Stop saying this before I have to hear low-effort memers fall back on a meme in real life instead of seeking the proper solution. Stop destroying language simply because you're too lazy and stubborn to educate yourself. Stop rejecting proper English out of your own lack of self-esteem (hurrrr wut if oi sonde tuu posh).
We all rely on slang sometimes to get a point across, but this particular case is one of massive, socially reasurred stupidity. Everyone is looking to their neighbors for an excuse to use this incorrect language, knowing alternatives exist. Seek them out and use them.
It's "folk"speak you idiot, why the fuck are you overanalyzing this shit?
Evan Collins
Based pic but language's more than vocab. 'Anglo' is a simple way to say "Native English Speaker" and also insult'ish way to mark this people. So inb4 >It's "folk"speak
Jace Barnes
>its stupid you idiot why the fuck are you "overanalysing" it >you should just be analysing it the regular amount
Lucas Perez
i agree, outside of raw vocabulary there's an intuitive aspect to language, and that spirit is totally ignored by everyone who uses anglo. I'm not convinced that any native English speaker thinks this is natural. It's one of those things where nobody knows the solution to the problem so they collectively agree to just ignore it.
Jackson Davis
It is an informal word
Like Spics refer to Mexicans an Spaniards etc
Samuel Sullivan
>It's one of those things where nobody knows the solution to the problem I don't think that the word "problem" describes it the right way. As well as I see no reason nor I see the way to solve anything about it. And define 'spirit' please, I'm not sure I've fully got what you include into this term.
Hunter Diaz
even informal words have rules. the word spaniard still makes linguistic sense, for example, even though the label is technically incorrect.
James King
the eternal anglo wants you to believe he doesnt exists
Cameron Myers
the problem is the apparent lack of a word which describes a white resident of a country within the anglosphere. "spirit" in this context means "essential nature".
Oliver Gonzalez
im here to tell you he DOES exist and that there are proper words to describe him, not the grammatical sidestep term you want to use on the internet and increasingly in real life.
Colton Cruz
The Anglomutt is immunized against all dangers. Call him an Amerifat, mutt, Yank, Seppo cunt, it all runs off him like shart down a Walmart aisle. But call him an Anglo and you'll be astonished how he recoils, how trolled he gets, how he suddenly resorts to flaming: 'm-muh grammar, ya darn Yuro!'
Cameron Thomas
another problem of the same nature: there is no such thing as "a germanic" or "germanics". there are germans, and germanoids, and germanic peoples, but there is no such thing as "a germanic".
"they" is also incorrect when used to refer to a person of ambivalent gender.
in no case is the usage of niggertalk a solution. we simply do not have these words. talk around them or find the proper alternatives.
Except this NEVER happens. I've even seen ANGLO-SAXON BRITS who are wont to use this non-term. They are WRONG and giving in to their LAZINESS by choosing to speak in memes, knowing other memers will indulge them.
Hudson Williams
>linguistic sense if smth uses (and widely) it starts to make sense. Language is a large tradition (or a bunch of traditions) and any tradition is simply a many generation long habit. >rules >incorrect Hm, you are just talking from the point of prescriptive linguistic. There's also descriptive one, as you know, I guess.
For example it's incorrect to say >Anglos gets to a Spain where the word 'Anglos' is not an issue, as you can see. And the lack of "intuitive aspect" is obvious here for the grammatical structure itself's broken af.
Landon Myers
"euro-" is also a non-word and the EU is in the wrong for naming their currency "the euro". Eurotrash is a legitimate word, even if it's a "folk-word", because its invention is consistent with the spirit of the language. I would be less upset with "angloshit" or "anglotrash" than I would with just "anglo-".
Colton Sanders
>simply a many generation long habit. your error is in thinking this is simple. our ability to walk upright is "simply" a many-generation-long habit as well. that doesn't mean we should take it so lightly.
Isaiah Walker
>the problem is the apparent lack of a word pam-pam - !Anglo! - a new word added! Here's how we solve your problems! It's legit as far as it uses. You may not agree with it and point to the dictionaries and other stuff, but as well as I know, words are prone to change their meanings as well as meanings are prone to get their words if such are needed. >your error is in thinking this is simple. Can you tell me where I'm wrong in my way to describe the nature of grammatical rules and words' meanings.
