"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


He's certainly not mastered the logic of Mexican being a nationality
rather than a race.

And you do not understand that many words have either various meanings or
shades of meaning. In fact, usage defines meaning.... "human race" is
technically incorrect... humans are a species, but contemporary usage has
made this acceptable.

The term Chifako will soon become acceptable! It of course describes a
jackass
who tries to pass himself off as being Hispanic and was of course born in
the
USA.

Once again, "Hispanic" is a culture, not a nationality or race. A person
immersed for most of their life in a culture becomes part of it. One of the
benchmark studies has to do with a child of European origin who somehow was
found and raised in a primitive indigenous culture and was, except for skin
color and such, 100% of that culture when discovered by explorers.

Or, as a cultural anthropologist I knew in Latin America said, "language
defines culture. So the language a person swears in when they hit a finger
with a hammer or the language they make love in defines their culture better
than any indicator."

David "Yes, I really blow as 'Eduardo'", wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


He's certainly not mastered the logic of Mexican being a nationality
rather than a race.

And you do not understand that many words have either various meanings or
shades of meaning. In fact, usage defines meaning.... "human race" is
technically incorrect... humans are a species, but contemporary usage has
made this acceptable.

The term Chifako will soon become acceptable! It of course describes a
jackass
who tries to pass himself off as being Hispanic and was of course born in
the
USA.

Once again, "Hispanic" is a culture, not a nationality or race. A person
immersed for most of their life in a culture becomes part of it.

So, what you are saying is that you immersed yourself in the culture of
pathological lying.

Priceless!

You go boy!

On Sep 15, 4:57 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...







David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

He's certainly not mastered the logic of Mexican being a nationality
rather than a race.

And you do not understand that many words have either various meanings or
shades of meaning. In fact, usage defines meaning.... "human race" is
technically incorrect... humans are a species, but contemporary usage has
made this acceptable.

The term Chifako will soon become acceptable! It of course describes a
jackass
who tries to pass himself off as being Hispanic and was of course born in
the
USA.

Once again, "Hispanic" is a culture, not a nationality or race. A person
immersed for most of their life in a culture becomes part of it. One of the
benchmark studies has to do with a child of European origin who somehow was
found and raised in a primitive indigenous culture and was, except for skin
color and such, 100% of that culture when discovered by explorers.

Or, as a cultural anthropologist I knew in Latin America said, "language
defines culture. So the language a person swears in when they hit a finger
with a hammer or the language they make love in defines their culture better
than any indicator."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ah, but by your standards it surely is a race. You are the one who
argued that people are of the same race whenever they share some
property in common. If, as you say, hispanics share a culture, then....

"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...
If, as you say, hispanics share a culture, then....


That is how the OMB defines it, and, thus the Census Bureau.

On Sep 15, 7:59 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

ups.com...

If, as you say, hispanics share a culture, then....

That is how the OMB defines it, and, thus the Census Bureau.

Sounds like you need to get your story straight.

On Sep 15, 7:59 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

ups.com...

If, as you say, hispanics share a culture, then....

That is how the OMB defines it, and, thus the Census Bureau.

This is actually quite funny. Tardo has a great fondness for arguments
from authority, since they only require him to cite
"authorities" (dictionaries, census bureaus, etc.) as opposed to
saying anything more substantive. Now, though, he's trying to justify
inconsistency itself by appeal to authorities. I guess if
inconsistency is good enough for your precious authorities, it must be
good enough for us, huh Tardo? lol

"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 15, 7:59 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

ups.com...

If, as you say, hispanics share a culture, then....

That is how the OMB defines it, and, thus the Census Bureau.

This is actually quite funny. Tardo has a great fondness for arguments
from authority, since they only require him to cite
"authorities" (dictionaries, census bureaus, etc.) as opposed to
saying anything more substantive. Now, though, he's trying to justify
inconsistency itself by appeal to authorities. I guess if
inconsistency is good enough for your precious authorities, it must be
good enough for us, huh Tardo? lol


What is inconsistent? The term "Hispanic" used to mean someone from what was
the Roman province of Hispania. Since that was a little used term, when the
Census was ordered to break out what we now know as Hispanics before the
1980 Census, there was no term that fit the mandate. Latino includes
Brazilians, Portuguese, French, Italians, etc. So the OMB and Census came up
with a word that covered persons of the "Hispanic culture" which really is
just anyone who speaks as their principal language or comes from a heritage
where it was the principal language of Spanish. Of course, even this is a
defective term in the sense that many Hispanics' heritage tongue is Náhuatl,
Quechua, Aymará, etc.

