Iam sick of wankers on this site who see a new post and are like “oh crap its been up like 2 minutes and i MUST post a comment EVERY DAMN TIME. my people need me ! hey this lame posting is lame ha ha wait thats funny i must use”
@Bucket – ahhh, I’m always confusing Lamebook and the inside of Plato’s head =:3 Right, I’m a chick, I’ll do some filing, draw some punctuation-bunnies, sleep with a few of the guys on here and I’ll be right as rain.
I’ve always thought that American English isn’t called American because then it would have to include hundreds of Native American languages (along with Hawaiian). I’m all for this, BTW, as long as the Scrabble dictionary goes along.
Scrabble does need to be even more epic. But the Native American languages all have their own names anyway. Did they even call America America? Hmm. It’s just that English is one langauge, and American English is another. In fact, International English encompasses all but one English language, and that’s American…
you know what? Right, yes, it’s Lamebook, this is neither the time nor the place. I really have not done as much as I’d have liked today and getting myself lost in ponderings is not getting the job done. Sorry guys!
No, the native Americans did not us the name america for their home. America derives from Amerigo Vespucci, the spanish explorer. It is believed that America comes from the feminized latin version of his name.
Ahhhh, Matt is my hero. So many times I’ve wanted to comment like that on my “friend’s” status updates.. Now I just use my hand dandy snipping tool to get a screen shot – and even if Lamebook doesn’t post my entries at least I have an outlet for my FB frustrations
Oh and Toot you’ll be happy to know, I just sent out an order for my future spouse… I checked no preference on gender, I just had to get a sex partner over here stat. I was jealous of Pedantic and his European sex slave!
@ Rimau and Vabadus. The naming of america after Amerigo Vespucci is a myth. Firstly, his name was actually Alberigo and secondly, places don’t get named after someone’s first name. If it was named after him it would be called Vespuccia.
The most likely candidate is a man called Joseph Americk who funded a lot of the early expeditions to America.
Care to explain how I’m trolling just by disputing what you said? You made a statement, I disagreed and made a counterstatement. Your response, rather than giving a counterargument is to accuse me of trolling.
Vabadus: Now I feel like you’re just messing with me. Do you really not follow? She mistyped, it should have said CAR, she just cleaned out and waxed her car,..not body.
You’re fucking with me aren’t you?
First of all, I have (and not only me, many professional historians) have troubles believing American historians and their view on the discovery of America, like if descending from Europeans was something bad. Some of the tales, because they deserve no other name, are highly surrealistic and improbable. There are letters (from family and friends) adressing him as Amerigo prior his first trip to America. If you are wondering why the continent would be called America and not Ameriga, it’s very possible that it’s because he went there under Spanish command and he was adressed as Américo Vespucio.
Cristobal Colón (Christopher Columbus), be Italian, Catalan or whatever, also travelled under Spanish command. Colombia is named after him and if you are curious, the “n” is turned into a “m” because in Spanish language, before “b” and “p”, you can’t put a “n”, has to be “m”.
You came here talking about a different name, something without any kind of proof, not even a letter, a possible legacy by a witness, not even a really logical explanation, then saying that the naming of America for Américo it’s just a “myth” without any kind of backup. I suppose it’s a product of current American system, using those “tales” are facts or something.
I wonder if those books even talk about Juan Sebastián Elcano.
Oh my Jayne, blame my super dirty mind. For some reason I inmediatily linked it to all those Lamebook posts from people who get words automatically changed when posting from some phone (iphone?) and assumed that it had changed pussy to cat…
You still don’t address the fact that people (other than royalty) don’t get places named after their first name. Why should Vespucci be any different. By your logic Columbia should be called Christophia.
Actually vabadus. Fuck it. I don’t care. Keep vespucci if you want him. I don’t give a fuck. If your first response to people disagreeing with you is to sneer and call them a troll then you don’t have the intellectual capacity to be worth debating with.
