=>North Ireland they are also irish... <=
Most of the north Irish are Protestant, the Irish are mostly catholic.They hate eachother.
Most of the north Irish are Protestant, the Irish are mostly catholic.They hate eachother.
Spanish
Ys, but they are all irish. So i think they will say "these f.....g catholics or these f.....g protestants but not these f..... irish.
See?
See?
Indeed, there are many differences between the Spanish spoken in Spain and the Spanish spoken in Mexico. In fact, every country has different accents and uses particular words, you can tell from what country is a Latin by recognizing their accent. An argentinian definetely doesn't speak like a Venezuelan... Or a Spanish like a Chilean... Anyway, NO OFFENSE, but I find Mexican Spanish quite rude with their words like "chido", "nako", "orale", etc... And their VERY STRONG ACCENT. In my opinion, "perfect" Spanish is spoken in Colombia, it has no accent and as far as I'm concerned it's easy for every Latin American to understand it. To end this, last year I read this article about a high-class peruvian lady who went to Spain and had trouble communicating. She was staying at this hotel in Madrid and her bathroom sink wouldn't work so she called the hotel receptionist so he would get a plumber and this is what she said:
Peruvian: "... Señor por favor consiga un GASFITERO porque el CAÑO (CANIO) esta MALOGRADO..."
At first, the Spanish receptionist didn't understand her, but when he finally did, he corrected vocabulary, he said:
Spanish: "... Gasfitero??? No... FONTANERO... Caño (canio)??? No... GRIFO... Malogrado??? No se ha malogrado la carne se malogra... esta DESCOMPUESTO... "
SINK:
In PERU: CAÑO.
In SPAIN: GRIFO. In Peru we use the word "grifo" to refer to gas stations, not to sinks.
PLUMBER:
In PERU: GASFITERO.
In SPAIN: FONTANERO. In Peru the word "fontanero" is very very old-fashioned.
SCREWED:
In PERU: MALOGRADO.
In SPAIN: DESCOMPUESTO. In Peru we use the word "malogrado" for non-organic things and the word "descompuesto" for organic things (like "decompose"), BUT IN SPAIN THEY USE IT THE OTHER WAY AROUND!
Peruvian: "... Señor por favor consiga un GASFITERO porque el CAÑO (CANIO) esta MALOGRADO..."
At first, the Spanish receptionist didn't understand her, but when he finally did, he corrected vocabulary, he said:
Spanish: "... Gasfitero??? No... FONTANERO... Caño (canio)??? No... GRIFO... Malogrado??? No se ha malogrado la carne se malogra... esta DESCOMPUESTO... "
SINK:
In PERU: CAÑO.
In SPAIN: GRIFO. In Peru we use the word "grifo" to refer to gas stations, not to sinks.
PLUMBER:
In PERU: GASFITERO.
In SPAIN: FONTANERO. In Peru the word "fontanero" is very very old-fashioned.
SCREWED:
In PERU: MALOGRADO.
In SPAIN: DESCOMPUESTO. In Peru we use the word "malogrado" for non-organic things and the word "descompuesto" for organic things (like "decompose"), BUT IN SPAIN THEY USE IT THE OTHER WAY AROUND!
Sander, what Brennus may be referring to regarding the Irish is an old prejudice against them that existed in the US in the late 1800's, after they started to arrive here en masse after the potato famine. Anytime there is a large influx of some group that is different, there will be a backlash against them, and in the case of the Irish immigrants, they were subjected to signs on businesses that said things like, "No Irish need apply" or "No dogs or Irish allowed inside." This prejudice died out a long time ago, but it is still remembered in the cultural consciousness.
As far as the word "Indians" having negative connotations in the US -- that's more of a regional thing. Some prefer to call themselves "Native American" (or "First Nations" in Canada), but many in my part of the country have no issues with "Indian" and happily refer to themselves that way.
As far as the word "Indians" having negative connotations in the US -- that's more of a regional thing. Some prefer to call themselves "Native American" (or "First Nations" in Canada), but many in my part of the country have no issues with "Indian" and happily refer to themselves that way.
Yes, the last I heard 'Indian' (or 'American Indian') was the name preferred by most Indians in the United States. The problem is that preferred ethnic names change over time, and it's not always easy to determine which term is the current favorite. The U.S. Census Bureau did a survey to find that out, and here are the results:
American Indian 49.76%
Native American 37.35
Some other term 3.66
Alaska Native 3.51
No preference 5.72
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762158.html
This survey is about ten years old, but the alternative 'Native American' was viewed as the politically correct term for a couple of decades before that, so the 'American Indian' numbers represent either the persistence of the old term or a return to it. In either case I suspect that it would still be number one now.
In Spanish some persons avoid using 'indio' (especially in Mexico), preferring 'indígena'. I don't know whether this substitution represents the wishes of most of the Indians, though.
