why are you using "Anglo-Saxon" all the time?

Tiffany   Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:00 pm GMT
We (Americans, British, Canadians, Australians, Jamaicans, etc) are native English speakers that live in English-speaking countries. This avoids all potentially racist connotations. What is so hard about using words already in use? Why must we create a new one?
Kirk   Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:02 pm GMT
<<We (Americans, British, Canadians, Australians, Jamaicans, etc) are native English speakers that live in English-speaking countries. This avoids all potentially racist connotations. What is so hard about using words already in use? Why must we create a new one?>>

As is very often the case, I agree with Tiffany.
Benjamin   Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:25 pm GMT
« "Anglic", which is construted the same way that the word "Hispanic" and could be used the same way. »

Sounds good enough. If such a term were to be popularised, one would have to emphasise that it refers to people societies for whom English is the primary language, rather than to people of English descent. This way, places such as Barbados would still be included, even though most people who live there are black.

As for 'Anglosphere'... I'm afraid I usually associate that term with James C Bennett and his rather prejudiced articles which emphasise white majorities and seem to exclude Ireland.
Benjamin   Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:29 pm GMT
Having said that, I do feel that many would still see racial/ethnocentric connotations in the word 'Anglic'.

Yes, I agree with Tiffany — 'we' are native English speakers who live in English-speaking countries.
fab   Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:50 pm GMT
" Having said that, I do feel that many would still see racial/ethnocentric connotations in the word 'Anglic'. "

The problem, in my opinion doesn't stand in a semantic question but on the racial/ethnic conotation that people in anglic societies seem to associated systematically to any word describing a people. For What I saw in this forum since a few months, Anglic peoples seems to have huge difficulties to think of "latin", "celtic", "gaul", "germanic", "anglo",
"hispanic" or even "european" free of any "ethnic/racial" meanings that doesn't have nothing to see with them.

whatever we would invent some people would continue to want to see in it racial meanings centred on English people. The word we use should necessary have a radical based upon "english", while english language is the point of reference of english-speaking nations. Why is it so difficult to think that anglic could be only a linguistic/cultural term, and not a "racial" one based upon english people (by the way english people themselves are not one ethny/race but are the result of lot of mixs) ?
Benjamin   Thu Aug 17, 2006 1:10 am GMT
One problem though is that 'English', 'Anglic' (or whatever we want to call it) all imply 'England'. Here lies the difference between the 'Anglosphere' and the 'Francosphere' : France is the centre of the French-speaking world, and, I believe, is also the place where most native French speakers live. Both native and non-native speakers of French look towards France if they don't live there.

This is not the case for England. Even though England is the origin of 'Modern English', the United States, with its greater size, wealth and power, has become the centre of the English language. It is not always considered appropriate or desirable in all parts of the English-speaking world to claim eternal ties to England, and probably most people in England wouldn't expect them to either or even care. Indeed, I've come across quite a lot of Americans on the internet who will admit that they know almost nothing about England and that they don't read any British literature, watch any British films or listen to any British music or anything; they might speak the same language, but the other links aren't always there. In other words, the connection which the average Californian might feel to England is unlikely to be as great as the connection which the average Québecois might feel to France. And equally, I'm sure that most British people would definitely say that they feel greater connections towards Ireland, Canada, Australia and New Zealand than to the United States.

« by the way english people themselves are not one ethny/race but are the result of lot of mixs »

Yes, but a lot of people don't see it that way. There are a lot of debate about the ethnic origins of the English, and it isn't entirely clear. It is also important to remember that the concepts of being 'English' and being 'British' have rather different connotations in England. Many people would say that immigrants (from India etc.) can become 'British', but not 'English'. My passport and nationality is British; 'English' might be comparable to, say, 'Breton' or 'Alsatian' — there's no piece of paper.

Yes, it's racialist. But the German nationality law is even more racialist, in my opinion.
greg   Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:18 am GMT
Kirk :

« <<Alors, Greg, tu veux continuer à utiliser le terme « Anglo-Saxon » en anglais avec la même significance qu'en français, bien que tu saches parfaitement que cela n'a pas les mêmes connotations en anglais qu'en français ? (...) >>

Sometimes "Anglosphere" can be used for that broader meaning. While "Anglo-Saxon" makes me think of a historical group of Germanic tribes, "Anglosphere" makes me think of the aforementioned regions and nations when referencing certain common bonds in traditions in law, culture and language, (...) »


Das ist zwar eine gute konsesuelle Idee. Also bin ich ein unangeborener Englischsprechende aber kein Anglosphärer (und auch kein Angelsachse, natürlich)...
fab   Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:07 am GMT
" One problem though is that 'English', 'Anglic' (or whatever we want to call it) all imply 'England'. "

Yes, but the language that is spoken in USA, it may not please a lot of people on both sides of the atlantic is still called English and comes from England. It may not please American people, but the foundations of their country were made by England. English and Americans may both dislike each other and don't want to be assimilated together, from an outside point of you (I know quite well both countries) the common points are obvious.