American text don’t really go into this huge thing about Joseph Americk, instead they teach about Amerigo Vesupucci. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t mean that an entire country’s history books are full of myths and tall tales. The idea that American history books are full of nothing but tall tales and that all Americans are ignorant of history because their books are so improbable is itself the myth and stereotype. Just because the K-12 school system doesn’t go that deep into history doesn’t mean the history books themselves are bad. Any history major at American universities can attest to this. Why do you think American universities (where the true historians in the country learn) are so prestigious? Why do so many people from all over the world come to learn here? It’s because even though the general population has a more broken K-12 system, the universities people go to here are great. Respected historians here aren’t among the general population and go to universities.
Also, there is definitely NOT a tone that descending from Europeans is bad. Americans have trouble with the whole system of Monarchy, NOT European lineage. Anyone that would argue that the American society doesn’t favor those who are of European descent and doesn’t think are history books are actually quite Euro-centric is delusional. They don’t deserve to call themselves professional historians if they believe this because it is a well documented fact that this is simply not the case.
well i have some examples that contradit your statement. Georgia(the country, not the state) is name after St. George, The Hellenic Republic in Greece is maned after Hellen of Troy, El Salvador was named after Jesus (it literally means “the savior”), and many places are named after other saints as well. Granted, saints dont usually HAVE last names, and you are mostly right as far as COUNTRIES go, but there are MANY cities and places named after first names.
That comment was highly ironical. You brought some “facts” that fail to have any physical proof, that’s why I thought you were trolling. Now I presented you a solid argument and you refuse to argue.
The naming thing is not so important. Some other places from similar times were named after first name and not family name, not a big deal. Not just royalty, like Philipines comes from Felipe II of Spain.
If that’s the biggest proof you (and American historians) got then I kinda feel sorry.
why does it matter? i dont think it really matters…The united states of america was only named that because we werent creative enough to come with our own name so we stole from north and south americans. Thats why many N&S americans get mad when USA citizens call themselves “americans” because they’re technically “americans” too. If you want to argue about who NORTH and SOUTH americans are named after, talk to all the other “americans”
1) How would he provide physical proof over the internet?
2) It’s just a theory
3) Quit saying American historians! It’s just a theory a few people think may be true! It’s not in American textbooks. Americans textbooks talk about Amerigo Vespucci, as I said before. Get over your prejudices or you will NEVER have a good understanding of history.
I’m sorry if I’m mistaken about American education about Amerigo Vespucci, I have no troubles admiting my mistake, but this Alberigo thing is annoying, especially when presented as fact, or America-from-Amerigo as “myth”, without any possible explanation about it.
I just read about this Alberigo thing and both situations are impossible. If “Alberigo” renamed himself after Amerrique Mountains, then it doesn’t make much sense that Americk would have named the continent. It’s either one, the other or neither, but never both.
This tone thing I was talking is related to some other “theories” I have read and they felt ridiculous. They were all based on comments made by people centuries ago, without any kind of proof, evidence or even a logical attempt to representate any. This Alberigo one is a very good example of this.
Don’t forget that, even if in “popular culture” America is USA, technically America is the entire continent and many Americans, especifically from South America, refuse their European ascenday, even if in countries like Uruguay or Argentina they are 90% Europeans. Some take it better than others.
No, people from North American are North Americans. People from South America are South Americans. The two regions are completely distinct from each other in every possible way and are even two different continents. Anyone who gets mad at Americans for calling themselves as Americans when the name derives from the actual country name is an idiot. That’s would be a person who lives in Texas getting mad they can’t call themselves a South American. Because they live in the south of the country known as America. Sorry, but the continental name is North/South America, not America. The US is the only place that is just America, so we have every right to call ourselves right. They don’t have the same legroom. And if we weren’t here they would probably be arguing over what an American even is since the two places are so different because they are TWO DIFFERENT CONTINENTS!
