But the fact that it has historically often been referred to as “America,” and that its inhabitants have never been referred to as anything but “Americans,” gives the name enough currency, I think.
Is there any history of referring to North and South America as simply “America” rather than “the Americas”?
One might make the argument for “America”, but the inhabitants of the country do have other terms (“yankee” and “gringo” come to mind). And I have heard a number of folks from Central and South America refer to themselves as “Americans”, meaning “inhabitant of the Americas”.
And is anyone else getting panty ads in this thread?
Yo. Two panty ads, and one for:
**Careers in Intelligence
State licensed degree programs in Protection, Intel & Cntr. Terrorism
www.cupim.org
**
Errr…
When England (which had digested Wales some centuries earlier) and Scotland joined in 1707 to form a single monarchial state occupying the whole of the island known to Geoffrey of Monmouth as Britannia Major, “United Kingdom of Great Britain” did seem rather obvious, seeing that it precisely and accurately described the new creation.
Yer man’s a real fecking gobshite…
Well, “gringo” is really only used by outsiders and often disparagingly. And I, for one, would never use “yankee” in reference to anyone but an American Northerner. 
I’ll amend my point, however, to say that inhabitants of the USA are, politely, almost called nothing but “Americans.”
Where I lived in Brazil, in any case, americano only seems to refer to people from the United States. I was referring mainly to English usage, however.
Well, I’m sure they were “the colonies” once upon a time 
I am not questioning the “currency” of the name, or rather the validity of the historic hubris of “United States Colonists” calling themselves “Americans”. Rather within the context of this thread, someone was trying to claim that Cecil was “Unamerican” for using the word “arse” and I was applying an equal if not lesser degree of semantic scrutiny to the OP for their initial statement.
But your scrutiny is not valid for reasons others have posted. To wit: ‘America’ is only ever used as a short form for the name ‘United States of America’, just like ‘Mexico’ is only ever used as a short form for the name ‘United States of Mexico’; the continents are individually always called ‘North America’ and ‘South America’ and collectively always called ‘the Americas’; finally, the working language of the SDMB is American English, in which both of the above statements are undeniably true.
oh, of course you are correct, but I just wanted to take advantage of any opportunity to point out the HUBRIS of the colonists taking the name America. Hubris I say!
That’s the vibe I usually get off of people who make that argument, or at least the ones who aren’t simply mistaken. There are people who are apparently not content with the rational reasons to call Americans arrogant and short-sighted: They have to invent reasons as well.
(Of course, the arrogance and short-sightedness of attributing human qualities to a nation-size population is simply stunning. Reification on that scale makes for better rhetoric than logic.)
Just search this very board, titles only, for “Americans”…
We’ve been through this too many times and it’s getting boring.
Mexicans, Brazilians, Canadians, etc… aren’t Americans.
Ask any of them, especially since Bush has been in office.
You mean Bestial Language Corruption, surely?
(If that’s a Freudian slip on my behalf, it’s one for the ages…)
Really? Because I thought you were pretending to be superior to everyone else by hijacking the thread on to a topic that had nothing to do with the OP and which you didn’t know as much about as you thought.
First of all, Perhaps I misunderstood the meaning of the term “Unamerican” but I had thought it is considered quite an insult to be called “Unamerican” if you are, in fact, a citizen of the United States of America.
Second, I never intended to imply that I was, in some way, “superior to everyone else”. Going through my statements I dont see how I did that, but I want to make it clear that I am certainly not.
Finally, The OP called Cecil “Unamerican”. I was merely pointing out my opinion that the term may consist of a wider range of constituents, which would include both terms “ass” and “arse”. Moreover, I reckon you would find many folks within the bounds of the United States of America who frequently use both terms. My opinion is, while quite possibly incorrect, clearly related to the OP statement.
All in good fun?
Well, real, when you start patronizingly explaining things that “ignorant people” aren’t aware of because of their “historical hubris”, you are going to risk acting superior. A word of advice - never assume on this board that you know more than everyone else.
I think they’re called the Nationals now.
lesson learned…also keep tongue firmly planted in cheek.