"England" or "United Kingdom"

[The Scientific States]

The UK.

England is just a part of the UK.

[Person012345]

I don't believe it to be an imperialist impostion, where Great Britain is putting it's name on the islands, but rather Great Britain is taking it's name from the Islands.

Except it isn't.

"Britain" - or the Welsh form 'Prydain' - long predates the English, true; it's first attested in written form by the Greek writer Pytheas of Massalia in the 4th century BC.

But it's not derived from the name of the islands as a whole, but rather means something roughly along the lines of "land of the Britons/Pritani" (precise etymology disputed). This is why, after various late Classical / early medieval migrations, we have a Great Britain (the island of the same name) and a Little Britain (not a comedy programme, but rather Brittany).

The crucial clue that the name has absolutely nothing to do with the Irish, though, is that the original form begins with a "P". Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the Celtic languages of Britain and Ireland will recognise why any relation to Irish (or Scots) Gaelic is impossible, and why the word must have a Common Brittonic origin from what's now Great Britain, with no real connection to Ireland.

Except, of course, that St. Patrick was Welsh.

Except that Ptolemy referred to Ireland as "little Britain" (mikra Brettania) in ~147 AD apparently.

I'm not convinced that had the Romans gotten to Ireland they wouldn't have called it something along the lines of Brittania. Either way, this is how I personally use it and what I consider the meaning to be. And what I think everyone should consider it to mean (regardless of the history).

Do you have a better term that doesn't imply some kind of "us and them" thing by the way?

[Estado Paulista]

Needless to say, England and the United Kingdom are two different entities. The UK is mistakenly called England sometimes. I try to avoid doing that, but since England —to some extent— dominates the UK, I don't think they're so wrong in saying that. It's like calling the USSR Russia.

[Arglorand]

Needless to say, England and the United Kingdom are two different entities. The UK is mistakenly called England sometimes. I try to avoid doing that, but since England —to some extent— dominates the UK, I don't think they're so wrong in saying that. It's like calling the USSR Russia.

Which isn't really cool either.

[Fionnuala_Saoirse]

Except it isn't.

"Britain" - or the Welsh form 'Prydain' - long predates the English, true; it's first attested in written form by the Greek writer Pytheas of Massalia in the 4th century BC.

But it's not derived from the name of the islands as a whole, but rather means something roughly along the lines of "land of the Britons/Pritani" (precise etymology disputed). This is why, after various late Classical / early medieval migrations, we have a Great Britain (the island of the same name) and a Little Britain (not a comedy programme, but rather Brittany).

The crucial clue that the name has absolutely nothing to do with the Irish, though, is that the original form begins with a "P". Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the Celtic languages of Britain and Ireland will recognise why any relation to Irish (or Scots) Gaelic is impossible, and why the word must have a Common Brittonic origin from what's now Great Britain, with no real connection to Ireland.

Except, of course, that St. Patrick was Welsh.

Except that Ptolemy referred to Ireland as "little Britain" (mikra Brettania) in ~147 AD apparently.

I'm not convinced that had the Romans gotten to Ireland they wouldn't have called it something along the lines of Brittania. Either way, this is how I personally use it and what I consider the meaning to be. And what I think everyone should consider it to mean (regardless of the history).

Do you have a better term that doesn't imply some kind of "us and them" thing by the way?

Great Britain and Ireland.

It is adorable that people love the whole "context and connotations never change" type bullshit.

[Esperantujo 2]

I prefer to think of myself as English over British. What confuses me is how most sports (excluding olympic ones) think of us as seperate, when the UN and EU and all those big politician type people call us the UK. Not that I want to merge sports teams, they're all crap

In the Olympic Games, the UK competes as Great Britain. In cricket and the various codes of football the nations compete separately.
We Brits have the same difficulty in talking about the Netherlands, once called the United Provinces, which we persist in calling Holland, the name of two provinces of that country.
Also we tend to call the USA "America", the name of two continents. There is no word in English for citizens of the United States, but if the President addressed the nation in Esperanto he would not have that problem. Instead of "my fellow Americans", he would say "miaj kunusonanoj".
Incidentally, there are two substitutes for Northern Ireland, used for political reasons. Ulster includes the counties of Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan as well as Northern Ireland, and "Six Counties" is also deprecated because these counties have been abolished in local government reform.

