I'm guessing because in English, a turkey is an animal name, and used as an insult (Jive turkey).
Even so, Türkiye is written with a U not found in english. Therefore I consider it incorrect to write it like this
Discuss.
Let's assume that the bird quip is tongue in cheek and not some really bizarre reasoning about homonyms.
Doyou still like Peking and Bombay? The point of the change is to recognize how the citizens call their own place.
What gives you (or me) any authority to oppose or permit?
You do have a point about spelling, but English generally adapts a foreign alphabet. Remember CCCP? It's Cyrillic for USSR.
How about this word, now beloved of people who fawn over bread-and-circuses superhero movies: ubermensch. In the original German, it has an umlaut over the U similar to the new spelling for Turkey. Look it up in your regular dictionary.
Doyou still like Peking and Bombay? The point of the change is to recognize how the citizens call their own place.
How they call themselves is irrelevant, since we don’t speak the same language, and we have may trouble with pronunciation. If they just want to hear us butcher the name of their country, then mission accomplished.
The level of Narcissism it takes to make such a demand is unreal.
The Côte d'Ivoire started doing this a few years ago. Sorry, we aren’t doing it.
I'm guessing because in English, a turkey is an animal name
"and I oppose this"
IKR?
How dare they go against your authority and choose their own name ?
Its like that kid in the playground whose lunch money you steal and call 'poopy pants' saying he's actually called Neil.
Like this?
https://youtu.be/oI6CTj72C2k?si=_B-kKQlxBc2ZjdTW
🤣
Hey utube's working again!
(it wouldnt believe i had disconnected the ad blocker yesterday)
utube wit ads gonna suck though.
YouTube with ads pushed me into the arms of Spotify.
shareSpot on , the worst part is with music , I'd built a whole playlist of like hour long mixes that other people upload of various themes that you wont get on the music streaming (such as ambient "synthwave" and such ), or if you could you'd have to spend hours replicating their 50 song mix
I discovered "The birthday Massacre" on one of them ,
I know you like your music - check out tracks 4 & 6 (the links go straight to them )
https://youtu.be/R-qDjKpimtw?t=755 "walking with strangers"
https://youtu.be/R-qDjKpimtw?t=1207 "Falling down"
I don't play along with any attempts to change the English language by fiat, nor by request. Some recent ones include "Ukraine" instead of "the Ukraine," and "Kyiv" instead of "Kiev." The day I start referring to Turkey as "Türkiye" is the same day that Butterball turkeys soar like eagles.
shareThe Kyiv thing is recent, but "Ukraine" has broadly been casually called "Ukraine" for a long time now.
shareThere has only been a big push to omit the "the" recently. I've even seen bots on Reddit that appeared within the past year or so, dedicated to "correcting" people who type "the Ukraine." The funny thing is, "the Ukraine" is grammatically correct, for the same reason that "the Netherlands" is grammatically correct. The attempted change to "Ukraine" sans "the" is due to "political correctness," which is a laughable concept.
sharehttps://www.google.com/search?q=ukraine&sca_esv=579144136&sxsrf=AM9HkKnLymdkwQCGato43_GMbcpCJEmSNg%3A1699014892706&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A10%2F29%2F2009%2Ccd_max%3A10%2F20%2F2014&tbm=
Google search of "Ukraine" between 2009-14
Most results show "Ukraine" and not "the Ukraine".
>reason that "the Netherlands" is grammatically correct. The attempted change to "Ukraine" sans "the" is due to "political correctness," which is a laughable concept.
What are you on about? People have been casually saying "Netherlands" for decades too.
But (the) Netherlands is slightly different, in that no-one in the country has asked for the article to be dropped. The United Kingdom may occasionally also be referred to as United Kingdom. The United States may occasionally be referred to as United States. [Conversely, France -- official name: La République française -- refers to itself as La France. We don't call it The France in English unless we're taking the piss out of them.]
(The) Ukraine has asked people to refer to it only as Ukraine for political reasons -- essentially, as it sees the issue, as an assertion of its sovereignty. It thinks 'The Ukraine' is the name given to an area rather than a nation-state. Hence the subject becoming a hotter topic more recently.
But MaximRecoil is right that the Ukraine is, in English, grammatically correct. Translation: The borderland.