First you call me “idiot”, then you fail at understanding what I meant with physical proof. I’m not asking people to hand me a copy of a letter, I’m talking about some past historians talking about random things and failing to prove it somehow. There are letters adressed to Amerigo, but there isn’t a single document, not a letter, a document from a church, nothing with Alberigo. How does a guy in XIX century come up with this Alberigo thing? That’s what I’m talking about. Without any proof of it, it’s non-sense. It’s not a gossip that has carried for centuries, like some other things, it’s a 400 years gap thing with no solid proof, yet here it’s being presented as FACT, not as theory, as FACT by Pedanticoldgit.
Can you see why I don’t like this?
This American textbook thing it’s not just from there but some other things I read years ago, but it’s also true that textbooks are highly manipulated from the upper spheres. This happens in USA, Spain and probably any country with a similar education system. Hiding information, adding some theories as facts, etc.
North America and South America are two different continents. I don’t care about the stupid little isthmus, Asia and Africa are joined by one too but no one would claim they are the same continent. Also, Europe is connected to Asia but that is still a separate continent. There is definitely a very distinct cultural, regional, and physical gap between North and South America. They are together known as the Americas, not America. Only the US should be known as America because we are the only ones that named our country as such. Disregarding the S, the history, the continental separation, the languages, etc all just so you can have something to argue with USA Americans is ridiculous. What would you have us call our selves? United States-ians? Please.
Depending the education you have received, America is one big continent or there are two continents, South and North America. I have been educated, and it’s quite common in latin countries that is taught as one big continent, composed of North America, Central America and South America, but it’s still one big continent.
Asians, Europeans, Africans, Oceanics (?), Americans and…Antartics…
I KNOW that this is being taught in different ways, while you don’t but now you rushed presenting it as a fact, that America doesn’t exist, it’s either North or South.
no the US in not “America” its the “United States of America” either way we were very uncreative in naming our country.And we didnt name it after Amerigo Vespicci,we named it after the already named noth and south america
When theories are presented in US textbooks they are presented as theories. They usually start with sentences like “Some people believe X because Y,” or “This fact is under debate because…,” It’s not presented by fact. Also, I know that what you meant by physical proof. But this isn’t an electronic database, it’s an internet discussion on lamebook. He isn’t going to be able to present you with any of that proof because your access to different information systems is different. I mean, I suppose he could try to find some wikipedia article but that site is so unreliable it’s worse than nothing at all. You aren’t collaborating in real life so you’re just going to have to hear him out about it and trust that he read this information from some kind of source and did not just pull it out of his butt. Then if you don’t like the reasoning behind the theory, ignore it or if you’re interested research more. The fact that you are demanding someone do all this and going on and on about how terrible American history books is without doing the same kind of elaboration that you are demanding from ped is what made me call you a troll. Not that there is some kind of difference in opinion between me and you as far as the Americo thing is concerned.
Yes, the US is America. I agree it’s not that creative by present standards but as I said before the US is the only one that is America. North and South America are separate continents and together (since they are two different things) they would be called the Americas. Plural because there is more than one. We dropped the S and described our government type as our name. It was pretty creative for the time period. It was a different way of thinking, instead of naming it after a person or thing name it after all the people at once.
if you feel so strongly about it, why dont you get mad at the textbook authors instead of getting into a petty argument on lamebook.com? Its not a big deal. This is a pointless argument no matter who is right. And yes i will agree that taxtbooks are often wrong–for example–Napoleon was not short, he was quite average etc. but i dont really think anyone cares about whether america was names after Vespucci or Americko, they care more about wars and revolutions and the constitution and junk
What I defend has been PROVED. I don’t have to bring additional information except some other faulty theories, but those are besides the topic right now.
What he was bringing has not been PROVED or even explained logically.
Not proved by the USER, but by the guy who came up with it. Do you understand what I mean?
“Alberigo” vs “Amerigo”.
Since always, he has been called Amerigo. His grave says “Amerigo”, letters adressed to him, Amerigo. Some random documents from his youth before moving to Spain, Amerigo.
There are physical evidences that his name has always been Amerigo and history, thus, takes granted that his name is Amerigo. I defend that his name is Amerigo.