American Indian 49.76%
Native American 37.35
Some other term 3.66
Alaska Native 3.51
No preference 5.72
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762158.html
This survey is about ten years old, but the alternative 'Native American' was viewed as the politically correct term for a couple of decades before that, so the 'American Indian' numbers represent either the persistence of the old term or a return to it. In either case I suspect that it would still be number one now.
In Spanish some persons avoid using 'indio' (especially in Mexico), preferring 'indígena'. I don't know whether this substitution represents the wishes of most of the Indians, though.
>Is Mexican Spanish and Spanish spanish compared to ich other the same as British English and American English are or are they closer? [Greg]
I'd say that they are slightly farther apart because of the differences in some of the personal pronouns and verb forms. These differences don't pose a serious problem for speakers of the various dialects, though. I agree with the previous comments about the dialects being easily understandable except when the speakers use many slang or regional terms.
The differences in the use of the personal pronouns and verbs are conspicuous, though, more conspicuous in written Spanish than anything I notice in written English. For example, in Spain 'vosotros' is the usual term for 'you' familiar plural. In Mexico and many other parts of Spanish America the formal plural 'ustedes' is used as the familiar plural too. Also 'vos' is used instead of 'tú' ('you' familiar singular) in Argentina and some other parts of South America, and even in some places in Central America. These are mayor differences, and they are reflected in the verb forms too.
In English the use of subject pronouns is more standardized. 'You' is the singular and plural, formal and familiar -- with very rare exceptions. I'm not up-to-date on British dialects, and there may be some remnants of 'thou' still around. I read the children's novel 'The Secret Garden' not long ago and noticed how the author represented a Yorkshire accent. She used 'tha' (for 'thou', I assume). Maybe some of the British persons here can confirm whether or not this substitute for 'you' is still common in Yorkshire. Also -- or so I've been told -- there are some Quakers in the United States who continue to use 'thee'. Most don't, though.
The use of anything besides 'you' is something very unusual in modern English. On the other hand, you'd expect to see 'vos' in novels set in Argentina, 'vosotros' in novels set in Spain, and 'ustedes' (for both formal and familiar 'you' plural) in Mexico and many other places. This doesn't pose a problem when trying to understand them, but it's very noticeable.
I'd say that they are slightly farther apart because of the differences in some of the personal pronouns and verb forms. These differences don't pose a serious problem for speakers of the various dialects, though. I agree with the previous comments about the dialects being easily understandable except when the speakers use many slang or regional terms.
The differences in the use of the personal pronouns and verbs are conspicuous, though, more conspicuous in written Spanish than anything I notice in written English. For example, in Spain 'vosotros' is the usual term for 'you' familiar plural. In Mexico and many other parts of Spanish America the formal plural 'ustedes' is used as the familiar plural too. Also 'vos' is used instead of 'tú' ('you' familiar singular) in Argentina and some other parts of South America, and even in some places in Central America. These are mayor differences, and they are reflected in the verb forms too.
In English the use of subject pronouns is more standardized. 'You' is the singular and plural, formal and familiar -- with very rare exceptions. I'm not up-to-date on British dialects, and there may be some remnants of 'thou' still around. I read the children's novel 'The Secret Garden' not long ago and noticed how the author represented a Yorkshire accent. She used 'tha' (for 'thou', I assume). Maybe some of the British persons here can confirm whether or not this substitute for 'you' is still common in Yorkshire. Also -- or so I've been told -- there are some Quakers in the United States who continue to use 'thee'. Most don't, though.
The use of anything besides 'you' is something very unusual in modern English. On the other hand, you'd expect to see 'vos' in novels set in Argentina, 'vosotros' in novels set in Spain, and 'ustedes' (for both formal and familiar 'you' plural) in Mexico and many other places. This doesn't pose a problem when trying to understand them, but it's very noticeable.
GJones sez:
>>In Spanish some persons avoid using 'indio' (especially in Mexico), preferring 'indígena'. I don't know whether this substitution represents the wishes of most of the Indians, though.<<
As I explained before when you call someone an "Indian" you are basically calling him/her sub-human regardless of what they look like whether they be white, black, purple looking or whatever. The only people that go by the name of Indian on this earth are people the Asian sub-continent and that's it, one would have thought that was common knowledge by now. Indian (indio in Spanish) is the equivalent of nigger in US English. This applies across all Spanish-speaking countries, it is always term a of derision. The term "indigena, "nativo" or the actual name of their ethnic groups such as Aztec, Inca etc. is preferred instead.
