Why do we add “ian” or “ite” to place names to signify the people that live there. I mean, I know we have to call them something, but why “ian” and “ite”. And are there any formal rules as to what should be the suffix to signify a resident thereof?
And what on earth do you call someone from Utah?
And really what on earth do you call someone from Dead Woman Crossing, WY; The Pas, MB (Canada); or, Climax, MI?
The Salt Lake Tribune, which seems to be as good a source as any to consult, uses Utahn. However, this handy page says “Utahan” is also acceptable.
Although I’ve only been an Indianan for a couple of years, I can safely say that most Indianians refer to themselves as “Hoosiers”. “Ohioans”, the group into which I was born, are more apt to use the “proper” name for themselves, although many call themselves “Buckeyes” regardless of their affiliation (or lack thereof) with The Ohio State University.
Not really. Steven Pinker, setting up an inductive argument about irregularity as a universal feature of human language, used the dramatic variation in residential nouns as his prime example:
Steven Pinker, Words and Rules: The Ingredients of Language 213 (1999). Arguably “someone from Massachusetts” would be a Massachusettensian, from “Massachusettensis,” or “man from Massachusetts,” a pseudonym used for a series of pro-British letters published in the Massachusetts Gazette in late 1774 and early 1775 by lawyer Daniel Leonard, to which John Adams replied in a different publication under the pseudonym “Novanglus.” The pseudonym was revived in 1788 by the author of Anti-Federalist Paper No. 49. (I have also seen Bay Stater used to refer to a resident of Massachusetts.)
There is actually an entire book on this topic: Labels for Locals: What to Call People from Abilene to Zimbabwe by Paul Dickson. The book explains how most names were derived. It is out of print, but you can usually find a copy at amazon or alibris. The book opens with an exhaustive essay about what you call these labels.