Why USA region is called USA?

[untok]

Yep nintendo regions to switch xaw america amd xaj other regions. Hate regions btw its more hassle to same product.

 

[FAST6191]

But English is not a new language at all, it comes from England, and American was how Europeans refered to the native people on America when they found the new continent, just how Asians are people from Asia, in the US they did not made up a new word, they are using an already existing one incorrectly.

Actually "Indian" was the word that got adopted for the natives. It still goes to this day. Old school ethnography was also a rather... odd subject so we might have to save that for another thread (I did post some photos from a very old book on the matter the other week actually).

Also ask someone from England (or the UK) what American means and they will say people and products from the USA. The distinction is fairly well observed for Canadian products and definitely for the people. Ask someone in the same what someone from Brazil has as a general regional thing and "South American" will come out, sometimes Mexico gets lumped in with that too. North American then referring to the US and Canada, possibly also Mexico depending upon things.
I also already covered Asian and just to blow the minds of the Americans (hah) in the audience then oriental is just fine as a term for a person from anywhere east of Bangladesh and not Russian in the UK.
Africa is a tricky one too that might take a while to unpack, especially if we mix in middle eastern.

To got a bit further. Places call themselves democratic despite being nothing of the sort. What do?

 

[MadMageKefka]

But English is not a new language at all, it comes from England, and American was how Europeans refered to the native people on America when they found the new continent, just how Asians are people from Asia, in the US they did not made up a new word, they are using an already existing one incorrectly.

I was making an example. If you wanna use English, I still dont understand. You would have every right to call yourselves earthlings, even if it is an already existing word...

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Actually "Indian" was the word that got adopted for the natives. It still goes to this day. Old school ethnography was also a rather... odd subject so we might have to save that for another thread (I did post some photos from a very old book on the matter the other week actually).

Also ask someone from England (or the UK) what American means and they will say people and products from the USA. The distinction is fairly well observed for Canadian products and definitely for the people. Ask someone in the same what someone from Brazil has as a general regional thing and "South American" will come out, sometimes Mexico gets lumped in with that too. North American then referring to the US and Canada, possibly also Mexico depending upon things.
I also already covered Asian and just to blow the minds of the Americans (hah) in the audience then oriental is just fine as a term for a person from anywhere east of Bangladesh and not Russian in the UK.
Africa is a tricky one too that might take a while to unpack, especially if we mix in middle eastern.

To got a bit further. Places call themselves democratic despite being nothing of the sort. What do?

Ummm... both Indian and Oriental are offensive in at least some areas. Indians was a name mistakenly given to native Americans because Columbus thought he had landed in India, iirc.

Oriental generally refers to an Asian object. To a lot of people, calling them oriental is calling them a thing. Food is oriental, not people.

 

[Chuardo]

I was making an example. If you wanna use English, I still dont understand. You would have every right to call yourselves earthlings, even if it is an already existing word...

You can if you want, but you can't make everyone else in the rest if the World get another term and just deal with it, that is why some people get pissed off when people from the US do not let other people refer to themselves by what they are imposing those mames in products and media seen everywhere, I don't care all that much personally, but it's just silly the term american as a citizen on the US.

 

[MadMageKefka]

You can if you want, but you can't make everyone else in the rest if the World get another term and just deal with it, that is why some people get pissed off when people from the US do not let other people refer to themselves by what they are imposing those mames in products and media seen everywhere, I don't care all that much personally, but it's just silly the term american as a citizen on the US.

Well... When you're basically the center of the world economy... you kinda can...

 

[FAST6191]

I was aware of that, though not before I put my foot in it on a couple of occasions and people had run through the logic before. As far as the UK goes though then both terms are in still in play and fine to use. It appears to be one of those divergences in language.

You can if you want, but you can't make everyone else in the rest if the World get another term and just deal with it, that is why some people get pissed off when people from the US do not let other people refer to themselves by what they are imposing those mames in products and media seen everywhere, I don't care all that much personally, but it's just silly the term american as a citizen on the US.

Make, no.
Most things in international politics generally have to be something like a consensus

Continuing to get real use out of CGP grey videos in this thread


Should it happen then we are fortunate that language is capable of having words with multiple meanings.