The country continues to take an article in other languages such as German. So it's entirely possible to continue calling it The Ukraine while recognising its sovereignty.
Personally, I'll call Ukraine Ukraine if Ukraine wants to be called Ukraine. But the change is politically motivated.
>But (the) Netherlands is slightly different, in that no-one in the country has asked for the article to be dropped. The United Kingdom may occasionally also be referred to as United Kingdom. The United States may occasionally be referred to as United States. [Conversely, France -- official name: La République française -- refers to itself as La France. We don't call it The France in English unless we're taking the piss out of them.]
In my experience, we don't call it "the Netherlands" or "la France" at all. We just call them Netherlands or France respectively.
>(The) Ukraine has asked people to refer to it only as Ukraine for political reasons -- essentially, as it sees the issue, as an assertion of its sovereignty. It thinks 'The Ukraine' is the name given to an area rather than a nation-state. Hence the subject becoming a hotter topic more recently.
Sure. But in any case, "Ukraine" was commonly used anyway in the west.
The distinction here though is that these aren't rooted in linguistic. It is like us telling Germans to stop referring to the UK as "Großbritannien".
Sure. But in any case, "Ukraine" was commonly used anyway in the west.
In my experience, we don't call it "the Netherlands" or "la France" at all. We just call them Netherlands or France respectively.
>We certainly do continue to refer to Netherlands as The Netherlands though. And even sometimes still Holland, which is probably the one the Dutch would choose to stop.
I've never seen this. Seen "Holland" a lot, to be sure.
"Google search of "Ukraine" between 2009-14
Most results show "Ukraine" and not "the Ukraine"."
That's irrelevant to what I said. Once again: "There has only been a big push to omit the 'the' recently." Usage by itself isn't a big push, and usage by mainstream media outlets that reflects whatever happens to be "politically correct" at the moment is obviously par for the course.
"What are you on about? People have been casually saying "Netherlands" for decades too."
Fortunately, I've never encountered anyone who says "Netherlands" without the "the" in real life.
In the English-speaking world during most of the 20th century, Ukraine (whether independent or not) was referred to as "the Ukraine".[23] This is because the word ukraina means 'borderland'[24] so the definite article would be natural in the English language; this is similar to Nederlanden, which means 'low lands' and is rendered in English as "the Netherlands".[25] However, since Ukraine's declaration of independence in 1991, this usage has become politicised and is now rarer, and style guides advise against its use.[26][27] US ambassador William Taylor said that using "the Ukraine" implies disregard for Ukrainian sovereignty.[28] The official Ukrainian position is that "the Ukraine" is both grammatically and politically incorrect.[29]share
>That's irrelevant to what I said. Once again: "There has only been a big push to omit the 'the' recently." Usage by itself isn't a big push, and usage by mainstream media outlets that reflects whatever happens to be "politically correct" at the moment is obviously par for the course.
There was never any mainstream usage of "the" beforehand though. Your own source notes that it started being called "Ukraine" normally since 1991. It's been in common parlance for over 30 years.
>Fortunately, I've never encountered anyone who says "Netherlands" without the "the" in real life.
You must hang around with some weird people.
"There was never any mainstream usage of "the" beforehand though."
Yes, there was.
"Your own source notes that it started being called "Ukraine" normally since 1991."
You think everyone in the English-speaking world changed the way they talked overnight on some date in 1991 due to some politically-motivated decree that came out of the Ukraine?
"It's been in common parlance for over 30 years."
No, it hasn't. It has only gained a large amount of traction among the general English-speaking population recently with the big push that came along with the Ukraine becoming "the latest thing" in early 2022. If it had already been common parlance for over 30 years, there would be no motive to create Reddit bots to automatically "correct" people who type "the Ukraine," because there would be hardly anyone to "correct."
"You must hang around with some weird people."
That's comically ironic, considering that "Netherlands" without the "the" is grammatically incorrect in English, so people who use correct grammar are "weird" and people who don't, aren't weird? LOL at that.
Is English even your native language? People who aren't native English speakers leave out articles when speaking English so often that it's a stereotype.
Not everyone I know uses perfect grammar all of the time, but leaving out the "the" from the Netherlands is as big of a gaffe as saying, e.g., "I'm going to store," instead of "I'm going to the store." People I know don't talk like non-native English speakers.
