United States = Usono?

This will be brief, but believe me, it's something that I'd love to find an answer to:

How did the United States end up with the odd Esperanto name Usono?

We have a name for the United Nations — la Unuigxintaj Nacioj — but we certainly don't refer to our country as la Unuigxintaj Sxtatoj. I'd sure like to get the low down on why my homeland gets a much shorter handle…

At the rate I'm spinning this crazy question in my head, I could end up using the Prelinger public domain film library for some weird collage film on the subject.

Hey, it beats some of Hollywood's recent "ideas."

by Philip David Morgan

Philip David Morgan's blog
Login or register to post comments

Comments

Poor Name Choice

We call it "The United States of America" despite the fact that our neighbor, "Los Estados Unidos Mexicanos" is also a "united states" and is also in (North) America. Worse, we shorten it to just "America", completely ignoring the nations of two entire continents.

Usono is kind of awkward, but it's better than a direct translation.

(The name "Esperanto League for North America" has similar problems, since the Kanada Esperanto-Asocio is recognized by the UEA as the official "landa asocio" of Canada and Mexico also has its own somewhat less rekoninda asocio.)

January 19, 2007 by rdmiller3, 3 years 7 weeks ago

Americans

In the 18th Century, prior to the Revolution, all of the inhabitants of the Western Hemisphere were called "Americans," with further distinctions made between "British Americans," "Portuguese Americans" and "Spanish Americans." After Independence, the residents of the former colonies were no longer British, and so, those residents of the only sovereign nation in the hemisphere were called "Americans" (who in any event felt themselves to be New Yorkers/Virginians/Georgians etc.) This name developed organically and internationally, not by Congressional fiat. By the time the next country on one of the continents earned independence (1810), a generation had passed, and the name "American" (= U.S.'er) had stuck. That newly independent country's inhabitants had taken the most logical alternative: Colombians. It is ludicrous to believe that calling Americans "Americans" is some form of arrogance.

Throughout Ibero-America, the term "American" usually means a person from the United States, however, "America" or its equivalent seldom refers to the United States. I would argue that "America" to mean "the U.S.A." comes from this use of "Americans" and not as a simple short form for United States of America.

I'm thankful to a degree that Esperanto cleans this mess up.

As for ELNA, there is no actual problem unless the name is viewed through the lens of political correctness. I don't know that there are any logistic problems such as mail mix-ups or confusion about the goals of the League. The chief complaint seems to arise from a desire not to offend, without inquiry into whether general offense is actually taken - and then, if it's valid.

Personally, I think that rather than making any actual change, ELNA should use "The Esperanto League" in large type and put "for North America" in small type, and in abbreviation, refer to itself as "the League" more often and "ELNA" less so. No name change, no vote, no apologies.

January 22, 2007 by KriZe, 3 years 7 weeks ago

1) yes; 2) no

About the history of these uses of the words "America" and "Americans", and their equivalents in other languages, and about who it is who decided they would use them in these ways, thank you for being so well-informed and so well-organized and cogent. Many, many people, of many different native languages, including many Esperantists, need these facts, so as to help relieve their indignations.

About the name "ELNA", you don't have it down yet. The name objectively does state, and people encountering the name for the first time routinely do understand it to state, a purpose and a scope for our activities which is no longer the actual purpose and scope. That is, we do not have some influence in Canada which is not parallel to the influence KEA has in the States. When the name ELNA was first chosen, and I believe also when the name EANA was first chosen, there wasn't really a stable KEA, and these names indicated the willingness to serve as a primary umbrella organization also for the Canadian Esperantists. Those conditions are long gone.

If that doesn't satisfy you as an "actual problem", I don't know what possibly could. It's good not to lie; and it's good for one's name not to be a lie. This makes it easier for people to trust you. And this would be a kindness to them, provided that you ever do have anything to say that is true.

It's the people who work or worked in the Centra Oficejo who can really tell you from personal experience what this factually inaccurate name means in their daily lives - what it means every single time they pick up the phone and there's a stranger on the other end of the line. This is where and how I learned it, and where and how my desire for a new name for ELNA became coherent. (I was there only a week-plus, as a volunteer. That is long enough to learn this very well.)

I really do like the word "League" for us very much, though. I would miss it, but I can live with that.

If this topic really doesn't belong here, my apologies, and I'll take it no further.

January 23, 2007 by Loren, 3 years 6 weeks ago