 

[MadMageKefka]

I was aware of that, though not before I put my foot in it on a couple of occasions and people had run through the logic before. As far as the UK goes though then both terms are in still in play and fine to use. It appears to be one of those divergences in language.

I am the farthest thing possible from a SJW, but even I feel that's not right. If a region / country / whatever decides that the N-word isn't offensive, that doesn't make it ok. Just because an area still uses outdated, offensive terms doesn't make it correct. Things get a little more touchy when talking about race, as opposed to continents.

 

[Chuardo]

Actually "Indian" was the word that got adopted for the natives. It still goes to this day. Old school ethnography was also a rather... odd subject so we might have to save that for another thread (I did post some photos from a very old book on the matter the other week actually).

Also ask someone from England (or the UK) what American means and they will say people and products from the USA. The distinction is fairly well observed for Canadian products and definitely for the people. Ask someone in the same what someone from Brazil has as a general regional thing and "South American" will come out, sometimes Mexico gets lumped in with that too. North American then referring to the US and Canada, possibly also Mexico depending upon things.
I also already covered Asian and just to blow the minds of the Americans (hah) in the audience then oriental is just fine as a term for a person from anywhere east of Bangladesh and not Russian in the UK.
Africa is a tricky one too that might take a while to unpack, especially if we mix in middle eastern.

To got a bit further. Places call themselves democratic despite being nothing of the sort. What do?

Well, Indians because he thought he landed there and because they look alike a little, maybe.

Here they teach us that America is one big Continent, that can be divided by language in Latin America and Anglo-saxon America, and North America/South América by region, and sometimes Central America.
Also, by an historic standpoint Europe and Asia are apart because of their story, but from a Geographic standpoint it's Eurasia.
I think every other country should also give the full picture how it depends on the context and not just a close minded view.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Well... When you're basically the center of the world economy... you kinda can...

But should you? Is that ok? To make decisions that make others unconfortable just because?

 

[FAST6191]

Surprisingly fast moving thread.

I am the farthest thing possible from a SJW, but even I feel that's not right. If a region / country / whatever decides that the N-word isn't offensive, that doesn't make it ok. Just because an area still uses outdated, offensive terms doesn't make it correct. Things get a little more touchy when talking about race, as opposed to continents.

Only if you let them. Also why is one outdated? To call it that presumes the changes being made are somehow right or correct where it may or may not be so. What if the historical context that made the word tricky varies between countries? While n**** is hardly a word for polite conversation in the UK it lacks an awful lot of the baggage associated with it in the US (the UK ending slavery rather before the US, and while ethnic issues were hardly absent a lot of what the US still has in living memory either never happened or was gone and fading fast long before that).
If we are talking more about demographics then treatment of natives in the US and Canada varies rather a lot, and the treatments of natives of New Zealand and Australia also varies a lot.

Similarly for the oriental thing I am aware of nowhere else that makes the object-person distinction/argument like that as far as English is concerned. Other languages... maybe a few specific instances and if said languages have gender then something there too.

Another example.
My grandma (UK born and bred) was rather upset with my grandad (US born and bred) when in the US when he said he was pissed off with the service of his bank to the lady behind the desk. In the UK it is a fairly strong invective where in the US it is apparently rather more mild. What goes here?

Well, Indians because he thought he landed there and because they look alike a little, maybe.

Here they teach us that America is one big Continent, that can be divided by language in Latin America and Anglo-saxon America, and North America/South América by region, and sometimes Central America.
Also, by an historic standpoint Europe and Asia are apart because of their story, but from a Geographic standpoint it's Eurasia.
I think every other country should also give the full picture how it deoends on the context and not just a close minded view.

I was aware of the historical reasoning, did not seem especially relevant to the point being made.

Equally Anglo-Saxon has a whole bunch of other meanings in Europe, and especially the UK. I would be here all night but as a start the Angles were one group of people, the Saxons another. Both from similar parts of northern Europe but distinct. At various times they variously invaded what is now the UK and mixed with some already there to create Anglo Saxons. It is then largely unique to the UK, and also long in the past by the time of colonialism.

"by an historic standpoint Europe and Asia are apart because of their story"
While I would agree history is often taught that way, and such a thing is not ideal from where I sit, that ignores much of what was done, known and such like before then. Wars, trading, plagues, migration of people... all well established for a long long time.

