…or British. And indicative of the problems in Northern Ireland. Unionists do not automatically say “British”, but most of them do.
Furthermore, I hope by “either” you weren’t referring to the people from the Republic as being “from the UK” - they’re most decidedly not, and fought a war not to be so.
Anyway, as our esteemed colleague says, “British” is the correct official nomenclature for the nationality, even though it is geographically incorrect WRT Northern Ireland.
Another thing I should mention - if you’re from Northern Ireland, your passport-by-government is a British one. Since a lot of Northern Irish nationalists don’t consider the British government to be the legitimate government of Northern Ireland, they baulk at getting one. And because until 1998 the Republic didn’t recognise the border (the now amended Article 2 of the Irish constitution), it would - and still does - issue Irish passports to anyone born anywhere on the island of Ireland who wants one.
British. “Briton” sounds weird to me, although the alternative, “British person”, is sort of awkward.
Hm, I wonder why “American” or “Canadian” can be either an adjective or noun, but “British” can only be an adjective. Now that I think on it, only nationalities or regionalities ending in “n” (ie, Italian, Scandanavian) function that way. Otherwise, we’re left with “British person” or “French person”.
Surely the decision to issue passports is a decision for a nation to make, on whatever grounds they choose? i.e. the decision by Ireland to issue passports to anyone born in Northern Ireland who wanted one wasn’t a direct result of the constitutional claim on the territory.
On the subject, what’s the history behind Aussies calling us ‘poms’.
I was told the other day that we originally called them poms, standing for Prisoner Of her majesties’ Service, and they for some reason now call us it.
It doesn’t sound too true to me, but I kind of like it anyway.
So…what’s the real reason? We like our apples, but that’s hardly something we’re known for.