[Estado Paulista]

Needless to say, England and the United Kingdom are two different entities. The UK is mistakenly called England sometimes. I try to avoid doing that, but since England —to some extent— dominates the UK, I don't think they're so wrong in saying that. It's like calling the USSR Russia.

Which isn't really cool either.

Meh. As I said, they're not entirely wrong in doing that.

[Person012345]

Great Britain and Ireland.

Pretty sure that counts as "us and them" besides which that's not even remotely the same. The British Isles includes all the Islands outside of Great Britain or Ireland. "Great Britain and Ireland" doesn't even include me. I don't like it, it's two separate terms just being rolled into one. Not one term that encompasses us all. It's like calling Europe "The United Kingdom, Ireland, France, Spain, Italy, Germany etc." then leaving out a bunch of small places because you think they don't matter. Most closely grouped geographic areas have a single term that refers to them all. I don't like that we have to make do with "Great Britain and Ireland" (because screw all those other british people) because some people might be offended at being somehow connected with their brothers across the water.

[Fionnuala_Saoirse]

Great Britain and Ireland.

Pretty sure that counts as "us and them" besides which that's not even remotely the same. The British Isles includes all the Islands outside of Great Britain or Ireland. "Great Britain and Ireland" doesn't even include me. I don't like it, it's two separate terms just being rolled into one. Not one term that encompasses us all. It's like calling Europe "The United Kingdom, Ireland, France, Spain, Italy, Germany etc." then leaving out a bunch of small places because you think they don't matter. Most closely grouped geographic areas have a single term that refers to them all. I don't like that we have to make do with "Great Britain and Ireland" (because screw all those other british people) because some people might be offended at being somehow connected with their brothers across the water.

"Fuck them and their feelings on the issue. Oh and why oh why won't they consider us brothers? Waaaahhhh"

Try the following on for size :

Alternative terms include "Britain and Ireland",[3][8] "Atlantic Archipelago",[9] "Anglo-Celtic Isles",[10][11] the "British-Irish Isles" and the Islands of the North Atlantic.[12] In documents drawn up jointly between the British and Irish governments, the archipelago is referred to simply as "these islands".[13]

[Person012345]

It is adorable that people love the whole "context and connotations never change" type bullshit.

Are you saying this to someone who just advocated that everyone imbue "britain" with a meaning that they hold even if it turns out to be bullshit, it shouldn't matter because when it comes to language what people perceive it to mean is what matters? I'm not sure how that is a rebuttal.

[Fionnuala_Saoirse]

It is adorable that people love the whole "context and connotations never change" type bullshit.

Are you saying this to someone who just advocated that everyone imbue "britain" with a meaning that they hold even if it turns out to be bullshit, it shouldn't matter because when it comes to language what people perceive it to mean is what matters? I'm not sure how that is a rebuttal.

Alright Spock.

[Great Britain and Oceania]

The status of the countries that make up the United Kingdom could be compared to the status of the states of the United States. As such, referring to the UK as 'England' is like referring to the US as 'Massachusetts' or any other state, or referring to Obama as the 'President of the District of Columbia'.

[The Flood]

Well I go by internationaly recognized titles, and since the U.K is short-ill refer to them thus. However, I must also state that on the tone of internationally recognized things, the areas of Northern Ireland Scotland and Wales are not sovereign countries and do thus belong to her Majesty the Queen of England-and yes that's her title not the Queen of the U.K, so thus while I refer to England as the U.K I do not do so to recognize the sovereignty of Northern Ireland, Scotland, or Wales...

Actually, you're wrong. Her title is Queen of the United Kingdom, and other Commonwealth Realms.
Also, you used thus too many times.

No, that's not correct. She is independently the Queen of each realm, the Queen of England, the Queen of Scots, and the Queen of Northern Ireland.

[Ainin]

As well there is no commonwealth,

wat

[Tagmatium]

Pretty sure that counts as "us and them" besides which that's not even remotely the same. The British Isles includes all the Islands outside of Great Britain or Ireland. "Great Britain and Ireland" doesn't even include me. I don't like it, it's two separate terms just being rolled into one. Not one term that encompasses us all. It's like calling Europe "The United Kingdom, Ireland, France, Spain, Italy, Germany etc." then leaving out a bunch of small places because you think they don't matter. Most closely grouped geographic areas have a single term that refers to them all. I don't like that we have to make do with "Great Britain and Ireland" (because screw all those other british people) because some people might be offended at being somehow connected with their brothers across the water.