 

[MadMageKefka]

Surprisingly fast moving thread.

Only if you let them. Also why is one outdated? To call it that presumes the changes being made are somehow right or correct where it may or may not be so. What if the historical context that made the word tricky varies between countries? While n**** is hardly a word for polite conversation in the UK it lacks an awful lot of the baggage associated with it in the US (the UK ending slavery rather before the US, and while ethnic issues were hardly absent a lot of what the US still has in living memory either never happened or was gone and fading fast long before that).
If we are talking more about demographics then treatment of natives in the US and Canada varies rather a lot, and the treatments of natives of New Zealand and Australia also varies a lot.

Similarly for the oriental thing I am aware of nowhere else that makes the object-person distinction/argument like that as far as English is concerned. Other languages... maybe a few specific instances and if said languages have gender then something there too.

Another example.
My grandma (UK born and bred) was rather upset with my grandad (US born and bred) when in the US when he said he was pissed off with the service of his bank to the lady behind the desk. In the UK it is a fairly strong invective where in the US it is apparently rather more mild. What goes here?


I was aware of the historical reasoning, did not seem especially relevant to the point being made.

Equally Anglo-Saxon has a whole bunch of other meanings in Europe, and especially the UK. I would be here all night but as a start the Angles were one group of people, the Saxons another. Both from similar parts of northern Europe but distinct. At various times they variously invaded what is now the UK and mixed with some already there to create Anglo Saxons. It is then largely unique to the UK, and also long in the past by the time of colonialism.

"by an historic standpoint Europe and Asia are apart because of their story"
While I would agree history is often taught that way, and such a thing is not ideal from where I sit, that ignores much of what was done, known and such like before then. Wars, trading, plagues, migration of people... all well established for a long long time.

You can argue that using a word like n**** may be more acceptable in some areas, but you wouldn't say it online, for the entire world to view, right? Obviously this depends on the context. Some kid online saying n**** in voice isnt nearly as bad as posting "I met a n**** today" on twitter. The backlash would be immense on the 2nd example, even though the statement itself may not be intended to be malicious. Same for oriental. If you say it at home, it might be considered ok, but say it to the world and you're going to piss off a lot of people. I think that's proof in itself that the term is just unacceptable, regardless of location.

Its like saying something in private to someone. They may be ok with it, but by hiding it from the public in the first place, that shows its probably not something you want them to hear, implying its probably bad, even if the two of you don't feel that way. No one can or should be able to stop you from talking that way in private, but that doesnt make the term okay.

 

[FAST6191]

I would say oriental person to the world. I am a person from the UK, speaking in the UK, speaking the UK flavour of English where it is entirely acceptable. Were I doing some kind of international advertising campaign one gets to consider their words more carefully but that is a different matter entirely. Some might be wary of going up against the US English speaking world police on Twitter but eh really and I can not extend your example that far.

Go another way. What do you know of the term paki? Is your internal word alarm going off just like it might for n**** or oriental. If your logic about things being unacceptable everywhere works then it should be.

 

[MadMageKefka]

I would say oriental person to the world. I am a person from the UK, speaking in the UK, speaking the UK flavour of English where it is entirely acceptable. Were I doing some kind of international advertising campaign one gets to consider their words more carefully but that is a different matter entirely. Some might be wary of going up against the US English speaking world police on Twitter but eh really and I can not extend your example that far.

Go another way. What do you know of the term paki? Is your internal word alarm going off just like it might for n**** or oriental. If your logic about things being unacceptable everywhere works then it should be.

You mean like outdated, racist terms used here in the US like paki-mart? Yes. Look, I'm not going to change your mind clearly, nor do I feel I need to. Just, in my opinion, if a race takes offense to a word with valid reasoning, maybe it shouldnt be used. Honestly I'd like it better if no words were viewed that way, but that's not how the world works.

 

[nachuz]

Yep nintendo regions to switch xaw america amd xaj other regions. Hate regions btw its more hassle to same product.

no, nintendo call the usa region as "Americas"

 

[Chuardo]

Surprisingly fast moving thread.