" Even though England is the origin of 'Modern English', the United States, with its greater size, wealth and power, has become the centre of the English language. It is not always considered appropriate or desirable in all parts of the English-speaking world to claim eternal ties to England"

Since the english-speaking world continue to speak english they would have ties to england. The same way Argentina or Mexico have cultural ties to Spain, despite the obvious differences.



" a lot of Americans on the internet who will admit that they know almost nothing about England and that they don't read any British literature, watch any British films or listen to any British music or anything "

I know some french people who don't read french litterature either, who what only American movies and listen only US rap and RnB. The dominant culture is the American one, it is not surprising.



" they might speak the same language, but the other links aren't always there. "

No of course, being speaking the same language doesn't make two countries the exact reproduction of each other.



" In other words, the connection which the average Californian might feel to England is unlikely to be as great as the connection which the average Québecois might feel to France. "

The connection between Quebec and France is quite important. Most Quebecers know the main french singer, they listen to them at radio, they have a lot of french movies in Quebec television, at quebec shool they learn french writer (quebers also). When I was living in Quebec, it was really exiting because I had two contradictory feelings : one very exotic, to be living in a very north American environnement, very north American kind of city of house, and in the same time I listen french singer at radio in the malls, I understood what people said, I had a lot of common cultural references with locals, I could find a lot of french products in supermakets impossible to find behind the border, etc. And I could manage to do what I wanted to do without being stressed with linguistic barriers - I had a feeling to be at home in a very foreign land.



" And equally, I'm sure that most British people would definitely say that they feel greater connections towards Ireland, Canada, Australia and New Zealand than to the United States. "

I think so, those countries are in commonwealth, and are supposed to have greater ties to england than the countries who aren't in.




" Yes, but a lot of people don't see it that way. There are a lot of debate about the ethnic origins of the English, and it isn't entirely clear. "

It would be never clear, since no one people on earth have on unique precise origin, but are unified with common language and culture. DEspide the fact that english may think they are a "race", they are not an exception.



" immigrants can become 'British', but not 'English'. "

If they are Brtish people and live in the land of England, aren't they English ?



" My passport and nationality is British; 'English' might be comparable to, say, 'Breton' or 'Alsatian' — there's no piece of paper. "

In France, Breton, or Alsacian is not more an ethnic thing than being french. recently, an athlete "Mehdi Baala" (obviously with non alsacian origins!) has been described by all medias as "the Alsacian" because he is coming from Strasbourg. The same way, being Breton just means that you live in the region called Britanny.
Benjamin   Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:42 am GMT
« The connection between Quebec and France is quite important. »

Yes, exactly. However, it is not the same between Americans and British. Actually, it's often seen as a very one-way thing, whereby the US has is perceived to have a large influence over Britain, but Britain has practically no (modern) influence over the US.

Essentially, the 'average American' (if such a thing exists) probably knows very little about Britain on the whole. Even the well educated Americans whom I've come across on the internet (a lot of people) do not generally claim to know very much about the place, unless they have a very specific interest in it. This is, incidentally, the opposite of what a lot of British and other Europeans do, unfortunately.

« If they are Brtish people and live in the land of England, aren't they English ? »

They could be, but a lot of people don't see it that way. And actually, it was non-white British friends who first told me about this — they often see themselves as 'British', but not 'English'. There isn't much patriotism here anyway, so it isn't entirely important.

The comparison with Breton and Alsatian was intended to demonstrate that 'English' is not a nationality.
Sigma   Thu Aug 17, 2006 2:11 pm GMT
Il arrive que les francophones utilisent An <Anglo-Saxon> dans le sens de Fr <A(a)nglo-saxon(s)(ne)(nes)>, lequel possède, grosso modo, 2 significations :

1/ personne appartenant à la tribu germanique ayant envahi la Grande-Bretagne celtique

2/ personnne de langue maternelle anglaise qui vit dans une société où l'anglais est langue officielle ou dominante — par extension : qualifie les choses ou concepts se rapportant à cette société (« comptabilité anglo-saxonne », « droit anglo-saxon », « littérature anglo-saxonne » etc).

