What would OTL United States and Canada be called if it's fragmented?

I assume, if there is already a "Latin America" in the south, the north would be called "Germanic America", since it would still be mainly English-speaking, plus a bunch of Pennsylvanian Dutch...

But their are the Quebecois...
 
Anglo-America for the rest.

Quebec, Louisiana and Acadia would be classified as Latin American countries; after all, French is a Romance language. Nevertheless, the three would be known collectively as "Gallic America".

If Newfoundland and Nova Scotia were settled by a large number of Gaelic speakers from Ireland and Scotland, they're would be identified as "Celtic America".
 
I think "Anglo-America" is more likely than "Germanic America."

“Latin/Iberian” America is used other than “Hispanic” America right?

And there wasn't this anti-German feeling before Kaiser Wilhelm ruined Germany's image... So Germanic America might be considered a more neutral term than Anglo-America, especially when Britain was the hated colonial overlord, and when the Dutch and the Germans were considered allies by the New Englanders.
 
“Latin/Iberian” America is used other than “Hispanic” America right?

And there wasn't this anti-German feeling before Kaiser Wilhelm ruined Germany's image... So Germanic America might be considered a more neutral term than Anglo-America, especially when Britain was the hated colonial overlord, and when the Dutch and the Germans were considered allies by the New Englanders.

Anglo-America for the rest.

Quebec, Louisiana and Acadia would be classified as Latin American countries; after all, French is a Romance language. Nevertheless, the three would be known collectively as "Gallic America".

If Newfoundland and Nova Scotia were settled by a large number of Gaelic speakers from Ireland and Scotland, they're would be identified as "Celtic America".

So it's Gallic America, Celtic America, Latin America and ... Germanic America (sorry for being so stubborn.)
 
So the "Latin" in "Latin America" doesn't refer to the religion of the inhabitants (Roman Catholicism)?

I think it'd probably be called "North America", though that includes Mexico technically, I can see people not really making that distinction (as in OTL).
 
"Latin America" only emerged as a term because the French pushed it during their adventures in Mexico. "Anglo-America" would certainly be the term for alt USA and Canada, minus Quebec. "Germanic America" makes no sense, as there are no other Germanic groups that hold political power.
 
"Latin America" only emerged as a term because the French pushed it during their adventures in Mexico. "Anglo-America" would certainly be the term for alt USA and Canada, minus Quebec. "Germanic America" makes no sense, as there are no other Germanic groups that hold political power.

So, the Dutch Antilles or Suriname don't exist anymore? Small they may be, but they're still there, still fairly well populated for their geographies, and still speak Dutch...
 
So, the Dutch Antilles or Suriname don't exist anymore? Small they may be, but they're still there, still fairly well populated for their geographies, and still speak Dutch...

And if you try calling the Dutch Germans you will get a pretty definitive reaction. I think it'd just be North America, or Anglo America if people wanted to make a big deal of the language issue.
 

jahenders

Banned
The continent would still be called North America and, if fragmented, you might have multiple nations. If looking for terms to call regions of North America that encompass multiple such nations, I don't think all would necessarily be linguistic/ethnically based, but some might. So you might have:

- Gallic-America (French-derived countries in OTL Canada)
- Either Celto-America or Nova America (countries in OTL coastal Canada)
- Anglo-America (English-derived countries in OTL colonial area and parts of Canada)
- Latin-America (Spanish-derived counties in OTL S. Cal, AZ, TX, Florida, etc)
- Native America (Native American states/nations in OTL mountain and mid west US)
- Russo-America (Russian derived states in Alaska)
 
And if you try calling the Dutch Germans you will get a pretty definitive reaction. I think it'd just be North America, or Anglo America if people wanted to make a big deal of the language issue.

But German ≠ Germanic, the former indicates "of/pertaining to Germany" (which the Dutch most definitely do NOT), the latter indicating being sibb or part of the same linguistic and cultural group inherent in the name, which even predates Germany as a "thing". I have no issue with Anglo-American existing as a separate Western entity, but you still need to accomodate the Netherlands' presence in the New World; Batavo-America(n), maybe? Either way, Germanic-America would almost certainly apply to non-German (as in, from Germany) countries and colonies, such as the British and Dutch Americas.
 