Only if you let them. Also why is one outdated? To call it that presumes the changes being made are somehow right or correct where it may or may not be so. What if the historical context that made the word tricky varies between countries? While n**** is hardly a word for polite conversation in the UK it lacks an awful lot of the baggage associated with it in the US (the UK ending slavery rather before the US, and while ethnic issues were hardly absent a lot of what the US still has in living memory either never happened or was gone and fading fast long before that).
If we are talking more about demographics then treatment of natives in the US and Canada varies rather a lot, and the treatments of natives of New Zealand and Australia also varies a lot.

Similarly for the oriental thing I am aware of nowhere else that makes the object-person distinction/argument like that as far as English is concerned. Other languages... maybe a few specific instances and if said languages have gender then something there too.

Another example.
My grandma (UK born and bred) was rather upset with my grandad (US born and bred) when in the US when he said he was pissed off with the service of his bank to the lady behind the desk. In the UK it is a fairly strong invective where in the US it is apparently rather more mild. What goes here?


I was aware of the historical reasoning, did not seem especially relevant to the point being made.

Equally Anglo-Saxon has a whole bunch of other meanings in Europe, and especially the UK. I would be here all night but as a start the Angles were one group of people, the Saxons another. Both from similar parts of northern Europe but distinct. At various times they variously invaded what is now the UK and mixed with some already there to create Anglo Saxons. It is then largely unique to the UK, and also long in the past by the time of colonialism.

"by an historic standpoint Europe and Asia are apart because of their story"
While I would agree history is often taught that way, and such a thing is not ideal from where I sit, that ignores much of what was done, known and such like before then. Wars, trading, plagues, migration of people... all well established for a long long time.

It's Latin America when hoy talk about countries that hace a main language that derives from Latin, oficina there's Latin America how souls you call the rest, non Latin languages? Well countries that have a language that derives from Anglo Saxons that are only US and Canada are called that, it makes sense with what you explained and all, I don't get what you mean by saying that it was "long in the past by the time of colonialism", that is the point clearly as a counterpart to saying Latin, in Spain, France and Portuguese they were not speaking Latin by the time of colonialism too.

Also, Europe and Asia are divided mainly because of their culture and different lifestyles, also, the philosophers were different and their art, I don't get why you think that making a distinction about them could be wrong, if each continent is happy with their own traditions, legends, myths and all being remembered and distinguished that way.

 

[VMM]

You can think of it as the USA region because it contains USA, and USA is undoubtedly the most important country in it. Not that it's entirely comprised of USA.

Then why don't we call Europe by Germany, since it's the most important country in Europe.
See how stupid your logic sounds?

 

[jefffisher]

i'm thinking it's because there's a nintendo of america in USA, a nintendo of japan and a nintendo of europe. that made the three regions microsoft and sony just followed the region naming conventions.
there is no nintendo of mexico or sony of canada, and once things are a certain way changing them is hard and in most cases entirely pointless.

its like asking why australia considered eur region or why does japan and america take the same region blu ray discs and why is africa completely disregarded

 

[digipimp75]

What does this have to do with Switch hacking?

 

[SexiestManAlive]

What does this have to do with Switch hacking?

exactly what i was gonna say xD

 

[skawo]

Then why don't we call Europe by Germany, since it's the most important country in Europe.
See how stupid your logic sounds?

Germany is not necessarily the definitively most important country in Europe. There's UK, France, Switzerland, could make a case for Russia... many to consider.

And, you're an idiot. I explained exactly why it's called the "USA region". Whether you consider the justification valid or not doesn't matter in the fucking slightest, even if it was the dumbest reason ever.

 

[sarkwalvein]

Germany is not necessarily the definitively most important country in Europe. There's UK, France, Switzerland, could make a case for Russia... many to consider.

It is relevant to note that "most important" refers to how profitable for Nintendo said country might be.
One could argue, probably correctly, that Russia could nuke blast UK's ass out of existence while drinking it's afternoon tea, but in the other hand regarding profits for Nintendo I assure you the UK matters more than Russia.

With that in mind, probably for Nintendo the most important market is JAPAN, then USA, then far behind the many highly consumerist countries of the European Union (that is UK(brexit pending), Germany and France), and only then the rest of satellites, that are not relevant enough to grant their own region and are assigned to one of the others, probably to the one that better match their legal frame, as to avoid additional legal work.