But, it had been impossible to separately enumerate this group before (most
were under "white" racially) the term worked.

On Sep 16, 1:51 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

ups.com...





On Sep 15, 7:59 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

roups.com...

If, as you say, hispanics share a culture, then....

That is how the OMB defines it, and, thus the Census Bureau.

This is actually quite funny. Tardo has a great fondness for arguments
from authority, since they only require him to cite
"authorities" (dictionaries, census bureaus, etc.) as opposed to
saying anything more substantive. Now, though, he's trying to justify
inconsistency itself by appeal to authorities. I guess if
inconsistency is good enough for your precious authorities, it must be
good enough for us, huh Tardo? lol

What is inconsistent? The term "Hispanic" used to mean someone from what was
the Roman province of Hispania. Since that was a little used term, when the
Census was ordered to break out what we now know as Hispanics before the
1980 Census, there was no term that fit the mandate. Latino includes
Brazilians, Portuguese, French, Italians, etc. So the OMB and Census came up
with a word that covered persons of the "Hispanic culture" which really is
just anyone who speaks as their principal language or comes from a heritage
where it was the principal language of Spanish. Of course, even this is a
defective term in the sense that many Hispanics' heritage tongue is Náhuatl,
Quechua, Aymará, etc.

But, it had been impossible to separately enumerate this group before (most
were under "white" racially) the term worked.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are inconsistent. First, when some posters object that there's a
distinction to be drawn between race and nationality, you respond that
there is no distinction because two people can be categorized as
belonging to the same race anytime they share some characteristic
(e.g., nationality) in common. However, when someone later describes
Hispanic people as belonging to the same race, it turns out that being
Hispanic is not, as a characteristic, sufficient for two people's
belonging to the same race. So, it appears you can't make up your
mind about whether to employ a very 'thin' notion of race or a
substantially thicker one. When pressed on this apparent
inconsistency, you seek shelter behind your dictionary and the Census
Bureau. Pathetic.

"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 16, 1:51 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:

What is inconsistent? The term "Hispanic" used to mean someone from what
was
the Roman province of Hispania. Since that was a little used term, when
the
Census was ordered to break out what we now know as Hispanics before the
1980 Census, there was no term that fit the mandate. Latino includes
Brazilians, Portuguese, French, Italians, etc. So the OMB and Census came
up
with a word that covered persons of the "Hispanic culture" which really is
just anyone who speaks as their principal language or comes from a
heritage
where it was the principal language of Spanish. Of course, even this is a
defective term in the sense that many Hispanics' heritage tongue is
Náhuatl,
Quechua, Aymará, etc.

But, it had been impossible to separately enumerate this group before
(most
were under "white" racially) the term worked.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are inconsistent. First, when some posters object that there's a
distinction to be drawn between race and nationality, you respond that
there is no distinction because two people can be categorized as
belonging to the same race anytime they share some characteristic
(e.g., nationality) in common. However, when someone later describes
Hispanic people as belonging to the same race, it turns out that being
Hispanic is not, as a characteristic, sufficient for two people's
belonging to the same race.

Thsat is because "Hispanic" has no common characteristics save language use
or heritage, and even there inconsistencies are found. Hispanic is not a
nationality, an ethnicity nor is it, under any standard definition, a race.
What common characteristic does an English speaking Tejano have with someone
from Buenos Aires... or either of them with a Quechua-speaking indigenous
person from Otavalo, Ecuador?

The usage by some US Hispanics of "raza" means (from the additonal Spanish
definitions... it is, after all. a Spanish word) "brotherhood " or "people."
There is a commonality there of language, origin, ethnicity and even (mixed)
racial characteristics. But to say all Hispanics are a race is patently
absurd.

So, it appears you can't make up your
mind about whether to employ a very 'thin' notion of race or a
substantially thicker one. When pressed on this apparent
inconsistency, you seek shelter behind your dictionary and the Census
Bureau. Pathetic.

In the US, the Census defined the term "Hispanic" by taking a little-used
term and adding a meaning. For all practical purposes, it is a neologism,
like the contemporary "downsize" term applied to layoffs or the word "crib"
used to indicate abode. Language is dynamic, of course, and such changes are
why dictionaries have new editions constantly.