67 replies to this topic

[Thaibebop]

I bet someone is getting confusing Germans and the Dutch. There was a large Dutch influence in North America before Germans ever showed up.

[JiG]

No. The United States as a whole has no official language. English is only "official" de facto, not de jure. At the most, English is an official language in 28 states, but that's it.



No, it never was. At best it is a legend.

Oh man I hate when that happens. Some popular "interesting historical tidbit" turns out to be complete bs. I suppose a lot far fetched interesting historical facts are like that.

[LongMa]

I bet someone is getting confusing Germans and the Dutch. There was a large Dutch influence in North America before Germans ever showed up.

There was not a large Dutch population out of New Amsterdam (which became New York City). We do refer to Pennsylvania Dutch, but really they were not Dutch from the Netherlands, they were Pennsylvania Deutsch (Germans, usually from Bavaria).

[Thaibebop]

There was not a large Dutch population out of New Amsterdam (which became New York City). We do refer to Pennsylvania Dutch, but really they were not Dutch from the Netherlands, they were Pennsylvania Deutsch (Germans, usually from Bavaria).

How could New Amsterdam not have many Dutch? It was a Dutch colony.

[Yun]

I think LongMa meant there wasn't a large Dutch population outside New Amsterdam.

[LongMa]

I think LongMa meant there wasn't a large Dutch population outside New Amsterdam.

Right. It was never a large colony to begin with.




It was just a tip of Manhattan, and only lasted about 50 years according to Wiki.

[polar_zen]

That's true, but remember, New Amsterdam was a part of a larger Dutch territory called New Netherlands, as seen here.

[LongMa]

That's true, but remember, New Amsterdam was a part of a larger Dutch territory called New Netherlands, as seen here.

So the question is how many Dutch families came there and how many stayed after it was sold to the Britain after 50 years?

"New France" was far larger and when the U.S. purchased that, outside of Louisiana there weren't many French people in that territory at all, even in Louisiana they were mostly concentrated South of Baton Rouge (the bottom 1/3 of the state), most of those people came from Haiti and Quebec after various political issues in those places.

Edited by LongMa, 09 March 2008 - 08:51 AM.

[kaiselin]

The Dutch colony of New Amsterdam was never a large population of Dutch. The only large concentration of Dutch descendants in the US now is in Michigan around Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids.

I am more inclined to believe that the statistics that were used in the original post were including the English as being a Germanic group.

[fireball]

The southern Germans also have strange habits!

I heard that there were a lot of Huns settled in Southern Germany, so the Southern Germans have a bit different cultural and ethnic background from the Northern Germans. This information was from some books about where Huns had settled in Europe!

As for the language thing, I agree. There were votes running in some parts of the US to adapt German as a second official language though.

I have also heard about this somewhere. However, I do not remember where. I think it was a passing glance at some articles or books about the early U.S. history. I somehow have this impression that I might have gotten this particular piece of information from my classes in U.S. history in U.S. High School or College. However, I don't quite remember for sure.

Edited by fireball, 09 March 2008 - 11:26 AM.

[Thaibebop]

So the question is how many Dutch families came there and how many stayed after it was sold to the Britain after 50 years?

"New France" was far larger and when the U.S. purchased that, outside of Louisiana there weren't many French people in that territory at all, even in Louisiana they were mostly concentrated South of Baton Rouge (the bottom 1/3 of the state), most of those people came from Haiti and Quebec after various political issues in those places.

Ok, I follow you on New Amsterdam, and I agree that the French colonies were not filled with people, but they were strong along the river systems. Most trades, like fur trade was controled by the French along the rivers.

[liuzg150181]

I am fairly certain that German was never adopted as a language for the US.

As for the German majority among white Americans, I may be wrong on this but the statistic seems a bit scewed. I am wondering if they were including the English because the English are anglo - saxan and have a strong connection to Germany. But to imply that they are German is not entirerly correct.

Dont think they would include English(anglo-saxon) as Germans,considering the arrival of Anglo-Saxon to British Isle is a thousand and five hundred years backs,the length of divergence and geograpical distance had in effect divorced any relationship btw Anglo-Saxon & Germans(apart from linguistic relationship,as both English and German belongs to Western Germanic branch of Indo-European language) as both would forge their own ethic identity,as indicated by English novelist William Makepeace Thackeray on George I from Hanover(in modern day Germany) ascending the British throne:"His heart was in Hanover. He was more than fifty-four years of age when he came amongst us: we took him because we wanted him, because he served our turn; we laughed at his uncouth German ways, and sneered at him…"(Excerpt from "The Four Georges: Sketches of Manners, Morals, Court and Town Life").

And there isnt Germany as we know today prior to 1871(Unification of Germany),prior to that 'Germany' is splintered into hundreds of entities(at worst,especially after Thirty Year's War) and the closest entity to 'Germany' would be Eastern Frankish Kingdom and Holy Roman Empire. Imposing our modern sense of a particular nationality and ethinic groups as opposed to its historical connotation can sometimes be tedious:
Pennsylvania Dutch or Germen(Deutsch)?
http://german.about....blgermyth07.htm
"Some linguists have made the case that the term Pennsylvania Dutch goes back to the original English use of the word "Dutch." Although there is no definitive evidence that links it to the term Pennsylvania Dutch, it is a fact that in the English of the 18th and 19th centuries, the word "Dutch" referred to anyone from a wide range of Germanic regions, places that we now distinguish as the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. At that time "Dutch" was a broader term that meant what we today call Flemish, Dutch or German. The terms "High Dutch" (German) and "Low Dutch" (Dutch, "nether" means "low") were used to make a clearer distinction between what we now call German (from Latin) or Dutch (from Old High German)."