Pedanticoldgit said that, in fact, his name was Alberigo. The only source is a comment made by a Swiss-American (from USA!) historian a century ago. It seems he didn’t have any proof, evidence or anything.
Really, who has to prove something to whom? Which information is more reliable? Letters from youth, name on the grave, etc. or a comment by someone with a 400 years gap with the key person?
I’ll continue. Pedantic said that Amerigo was Alberigo, who, according to someone, renamed himself after discovering the Amerrique Mountains, which seems (seems to be same theory at least) to name America (the continent). Then, Pedantic also said that the continent was called after Americk.
I don’t think you are correct in saying that the U.S. was simply “not creative” in naming our country. In fact the name of the country describes the unity of a number of independent states rather than one single state. The US was formed more as a federation of individual governments. In fact, I don’t think it was until after the Civil War that the US was even referred to as in the singular, i.e. The United States is, used to be The United States are.
I know what Latin American countries teach but that is because they are focusing totally on their own self interests instead of fact. Even old word maps present the two continents as the Americas. Plural because they viewed them as separate. The fact of that matter is if you separate it strictly by geography then you must teach that there is no Europe, Asia, or Africa either because they are connected the same way. They don’t teach that. They only break up the Americas that way because they want to boost their own continents combined economic figures not because of anything grounded in fact. If you separate it by regions than they are absolutely two different things. Which is what a continent is supposed to be separated by and which is why Australia is considered a continent, then they are two different continents. It’s been that way since discovery maps named them “The Americas” a long time ago. I didn’t invent that word, the people who originally started using that phrase did.
Candidcamera, my argument was with Pedanticoldgit, not with American historians or anyone else.
Pedanticoldgit presented as fact some information that has no solid base behind it, especially the Alberigo thing.
At first I thought he was trolling me with someone else (who confused Portugal and Italy), that’s why I reacted that way. Then I just decided to argue normally when it seemed that he was not trolling, just presenting BASELESS information as fact. Not baseless only because he didn’t defend it when I called it out, but baseless because there is nothing that shows that Amerigo was called Alberigo except something that someone said a century ago.
I have to go now anyways. Again, the hot issue thing was this Alberigo thing.
Yeah, you’re right though I digress about the two continents thing now. I’ve said my piece and I won’t comment anymore. It just really ticks me off because my professor lowered my grade on a paper from an A to an F because I used the phrase America to describe the United States. I was able to get the grade changed but it still ticks me off.
I was just trying to say that the reason for the name behind the United States is that it isn’t the federal government that was the most important. The importance was placed on the individual states – and if you look at the states’ names that is really what should be judged. The United States as a country I don’t think was meant to have a single identity – it’s importance only came from the power that was given to it by the states. So in reality, it makes perfect sense to have it named the United States because it describes what they were trying to accomplish.
meh, I’m Latina so I don’t really care about the controversy behind it. Latino(a) is a positive phrase to Americans who use that phrase. I still disagree strongly with Italy, France, Portugal and Spain then too. I don’t know their reasoning behind it but it’s still as elitist as saying Europe is it’s own continent but North and South America are not. There are huge differences between the two.
There’s a reason your professor did that Aries. THINK.
by your logic of USA and Americans:
I’m from South Africa; seeing as it has the word ‘Africa’ in it it, I should hog it and refer to myself as African, and god (with a small ‘g’) forbid if anyone else on the continent call themselves African.
You can’t just throw the word ‘troll’ around anytime you see fit.
If someone is smarter than you, or black, or a douchebag, homo, pedantic, or an old git etc, this does not automatically make them a troll. To be continued after I spell check…
The official name is ‘The United States of America.’ This was intended to reflect the fact that the nation was a federation of separate states (which at the time was basically equivalent to ‘nation,’ hence Hegel’s ‘nation-state’) with a great deal of reciprocal agreement between them, sort of like the EU of today. The ‘of America’ to denote that these states were all part of the American continent. After a while people decided that South America, Mexico, and Canada didn’t matter so they just started calling the US ‘America.’