En Español es el mismo uso para el término "Anglo-Sajón", "Anglo-Sajona", "Anglo-Sajones":

1. personas pertenecientes a la tribu germanica que habitó la Gran Bretaña celtica.

2. Persona que tiene por lengua maternal el Inglés, que vive dentro de una sociedad donde la lengua Inglesa es oficial o dominante, por extensión califica las cosas o conceptos que se refieren a esta sociedad; literatura Anglo-Sajona, mentalidad Anglo-Sajona, derecho Anglo-Sajón, personas Anglo-Sajonas etc.
greg   Fri Aug 18, 2006 1:42 pm GMT
Tiffany : « I personally don't care what they want to use in French or Spanish, but don't call us Anglo-Saxons in English because that is just inaccurate. »

Pas si sûr...
Trouvé sur le net :

« Resilient consumption among *Anglo-Saxon economies* ─ in my view the most important pillar for the global economy today ─ is a bubble that mirrors the property bubble in these countries. »

« Household saving rates in many OECD countries have fallen sharply in recent years. *Anglo-Saxon countries*—America, Canada, Britain,
Australia and New Zealand—have the lowest rates of household saving. »

« Let there be no doubt about it. This war only exposes the bankruptcy of *Anglo-Saxon policy*, when 19th century methods of "bomb the natives, frighten and numb them by force", are being used to handle complicated 21st century problems of Islamic fundamentalism. »

« In these times of deregulation, privatization and the *Anglo-Saxon model* of wealth subsuming politics, Chavez' aims are regarded as revolutionary, even though the measures proposed are no different to those of the post-war Attlee government in Britain. Some of the oil-wealth is being spent to educate and heal the poor. »

« At Britain’s hour of need, the United States will stand shoulder to shoulder with her British allies, who are bloodied but unbowed. The terrorists’ fatal conceit is similar to that of the Kaiser, Hitler, and Stalin: underestimating the power and determination of the *Anglo-Saxon peoples*. This is a war that may last for decades but will ultimately be won by the two nations that stand at the forefront of defending freedom and liberty on the world stage. »

« *Anglo-Saxon economy* or *Anglo-Saxon capitalism* (so called because it is largely practiced in English speaking countries such as Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States) is a capitalist macroeconomic model in which levels of regulation and taxes are low, and the quality of state services and social indicators are weak. In addition, *Anglo-Saxon economies* generally are more 'liberal' and free-market oriented than other capitalist economies in the world. »

« The term Anglo-America or *Anglo-Saxon America* is used to describe those parts of the Americas in which English is the main language, or having significant historical, linguistic, and cultural links to England or the British Isles. Alternatively, Anglo-America is the American portion of the Anglosphere. »

« The Universal Convention duplicates to some extent the Berne Convention, but embodies the *Anglo-Saxon concept* of Copyright, as opposed to the Continental notions of a Right of Authorship. »
Uriel   Fri Aug 18, 2006 1:56 pm GMT
But greg, in real life, you can go years without hearing the term Anglo-Saxon -- except maybe at a Klan rally. It's just not the term that's in vogue for us. "English-speaking" is the term you hear us use most to describe ourselves -- more like the "anglophone" fab describes -- although, honestly, anglophone is one of those words that just comes off seeming like a snotty and pretentious way of saying .... English-speaking.

A bit like our discussion on the use of "artiste" in English. ;)
Kirk   Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:44 pm GMT
<<But greg, in real life, you can go years without hearing the term Anglo-Saxon -- except maybe at a Klan rally. It's just not the term that's in vogue for us. "English-speaking" is the term you hear us use most to describe ourselves -- more like the "anglophone" fab describes -- although, honestly, anglophone is one of those words that just comes off seeming like a snotty and pretentious way of saying .... English-speaking. >>

Yeah I don't use the word "Anglophone" unless I'm speaking/writing French. It doesn't sound natural in English (to my ears). "English-speaking" is what I'm used to.
Travis   Fri Aug 18, 2006 5:00 pm GMT
I must say that I agree with Uriel has just said overall, even though you will at times hear more right-wing types with a rather Anglophile-type bent besides just Klan members use terms like "Anglo-Saxon" as well at times -- even though such does not seem to happen that often these days as compared to in the past.
Tiffany   Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:10 pm GMT
Uriel, Kirk and Travis have said all I wished to say, greg :)