When we use the plural "Netherlands" in Dutch (which is almost never) we always use the article "the". It makes no sense to leave it out. But we actually use the singular "Netherland" when talking of our country. Please refer to us as such from now on!😬
share"But we actually use the singular "Netherland" when talking of our country. Please refer to us as such from now on!"
No, thanks.
Ok, then I'm sure you don't mind if I keep calling you "moron".😊
share"Ok, then I'm sure you don't mind if I keep calling you "moron"."
Comical Irony Alert
Singular "Netherland" isn't a thing in the English language (this web browser's spell-check even flags it as a misspelled word), clodpate. LOL at you thinking you should have any say at all regarding the conventions of the English language based on how things work in Dutch, of all things. Do you want some lessons in the Dutch language from me based on how things work in English?
LOL at the miserable human being that you are.🤣🤣🤣
share>You think everyone in the English-speaking world changed the way they talked overnight on some date in 1991 due to some politically-motivated decree that came out of the Ukraine?
32 years is a long time for "Ukraine" to be normalised in the common vernacular - and it became normalised because Ukraine gained its independence. There wasn't any significant usage of "The Ukraine" in the Anglosphere by 2022. That was my point.
>No, it hasn't. It has only gained a large amount of traction among the general English-speaking population recently with the big push that came along with the Ukraine becoming "the latest thing" in early 2022. If it had already been common parlance for over 30 years, there would be no motive to create Reddit bots to automatically "correct" people who type "the Ukraine," because there would be hardly anyone to "correct."
I literally demonstrated otherwise. https://www.google.com/search?q=ukraine&sca_esv=579144136&sxsrf=AM9HkKnLymdkwQCGato43_GMbcpCJEmSNg%3A1699014892706&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A10%2F29%2F2009%2Ccd_max%3A10%2F20%2F2014&tbm=
This is a timestamped google search for articles that reference "Ukraine" in the period between 2009-14. Almost all of them say "Ukraine", and not "the Ukraine".
>That's comically ironic, considering that "Netherlands" without the "the" is grammatically incorrect in English, so people who use correct grammar are "weird" and people who don't, aren't weird? LOL at that.
I have literally never heard, or seen anyone say "the Netherlands" in casual chatter. I have seen it used in more formal informative contexts though. I just got used to see it used as "Netherlands" in drop-down lists, in sports commentary where the team is just listed as "Netherlands" (or "Holland")
>Is English even your native language? People who aren't native English speakers leave out articles when speaking English so often that it's a stereotype.
Yes, it is.
"32 years is a long time for "Ukraine" to be normalised in the common vernacular - and it became normalised because Ukraine gained its independence."
Not without a big push from mainstream media outlets it isn't. There was never a big push until early 2022 when the Ukraine started being in the headlines constantly. How often do you think the Ukraine even came up in conversations among the general public in English-speaking countries from 1991 to 2022? And how many do you think even heard about the Ukraine's attempt to change the English language by fiat in 1991? I certainly never did until 2022.
"I literally demonstrated otherwise."
No, you didn't. You linked to Google search results consisting of mostly mainstream media articles, and obviously they are going to be onboard with "political correctness" and/or style guides. There's nothing there to indicate how everyday people talked.
The funny thing is: even among those mainstream media results, there are still instances where someone didn't get the "politically correct" memo. For example:
"Terry Moran discusses the latest developments in the Ukraine and for its former leader." - https://abcnews.go.com/International/ukraine-russia-war-outcomes-ukraine-unrest/story?id=22703348
And here's one from a US government website:
"The U.S. recognized Ukraine after the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991. The United States has traditionally sought to promote Ukrainian political and economic stability since the Ukraine declared independence from Russia. U.S. relations with the Ukraine have, however, been complicated by Ukraine’s historical relationship with Russia." - https://history.state.gov/countries/ukraine
"I have literally never heard, or seen anyone say "the Netherlands" in casual chatter."
"Yes, it is."
Then English is either not your native language despite your assertion otherwise, or you're from somewhere that has a truly bizarre take on the English language. Where are you from? In any case, your claims about "Ukraine" vs. "the Ukraine" in common vernacular over the past ~30 years are worthless when you don't even realize that "the Netherlands" is absolutely the norm in English.