>>In Spanish some persons avoid using 'indio' (especially in Mexico), preferring 'indígena'. I don't know whether this substitution represents the wishes of most of the Indians, though.<<
As I explained before when you call someone an "Indian" you are basically calling him/her sub-human regardless of what they look like whether they be white, black, purple looking or whatever. The only people that go by the name of Indian on this earth are people the Asian sub-continent and that's it, one would have thought that was common knowledge by now. Indian (indio in Spanish) is the equivalent of nigger in US English. This applies across all Spanish-speaking countries, it is always term a of derision. The term "indigena, "nativo" or the actual name of their ethnic groups such as Aztec, Inca etc. is preferred instead.
Uriel sez:
>>As far as the word "Indians" having negative connotations in the US -- that's more of a regional thing. Some prefer to call themselves "Native American" (or "First Nations" in Canada), but many in my part of the country have no issues with "Indian" and happily refer to themselves that way.
That may be true in the States but south of the US border the word Indian is never acceptable under any circumstance unless you don't mind getting into physical confrontation that is. :) The word "Indian" (Indio) was a term imposed on the native inhabitants that over years came to mean "lesser" and "inferior" and thereby explains why no one would be particularly pleased to be called that.
>>As far as the word "Indians" having negative connotations in the US -- that's more of a regional thing. Some prefer to call themselves "Native American" (or "First Nations" in Canada), but many in my part of the country have no issues with "Indian" and happily refer to themselves that way.
That may be true in the States but south of the US border the word Indian is never acceptable under any circumstance unless you don't mind getting into physical confrontation that is. :) The word "Indian" (Indio) was a term imposed on the native inhabitants that over years came to mean "lesser" and "inferior" and thereby explains why no one would be particularly pleased to be called that.
GJones sez:
>>I'd say that they are slightly farther apart because of the differences in some of the personal pronouns and verb forms. These differences don't pose a serious problem for speakers of the various dialects, though. I agree with the previous comments about the dialects being easily understandable except when the speakers use many slang or regional terms. <<
Spanish is by far a more complex language than English grammatically speaking anyhow thus the reason why there is such huge variety. I'm fully aware of this differences and I don't have any issues whatsoever when it comes to dealing with spanish speaker from other regions. On the contrary it makes me happy because it makes life just that little bit more interesting.
>>I'd say that they are slightly farther apart because of the differences in some of the personal pronouns and verb forms. These differences don't pose a serious problem for speakers of the various dialects, though. I agree with the previous comments about the dialects being easily understandable except when the speakers use many slang or regional terms. <<
Spanish is by far a more complex language than English grammatically speaking anyhow thus the reason why there is such huge variety. I'm fully aware of this differences and I don't have any issues whatsoever when it comes to dealing with spanish speaker from other regions. On the contrary it makes me happy because it makes life just that little bit more interesting.
>>In English the use of subject pronouns is more standardized. 'You' is the singular and plural, formal and familiar -- with very rare exceptions.<<
Well, not quite, GJones, as new second person plural forms have been innovated by many English dialects, especially North American English dialects. Examples include "you guys" (in construction very similar to Castilian "vosotros"), "you all", "y'all", "youse", and "youse guys", with the first three probably being the most common in NAE. At least from here, and what I have heard from some other NAE speakers in other places, in informal speech, "you" alone (not in constructions like "all of you" or with something else following) is practically always singular, and when referring to the second person plural other constructions, like those listed above, are used. Oh, and by the way, "you guys" has been grammaticalized to the effect that it does not have any gender marking at all, and can be used for referring to groups that are composed solely of women today.
Well, not quite, GJones, as new second person plural forms have been innovated by many English dialects, especially North American English dialects. Examples include "you guys" (in construction very similar to Castilian "vosotros"), "you all", "y'all", "youse", and "youse guys", with the first three probably being the most common in NAE. At least from here, and what I have heard from some other NAE speakers in other places, in informal speech, "you" alone (not in constructions like "all of you" or with something else following) is practically always singular, and when referring to the second person plural other constructions, like those listed above, are used. Oh, and by the way, "you guys" has been grammaticalized to the effect that it does not have any gender marking at all, and can be used for referring to groups that are composed solely of women today.
Spanish is by far a more complex language than English grammatically speaking>>>
In which ways?
In which ways?
Travis, I still believe that the dialectal differences in the use of subject pronouns are greater in Spanish than in English (this claim, Irregular visitor, is not meant to carry any negative implications). 'Vosotros', 'vos', and 'ustedes' use different verb forms (the 'vos' form supposedly being a modification of the 'vosotros' form). 'You', 'y'all', and 'youse guys' keep the same verb forms.
You make a good point, though, about these alternatives to 'you'. They had completely slipped my mind (even though I myself use 'y'all' :-). I take back my claim about the exceptions being rare.
You make a good point, though, about these alternatives to 'you'. They had completely slipped my mind (even though I myself use 'y'all' :-). I take back my claim about the exceptions being rare.