the Canadians, the Mexicans and those of us from the U.S. of A., who are all North Americans. Right? How do we differentiate? Do any of the others in North America dispute the habit of calling those who live in the U.S. Americans? How about South America? Those folks are Americans, too. South Americans, yet. . . Americans is what we ALL are, isn't it?
So how can we in the U.S feel comfortable taking on the mantle of national identification as Americans, when the others who are ALSO Americans, all have their own regional name?
I don't know how eise to explain how I feel about it. You didn't like "hubris." What else shall it be called?
Or maybe no-one else feels the dichotomy as I do. I'll accept that.
keith
>
> Keith Whaley wrote:
>
> > As a US citizen, that has always bothered me.
> > To call those citizens of the U.S. of A. "Americans" seems to be great
> > hubris, especially when it's them saying it, and patently ignores the
> > fact that there are other Americans, both north and south of the Canal Zone.
> > I suppose it's like coke in lieu of Coca Cola. In spite of CC's lawyers,
> > common usage makes it acceptable, if not legal. . .
> > Nevertheless, the feeling remains.
> >
> > keith whaley
> >
> > Steve Desjardins wrote:
> > >
> > > I was looking through Shutterbug yesterday and noticed that 3 of the
> > > 6(?) photographers they were interviewing where referred to as "North
> > > Americans", not Americans or Canadians. I have noticed this elsewhere.
> > > Is this usage becoming common? From what I have seen, this does not
> > > seem to include Mexicans although this certainly spoils my sense of
> > > geography.
> > >
> > > I'm not complaining about anything, just curious. This is the only
> > > international group with which I can discuss such things. The UN won't
> > > return my Emails :-(
> > >
> > > Steven Desjardins
> > > Department of Chemistry
> > > Washington and Lee University
> > > Lexington, VA 24450
> > > (540) 458-8873
> > > FAX: (540) 458-8878
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