>Not without a big push from mainstream media outlets it isn't. There was never a big push until early 2022 when the Ukraine started being in the headlines constantly. How often do you think the Ukraine even came up in conversations among the general public in English-speaking countries from 1991 to 2022? And how many do you think even heard about the Ukraine's attempt to change the English language by fiat in 1991? I certainly never did until 2022.
The "Kyiv" thing is new. Not the "Ukraine" thing. What you insist without evidence I can dismiss without evidence. Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public, but the use of "*the* Ukraine" was always a type of geopolitical shibboleth when uttered. That's even more true now.
>The funny thing is: even among those mainstream media results, there are still instances where someone didn't get the "politically correct" memo. For example:
I never said it was universal. I said the majority already called it "Ukraine". And they did long before Crimea and long before Russia invaded last year.
>Then English is either not your native language despite your assertion otherwise, or you're from somewhere that has a truly bizarre take on the English language. Where are you from? In any case, your claims about "Ukraine" vs. "the Ukraine" in common vernacular over the past ~30 years are worthless when you don't even realize that "the Netherlands" is absolutely the norm in English.
As I said. It's shortened often to "Netherlands" in drop-down lists on websites and in stuff like this:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/european-championship/table (group B).
But fine, I'll concede "the Netherlands" thing but it is not true in the case of Ukraine.
"Not the "Ukraine" thing."
The big push is new, as I've said all along. It is about a year and nine months old.
"What you insist without evidence I can dismiss without evidence."
I already gave evidence: the Reddit bots. There were no Reddit bots automatically "correcting" people who typed "the Ukraine" prior to 2022. In any case, this should be self-evident to you anyway, since you've already conceded that the "Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public." Ask yourself how there could have been a big push while at the same time the "Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public." A big push would have ensured that the Ukraine came up a lot among the general public, obviously.
"but the use of "*the* Ukraine" was always a type of geopolitical shibboleth when uttered."
No, it wasn't. I never heard anything about it prior to 2022. I posted on the old IMDb forums, mainly The Soapbox and the Politics boards, from 2002 until the forums closed in 2017, and if "the Ukraine" was ever a controversial thing to say during that time among the mostly American, British, Canadian, and Australian posters there, I would have seen arguments about it, since those were both highly argumentative forums. I never did; not once, not ever. I never heard anything about it anywhere else either, not online, and not in real life. There were no doubt certain types of people who crusaded against the word "the," but they weren't common enough for me to ever encounter them until 2022.
"I never said it was universal. I said the majority already called it "Ukraine". And they did long before Crimea and long before Russia invaded last year."
You don't seem to understand the significance of "the Ukraine" showing up in mainstream media articles and even on a US government website after 1991 and prior to 2022. If sites like that with their "politically correct" policies, style guides, and professional editors were still occasionally calling it "the Ukraine," how much more often do you think the general public was doing it, with no workplace policies or big push to convince them otherwise?
"As I said. It's shortened often to "Netherlands" in drop-down lists on websites and in stuff like this:"
As you've already been told by someone else, that's utterly irrelevant.
"But fine, I'll concede "the Netherlands" thing but it is not true in the case of Ukraine."
Your "[...] but it is not true in the case of Ukraine" assertion is coming from someone who very recently said, "I have literally never heard, or seen anyone say 'the Netherlands' in casual chatter." I suspect that every native English-speaker who read that bizarre statement of yours is wondering where the hell you're from. If you're from some Twilight Zone-like area where no one says "the Netherlands," then it's not surprising that they don't/didn't say "the Ukraine" either.
>The big push is new, as I've said all along. It is about a year and nine months old.
No, it's not. What you insist without evidence I can dismiss without evidence.
>I already gave evidence: the Reddit bots. There were no Reddit bots automatically "correcting" people who typed "the Ukraine" prior to 2022.
Not only have I never seen those bots, it's a laughable excuse for evidence. Ah yes, Reddit defines everything. I have given you evidence of Ukraine being called "Ukraine" repeatedly by media outlets as far back as 2009.
>In any case, this should be self-evident to you anyway, since you've already conceded that the "Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public." Ask yourself how there could have been a big push while at the same time the "Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public." A big push would have ensured that the Ukraine came up a lot among the general public, obviously.
That they didn't come up much amongst the general public doesn't mean it was normalised, when referring to them, to call them "the Ukraine". It just wasn't. Maybe in Russia and parts of Eastern Europe, but not in the western anglosphere.