But German ≠ Germanic, the former indicates "of/pertaining to Germany" (which the Dutch most definitely do NOT), the latter indicating being sibb or part of the same linguistic and cultural group inherent in the name, which even predates Germany as a "thing". I have no issue with Anglo-American existing as a separate Western entity, but you still need to accomodate the Netherlands' presence in the New World; Batavo-America(n), maybe? Either way, Germanic-America would almost certainly apply to non-German (as in, from Germany) countries and colonies, such as the British and Dutch Americas.

My long-awaited soulmate:D
 
Avoiding the A-word (Anglo), everything north of Mexico would be labeled as North American, whether Mexico may technically belong to it or not.

There are two Spanish words for United Statesian: estadounidense and norteamericano and I'm pretty sure you can safely use the latter for Canadians as well.
 
So, the Dutch Antilles or Suriname don't exist anymore? Small they may be, but they're still there, still fairly well populated for their geographies, and still speak Dutch...

Why not simply consider them West Indian, as we generally do today? Is it necessary to group all nations of the Western Hemisphere by language only?

(Incidentally, the Dutch Antilles are not particularly Dutch speaking; the northeastern ones mostly speak English and the ABC islands mostly speak Papiamento.)

But German ≠ Germanic, the former indicates "of/pertaining to Germany" (which the Dutch most definitely do NOT), the latter indicating being sibb or part of the same linguistic and cultural group inherent in the name, which even predates Germany as a "thing". I have no issue with Anglo-American existing as a separate Western entity, but you still need to accomodate the Netherlands' presence in the New World; Batavo-America(n), maybe? Either way, Germanic-America would almost certainly apply to non-German (as in, from Germany) countries and colonies, such as the British and Dutch Americas.

But I think the bigger issue here is that while the Romance-speaking nations of Europe still feel somewhat of a common Latin identity (an identity transplanted to the New World), I think this is much less true for those of the Germanic-speaking nations. I don't think English-speaking North Americans would necessarily feel that much in common with Dutch-speaking neighbors. I don't think they'd be grouped together at all.

Probably, only the huge linguistic groups would be lumped together. You'd have Latin/Iberian America, Anglo America and perhaps Gallic America, but that'd be about it. Smaller nations that speak Dutch, Swedish, etc. simply wouldn't be grouped in any of them.
 
Last edited:
Why not simply consider them West Indian, as we generally do today? Is it necessary to group all nations of the Western Hemisphere by language only?

(Incidentally, the Dutch Antilles are not particularly Dutch speaking; the northeastern ones mostly speak English and the ABC islands mostly speak Papiamento.)

Do we? I don't, and don't really know of anybody that'd just leave it at that anymore than we would with Jamaica or Haiti (at least, in terms of anybody I know that's been there). They're all West Indian, true, but that's not all. And while Papiamento are the common tongue of the ABC Isles (I've spent some lengthy bouts of time in Willemstad, trust me I know), there's still bilingualism/trilingualism that's Dutch-inclusive on the island(s) and the vast bulk of signage is at least Papiamento-Dutch both.


But I think the bigger issue here is that while the Romance-speaking nations of Europe still feel somewhat of a common Latin identity (an identity transplanted to the New World), I think this is much less true for those of the Germanic-speaking nations. I don't think English-speaking North Americans would necessarily feel that much in common with Dutch-speaking neighbors. I don't think they'd be grouped together at all.

Probably, only the huge linguistic groups would be lumped together. You'd have Latin/Iberian America, Anglo America and perhaps Gallic America, but that'd be about it. Smaller nations that speak Dutch, Swedish, etc. simply wouldn't be grouped in any of them.

I could probably agree with that assessment about Latin "solidarity", much to my chagrin. Although, I'm not sure the French Americas feel much included in the Hispano-Portuguese world despite being technically Latinate-descended themselves (one of the people I work with is of Cajun-speaking roots, and pretty much doesn't consider themself to be Latin at all but rather just "Louisianan" or "creole"). If we're being as precise as all that, maybe you'd see something like Iberian-, Anglo-, Gallic- and Dutch-America all put into their separate groups along linguistic, legal, economic, political (at least formerly) and traditional lines. To touch on the opposite of the Pan-Latin thing, it should be born in mind that Pan-Germanicism wasn't accepted by the Scandinavians or the British, as they both had their respective spheres of cultural influence that only partially overlapped those of the "German" world (and IIRC the Dutch didn't really fall into any one of them, not even the Germany-based one).
 
Top