Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
I think the term anglos make much more sense if spoken from a mexican point of view.
the term yanks applying to all americans didn't come into common usage until after 1865.
Wrong.
Quote:
British General James Wolfe made the earliest recorded use of the word Yankee in 1758 to refer to people from what became the United States.... As early as the 1770s, British people applied the term to any person from the United States.
Dutch origin
New Netherland is to the northwest, and New England is to the northeast.
Most linguists look to Dutch language sources, noting the extensive interaction between the colonial Dutch in New Netherland (now largely New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and western Connecticut) and the English in colonial New England (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and eastern Connecticut). Michael Quinion and Patrick Hanks argue that the term refers to the Dutch feminine diminutive name Janneke or masculine diminutive name Janke, which would be Anglicized as "Yankee" due to the Dutch pronunciation of J as the English Y. Quinion and Hanks posit that it was "used as a nickname for a Dutch-speaking American in colonial times" and could have grown to include non-Dutch colonists, as well. Alternatively, the Dutch given names Jan (Dutch: [jɑn]) and Kees (Dutch: [keːs]) have long been common, and the two are sometimes combined into a single name (e.g., Jan Kees de Jager). Its Anglicized spelling Yankee could, in this way, have been used to mock Dutch Americans. The chosen name Jan Kees may have been partly inspired by a dialectal rendition of Jan Kaas ("John Cheese"), the generic nickname that Southern Dutch used for Dutch people living in the North.
The Online Etymology Dictionary gives its origin as around 1683, when it was applied insultingly to Dutch Americans (especially freebooters) by the English. Linguist Jan de Vries notes that there was mention of a pirate named Dutch Yanky in the 17th century. The Life and Adventures of Sir Launcelot Greaves (1760) contains the passage, "Haul forward thy chair again, take thy berth, and proceed with thy story in a direct course, without yawing like a Dutch yanky." It was at some point reappropriated by Dutch settlers of New Amsterdam who started using it against the English colonists of neighboring Connecticut.
IB, I said "common" usage. sure the term was used in the late 1700's, but it was not common usage or used very often (put it that way).
The article explicitly says it was common usage in the late 1700s.
Quote:
"Yankee Doodle" is a well-known American song, the early versions of which date to before the Seven Years' War and the American Revolution (1775–83). (Wiki)
yeah, but Yanks referred to people of the North East America, (New England states) not all of america. that part wasn't used to mean them until much later.
yeah, but Yanks referred to people of the North East America, (New England states) not all of america. that part wasn't used to mean them until much later.
No. It clearly states that the Brits called all Americans Yankees. The Brits were the most powerful nation at that time, and they had more ships in more foreign ports than any other nation at that time. "The sun never sets on the Union Jack" was a truism meaning the Brits and their flag and their parlance was literally world wide. Hence, when a British Jack spoke of "Yankees" in a Spanish port, the Spaniard knew that the Jack was speaking of Americans.
The Brits were the most powerful nation at that time, and they had more ships in more foreign ports than any other nation at that time. "The sun never sets on the Union Jack" was a truism meaning the Brits and their flag and their parlance was literally world wide.
]What made me peeved off when i read a different article on it. THE COMPANY Donated 25k to BOTH PARTIES. Not just the republicans.[/B] So they are wanting a boycot, JUST for daring to give equal treatment to the republicans.
Just goes to show, the party that preaches tolerance the loudest, NEVER SHOWS TOLERANCE back.
LOL if you had done your research you would know they donated to the CA republican party and a PAC that supports democrats and the Ca republican party. So that means that they mislead you when they said they supported both party's equally. I do not know how much they gave the PAC but even if it was a million dollars you can not say what was done with it.