IMO another conflict btw modern usage Germany is its political sense now and then,in the sense of inclusion or exlusion of German-speaking Austria. After Prussian victory in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866 Otto von Bismarck decreed the unification of Germany excluded Austria(called the "Kleindeutsche Lösung") as opposed to inclusion of Austria,called "Großdeutschland-Greater Germany"(though later an Austrian actually realised the unification(Anschluss) of Germany & Austria. His name was Adolf Hitler). Therefore in what circumstance should we include Austrians as Germans as well, if at all?

Edited by liuzg150181, 10 March 2008 - 12:49 AM.

[LongMa]

Dont think they would include English(anglo-saxon) as Germans,considering the arrival of Anglo-Saxon to British Isle is a thousand and five hundred years backs,the length of divergence and geograpical distance had in effect divorced any relationship btw Anglo-Saxon & Germans(apart from linguistic relationship,as both English and German belongs to Western Germanic branch of Indo-European language) as both would forge their own ethic identity,as indicated by English novelist William Makepeace Thackeray on George I from Hanover(in modern day Germany) ascending the British throne:"His heart was in Hanover. He was more than fifty-four years of age when he came amongst us: we took him because we wanted him, because he served our turn; we laughed at his uncouth German ways, and sneered at him…"(Excerpt from "The Four Georges: Sketches of Manners, Morals, Court and Town Life").

And there isnt Germany as we know today prior to 1871(Unification of Germany),prior to that 'Germany' is splintered into hundreds of entities(at worst,especially after Thirty Year's War) and the closest entity to 'Germany' would be Eastern Frankish Kingdom and Holy Roman Empire. Imposing our modern sense of a particular nationality and ethinic groups as opposed to its historical connotation can sometimes be tedious:
Pennsylvania Dutch or Germen(Deutsch)?
http://german.about....blgermyth07.htm
"Some linguists have made the case that the term Pennsylvania Dutch goes back to the original English use of the word "Dutch." Although there is no definitive evidence that links it to the term Pennsylvania Dutch, it is a fact that in the English of the 18th and 19th centuries, the word "Dutch" referred to anyone from a wide range of Germanic regions, places that we now distinguish as the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. At that time "Dutch" was a broader term that meant what we today call Flemish, Dutch or German. The terms "High Dutch" (German) and "Low Dutch" (Dutch, "nether" means "low") were used to make a clearer distinction between what we now call German (from Latin) or Dutch (from Old High German)."

IMO another conflict btw modern usage Germany is its political sense now and then,in the sense of inclusion or exclusion of German-speaking Austria. After Prussian victory in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866 Otto von Bismarck decreed the unification of Germany excluded Austria(called the "Kleindeutsche Lösung") as opposed to inclusion of Austria,called "Großdeutschland-Greater Germany"(though later an Austrian actually realised the unification(Anschluss) of Germany & Austria. His name was Adolf Hitler). Therefore in what circumstance should we include Austrians as Germans as well, if at all?

Austria was not included because they didn't want to give up their Empire, there were too many nonGErmans they wanted to bring in. Prussians did not want that.

In reality "Germans" at one time stretched from the UK through Finland all the way through Denmark, Netherlands and as far South as Switzerland.

All of those people spoke "German" and still do speak a "Germanic language".

You are right that what we call "German" today is political not linguistic because High German spoken in Germany is closer to Dutch in the Netherlands (and Beligum) than it is to Swiss German...but the Swiss still say they speak "SwitzerDeutsch" and the Dutch say they speak Dutch, not Dutch German.

It is odd. English is more related to Dutch/Flemish than High German and has a lot of Scandinavian influence which makes a lot o the words similar to Danish/Swedish/Norwegian because the Anglo-Saxons came from the Baltic coast and viking controlled Northern England and parts of Scotland (and even Ireland) for long periods. I would imagine at the time the Anglo-Saxon old English and the Danelaw Old Norse was mutually intelligible or very close...

[One time poster]

I had thought the rivalry between Austria and Prussia was the main reason Prussia excluded Austria, although the whole empire idea was also part of the reason. The nation state was not quite compatible with the multi-ethnic character of the Austrian empire. Prussia rose up to become the premier German state under the shadow of Austria's dominance. Prussia did not rise peacefully. It rose at the cost of defeating Austria and France in a series of wars, which left the other sides very bitter.

[ghostexorcist]

No. The United States as a whole has no official language. English is only "official" de facto, not de jure. At the most, English is an official language in 28 states, but that's it.

Where did you get that figure from? Are you referring to the states with large Spanish-speaking populations? I would say "American" is best descriptive of the language spoken here. Each "English" speaking country has vastly different sub-dialects and slang terms. They tend to absorb the languages of the countries around them. Hence, the Brits speak “British,” the Australians speak “Australian,” etc. I bet if you take the average American (whatever that is) and plop them in the middle of a cockney neighbor in England, they would barely understand a single word of the local language.

The base for "American" may be English, but many of our words have come from the base languages of the immigrants who have prospered here--including Spanish, German, Dutch, Chinese, and you can even throw some "Ebonics" in too.