Jeremiah Diaz
yes, anyone can create nonsense from thin air. but in order for it to be a legitimate creation it has to respect certain rules. some of these rules are either too complex to explain to people who want lazy solutions, or they're merely unspoken and intuitive, in which case even lazy people understand - they just ignore them. your error in saying "words are simply developed over generations" is to claim the process is "simple" or that the inevitability of change justifies everything in and of itself.
i could guess that in a hundred years it will be okay to marry multiple women - but that doesn't justify or legitimize polygamy TODAY.
Justin Reyes
shut up Anglo
Jack King
you're wrong
Benjamin Garcia
t. Eternal anglo in disguise
Juan Gomez
okay, but at least I'm not as pathetic as you. shut the fuck up, Angloid.
Xavier Gonzalez
>anglo- your error is in thinking that the things of the same shape/look should act the same way. There's nothing wrong in using the same combination-of-sounds diffretly in the diffrent contexts. I bet English has a lot of words which're ended with [-o] and not all of them are prefixes. Yah, suddenly "Anglo" acts as prefix when it's used with the other word like "Saxon" and acts as a noun in any other context. That's how it just works. oke, you still talking from the point of prescriptive linguistic. Oke, imagine all the english-speaking-coutries have geathered up the en-spe-count-name liguistic conference. Oke, all these people have found the most pleasent word for the en-spe-countsmen. Oke, cool. What's next? What shall you do with the new-born tradition of usage the old combination-of-sounds which's actually "Anglo"? >Hey, guys, here's the new word we've invented! Now use it please! Will this new word even be catched on? Is there any sense? Actually, that's why esperanto's died (or just a stillborn conlang)
Michael Garcia
Who cares what slaves are saying to each other?
Hunter Ward
>i could guess that in a hundred years it will be okay to marry multiple women - but that doesn't justify or legitimize polygamy TODAY. Has I ever mentioned that we should turn english back to Pre-norman period? And If something disturbs you - cool, but that doesn't make your way of thought right (or wrong). The tradition to marry multiple women isn't fully dead. In the western societies it has gradually died out or banned by christians (concubines aren't wives btw). Meanwhile look at the more traditional societies.
Zachary Thomas
this
Isaiah Russell
>that doesn't make your way of thought right i agree. those things which make my way of thinking correct, i have outlined above.
Camden Sullivan
my belief that "Anglo-" isn't a word, but a hyphenated prefix, isn't borne of its shape. it's born of the knowledge i have of its syntax.
Wyatt Brown
>Anglo is a prefix >therefore Anglo is not a word >so it can't be used as a word Is that your point?
Isaiah Flores
...so in closing, Anglo is just a contraction of Anglo-Saxon for use in abbreviated forms of communication such as posting on anime imageboards
Aiden Myers
the legitimacy of a created word is not based in the mere consensus of an educated council. neither is it based on the inevitability of change. neither is it based on the current popularity of the word. these are the truths i profess.
Anthony Perez
it can be used as anything. but not legitimately. "anglo-" is a hyphenated prefix that can only be used legitimately as such. when used in isolation, it has no legitimate meaning. it's wrong. nignog speech.
Owen Jenkins
>the knowledge i have of its syntax If you agree that >syntax is the set of rules, principles, and processes that govern the structure of sentence (first def. I got, sorry) so you would agree that different parts of speech have different roles in sentence. where Anglo- is a prefix it has one syntax where Anglo is a noun it has other syntax inb4 you are still talking from the prescriptive point, where 'Anglo-' is always 'Anglo-' and no way other. In practice it widely uses as a noun and in that case should be treated as a new word with its different (from Anglo-) noun'ish role .
Ethan Adams
>legitimately By 'legitimately' you mean "acceptable to press and official media"? I'm afraid to get it wrong.
Cooper Reed
Nobody cares faggot.
Henry Smith
Its fucking 4:00 here and I'm discussing about the words of the random germanic language with its nativer! That's gonna kill me (mortally and by death)!
Noah Brown
I DO CARE LEAF! That's the strangest conversation I ever had on this site!
Ryder Perez
This case would be an exception because the use of the noun 'Saxon' would instead imply a connection to one of two German federal states rather than to the inhabitants of Britain and their former colonies.
