So, essentially, “Dutch” or a cognate was a word in all Germanic languages referring to all Germanic people. Over time, the meaning of “Dutch” in English narrowed to refer to the … Hollanders (&c.).
And I suppose we could add to that a secondary meaning in American English for some Americans of German origin.
Yes, it’s not a GQ argument, and it’s also developed into a bit of a hijack. The discussion of what the UK is called, and especially how people feel about it, is rather offtrack with respect to the OP. Let’s focus on what people from the Netherlands are called. If you want to debate how people feel about various names used for the UK, Great Debates would be more appropriate.
I was quoting Tom Burnam in one of his Misinformation books… I confess to having no other evidence. But as a “Dutchman,” * Haben Sie die Deutschen gern?*
OK, I was wrong…I had concluded from contexts that you were of Dutch ancestry. As for the people of the Netherlands in general, it would seem reasonable to me that they would detest the Germans and the word “Dutch”… I guess there is more to it than that. Or maybe World War II has faded in their memories, perhaps…
Not so much anymore, I actually think a majority liked that they won the world cup… which was unthinkable 10/20 years ago. Sure, some people still live with the 2nd world was, but there really aren’t that many people left from that time.
In any case, being called Dutch will not be an issue… maybe if somebody thinks you’re actually German?
In response to the last two posts, I must back down… despite my Irish ancestry I do not possess a hatred of the English. I know how long ago the war ended.
It doesn’t take hatred to be annoyed by this kind of thing. Scotland, Wales, and Ireland aren’t considered to be “England” as a general matter, any more than New York is California. But the Dutch don’t necessarily mind bring labeled as “Holland” in certain situations. Fine. Strict parallelism isn’t mandatory.
I will still continue to say Queen of England, however.
Ignoring “British” for a moment, it is (?was- 1970s) official Government policy that “Britain” may be used to mean the whole of the UK. There is a thread from my early days here where there was tremendous disagreement because Google did not show it, but I had a Government book on British facts and statistics and the use of “Britain” for the UK was in the introduction.
Scotland has many local cricket grounds and IIRC about the same order of active cricketers per head than England! One year it was in the news (when Scottish Cricket was in its ascendency in the noughties) that there were more active cricketers per head in Scotland.
Scottish participation rate is about 0.5-1+ percent.
It is of course helped by the fact that no one plays soccer or rugby in Scotland so cricket has less competition
The best players tend to drift south rather than play for Scotland, but then many non-English/Welsh play for that team.
This has been done on this board many times. There is no Queen of England. Elizabeth the first was but that preceded Union. Since then there is no such person or style as Queen of England. There is a Queen of Canada, Australia, New Zealnd and about ten other countries, but no Queen of England or Queen of Scotland etc.
People referring to the Queen of England do so informally, but it is not an official designation.
To confuse matters further in Jersey and Guernsey the human being referred to as Queen Elizabeth II is the Duke of Normandy and as such is head of state.
It was not until I moved to Scotland that I realised that although I usually was very correct about referring to England and Scotland as different objects, I had a tendency to slip into anglocentrism using “English” as an adjective. This is difficult when asking what the “English” term for something or the way of doing something collides with “English” as a language, and used carelessly can annoy certain (?most) Scots.
I now self correct and use British when appropriate and English when appropriate.
And I’ll judge those who judge me for that. I don’t ever refer to Scots as English and I don’t refer to the entire U.K. as England. But England has a Queen and she’s it. “Queen of England” is a perfectly accurate description and given that her position is a straight-line successor to other queens of England, insisting otherwise in anything but formal, official contexts is pedantry. It’s the same with “chief justice of the United States” and “chief justice of the Supreme Court.” The former is the official former title, but it’s pedantry to always correct the latter because it’s literally true.
Once again, the topic of this thread is Holland/Netherlands, not Britain. This extended discussion of the ins and outs of the terminology for residents of the UK has developed into a hijack. If you want to pursue this discussion, please open a new thread in Great Debates.