"Fuck them and their feelings on the issue. Oh and why oh why won't they consider us brothers? Waaaahhhh"

Try the following on for size :

Alternative terms include "Britain and Ireland",[3][8] "Atlantic Archipelago",[9] "Anglo-Celtic Isles",[10][11] the "British-Irish Isles" and the Islands of the North Atlantic.[12] In documents drawn up jointly between the British and Irish governments, the archipelago is referred to simply as "these islands".[13]

"Atlantic Archipelago" has a nice, exotic ring to it.

Shame it shits it down a lot of the time here.

[Person012345]

"Fuck them and their feelings on the issue. Oh and why oh why won't they consider us brothers? Waaaahhhh"

Rather, you should consider us all as such because that's how problems get solved. The more antagonistic you are about shit that happened a few hundred years ago, the less you can co-operate. And you'll note it's not so much "my feelings" (though you confused a number of things here) as it is that most other geographically related part of the world gets this shit. North America, Central America, South America, America, Southern Africa, East Africa, West Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa, Northern Africa, Scandinavia, The Middle East, The Indian Subcontinent etc.

Now, your proposal "hurts the feelings" of people you shouldn't even really hate that much, Islands who have fuck all to do with Imperialism. Or other British people who actually want to help you because it's like, "fuck you" to them. You know who it won't hurt? British people who hate the Irish. Although it's a stretch to say anyone's feelings are being hurt here, it's just that I don't like that term and won't use it because it's entirely inadequate to describe what I want to describe anyway.

You don't have to be so belligerent by the way.

Try the following on for size :

Alternative terms include "Britain and Ireland",[3][8] "Atlantic Archipelago",[9] "Anglo-Celtic Isles",[10][11] the "British-Irish Isles" and the Islands of the North Atlantic.[12] In documents drawn up jointly between the British and Irish governments, the archipelago is referred to simply as "these islands".[13]

The only one that really fits the bill is "Atlantic Archipelago", which sounds pretty lame. I think I could live with it though.

[Nadkor]

Actually, you're wrong. Her title is Queen of the United Kingdom, and other Commonwealth Realms.
Also, you used thus too many times.

No, that's not correct. She is independently the Queen of each realm, the Queen of England, the Queen of Scots, and the Queen of Northern Ireland.

This is something I love about NSG - people coming in, telling other people they're wrong, and then, with absolute certainty that they're right, being wrong themselves.

[Pravengria]

Then you're perpetuating an inaccuracy; and one that's likely to irritate the Scots, Welsh, and Northern Irish.

If you can't be bothered typing out the full name, I'd suggest using "UK", which I think you'll find is even shorter, just as universally recognised, and won't have snippy pedants calling you up on your inaccuracy.

Well I go by internationaly recognized titles, and since the U.K is short-ill refer to them thus. However, I must also state that on the tone of internationally recognized things, the areas of Northern Ireland Scotland and Wales are not sovereign countries and do thus belong to her Majesty the Queen of England-and yes that's her title not the Queen of the U.K, so thus while I refer to England as the U.K I do not do so to recognize the sovereignty of Northern Ireland, Scotland, or Wales...

Regardless of whether or not they're ''free'' or independent countries, it is referred to as the UK. They hold a degree of autonomy, in a sense the UK is in a way a federation of these prior kingdoms or states. The Queen owns nothing in the modern world as far as sovereignty, the Crown is nothing more than a figure-head for the UK - as well it is referred to as the ''United'' Kingdom, promoting an equal understanding of all its pieces for representation in the body as a whole. To say that the Queen 'owns' these other parts of the body would be offensive and incorrect.

[Nadkor]

"Fuck them and their feelings on the issue. Oh and why oh why won't they consider us brothers? Waaaahhhh"

Rather, you should consider us all as such because that's how problems get solved. The more antagonistic you are about shit that happened a few hundred years ago, the less you can co-operate. And you'll note it's not so much "my feelings" (though you confused a number of things here) as it is that most other geographically related part of the world gets this shit. North America, Central America, South America, America, Southern Africa, East Africa, West Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa, Northern Africa, Scandinavia, The Middle East, The Indian Subcontinent etc.

Now, your proposal "hurts the feelings" of people you shouldn't even really hate that much, Islands who have fuck all to do with Imperialism. Or other British people who actually want to help you because it's like, "fuck you" to them. You know who it won't hurt? British people who hate the Irish. Although it's a stretch to say anyone's feelings are being hurt here, it's just that I don't like that term and won't use it because it's entirely inadequate to describe what I want to describe anyway.

You don't have to be so belligerent by the way.

Try the following on for size :

Alternative terms include "Britain and Ireland",[3][8] "Atlantic Archipelago",[9] "Anglo-Celtic Isles",[10][11] the "British-Irish Isles" and the Islands of the North Atlantic.[12] In documents drawn up jointly between the British and Irish governments, the archipelago is referred to simply as "these islands".[13]

The only one that really fits the bill is "Atlantic Archipelago", which sounds pretty lame. I think I could live with it though.

What on earth are you even on about.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

The English people should have the right to autonomy, as well as their own devolved parliament, and succession from the Queen of the United Kingdom, being foisted with that particular union.

[Tagmatium]

The English people should have the right to autonomy, as well as their own devolved parliament, and succession from the Queen of the United Kingdom, being foisted with that particular union.

Maybe we should leave her like Gorbachev - Queen of a United Kingdom with no nations actually in it.

[Imperializt Russia]

England doesn't have a seat on the UN Security Council.

Perhaps you mean the United Kingdom?

yes Moderator, that is what I mean, I refer to them as England because their official U.N title of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, is too long to type, and most people in America, still relate to them as the english...

So, United Kingdom?
UK, GB?

Since I assume this is a thread on how subjects of the United Kingdom see themselves, I am English and was born and live in England, but I identify as British and being a citizen of the United Kingdom.
Unlike citizens of the US, I don't think any language refers to us as "United-Kingdomites". Besides, I never really got the appeal of "United Statesian". Almost sounds too self-absorbed. Somehow. Can't explain why. I understand why it's used of course, since "American", outside of the US and UK can easily be referencing south America or just as equally Canadians (to non-English speakers, probably).

[Person012345]

What on earth are you even on about.

What are you confused about? Fionnuala here takes some kind of offense at the use of the term "British Isles" and so I am requesting a replacement that A. Actually describes the same thing and not just parts of it and B. Isn't just a compilation of the various components therein.

[Imperializt Russia]

The English people should have the right to autonomy, as well as their own devolved parliament, and succession from the Queen of the United Kingdom, being foisted with that particular union.

Maybe we should.
We probably do, somewhere, buried within our convoluted legal system.

There's a reason no-one seriously made an effort on acting on it.

[God Kefka]

Split off from the Ukrainian crisis thread to avoid a derail

In a word, "no"

I see the Russian occupation as purely icing on the shit cake their baking over there in Ukraine, a good majority of the people in Crimea want to suceed to Russia because the speak, act, identify culture and customs with, Russia and were in fact under Russian rule for ever 150 years before they got caught up with Ukraine's independence. So if they vote to go back to the Federation, let them, purely because the U.N Security Council lead by England and the U.S-who have heavily vested interests in Ukraine, and all it's territories, remaining sovreign-says "we will not recognize this" dosn't mean hell all! Because, the U.N dose not have jurisdiction in rebelling member-nations and, on a moral note, their reasons as stated above, are not entirely altruistic...

England doesn't have a seat on the UN Security Council.

Perhaps you mean the United Kingdom?

England sounds better to tell you the truth than ''United Kingdom''...

England is crisp and clear. Also, I think the term should be used more often, if you use it often enough maybe the Welsh, Irish and the Scots will start considering themselves English too. Then we could preempt the possibility of them dismembering the union by separating...

Seriously, you're all on one tiny and small fucking island. Seriously, Japan's much bigger and it has no problem considering everyone on the island Japanese without giving formal recognition to further divisions. Same for China etc...

I don't like giving official recognition to ethnic minorities, at BEST it leads to demanding special privileges and representation (that other unnamed groups don't get), at worst it could lead to separation and treason...

I think it usually inevitably escalates to treason and separation. Which is why I also oppose giving natives (''Aboroginal'' and ''Indian'' title) special recognition in the USA and Canada...

GOD BLESS ENGLAND!