>No, it wasn't. I never heard anything about it prior to 2022. I posted on the old IMDb forums, mainly The Soapbox and the Politics boards, from 2002 until the forums closed in 2017, and if "the Ukraine" was ever a controversial thing to say during that time among the mostly American, British, Canadian, and Australian posters there, I would have seen arguments about it, since those were both highly argumentative forums. I never did; not once, not ever. I never heard anything about it anywhere else either, not online, and not in real life. There were no doubt certain types of people who crusaded against the word "the," but they weren't common enough for me to ever encounter them until 2022.
I never said it was *controversial*, I said it was less common than just saying "Ukraine".
"No, it's not. What you insist without evidence I can dismiss without evidence."
Your mere gainsaying is dismissed.
"Not only have I never seen those bots"
That's your problem.
" it's a laughable excuse for evidence. Ah yes, Reddit defines everything."
Your non sequitur is dismissed, and this is yet another instance where your extra thick forehead has prevented you from understanding the significance of something. If "Ukraine" sans "the" had already been common vernacular for 30+ years then what would be the point of creating Reddit bots to "correct" people? There would be hardly anyone to "correct," obviously. Some "politically correct" types obvious saw "the Ukraine" as enough of a "problem" in 2022 to try to "fix" it with bots that could auto-reply to many thousands of people per day.
"That they didn't come up much amongst the general public doesn't mean it was normalised, when referring to them, to call them "the Ukraine". It just wasn't. Maybe in Russia and parts of Eastern Europe, but not in the western anglosphere."
This is another non sequitur from you. Once again:
"Ask yourself how there could have been a big push while at the same time the "Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public." A big push would have ensured that the Ukraine came up a lot among the general public, obviously."
You can't have it both ways.
"I never said it was *controversial*"
If it wasn't controversial then there was no big push, obviously. The big push is what makes it controversial.
"I said it was less common than just saying "Ukraine"."
Uh huh... coming from the guy who said:
"I have literally never heard, or seen anyone say 'the Netherlands' in casual chatter."
And why do you keep dodging the question of where you're from?
"You mean "showing up" since 1991"
No, I mean after 1991 and before 2022, just as I said, obviously.
"I also never claimed it was *never* referred to as "the Ukraine" but that "Ukraine" was far more common vernacular long before the annexation of Crimea."
That doesn't address anything I said, so consider your non sequitur dismissed.
>Your non sequitur is dismissed, and this is yet another instance where your extra thick forehead has prevented you from understanding the significance of something. If "Ukraine" sans "the" had already been common vernacular for 30+ years then what would be the point of creating Reddit bots to "correct" people? There would be hardly anyone to "correct," obviously. Some "politically correct" types obvious saw "the Ukraine" as enough of a "problem" in 2022 to try to "fix" it with bots that could auto-reply to many thousands of people per day.
People create all sorts of bots on Reddit for all kinds of reasons. Again, a quick check on google illustrates that its societal usage was very much "Ukraine" over a decade ago.
>You can't have it both ways.
You are really overstating how much of a "big push" there was. There really wasn't. Some media outfits ran articles. That was mostly it.
>If it wasn't controversial then there was no big push, obviously. The big push is what makes it controversial.
>Uh huh... coming from the guy who said:
Except in this case I literally have reciepts via google search over a decade ago where the majority of the references to Ukraine just said "Ukraine", and not "the Ukraine".
>And why do you keep dodging the question of where you're from?
I've already said I'm English.
"People create all sorts of bots on Reddit for all kinds of reasons."
Your non sequitur is dismissed.
"Again, a quick check on google illustrates that its societal usage was very much "Ukraine" over a decade ago."
I've already explained the irrelevance of your Google search (more than once), therefore this statement of yours is dismissed.
"You are really overstating how much of a "big push" there was. There really wasn't. Some media outfits ran articles. That was mostly it."
It was a big enough push for me to hear about it, whereas I never heard about it prior to 2022.
"Except in this case I literally have reciepts via google search over a decade ago where the majority of the references to Ukraine just said "Ukraine", and not "the Ukraine"."
I've already explained the irrelevance of your Google search (more than once), therefore this statement of yours is dismissed.
>Your non sequitur is dismissed.
You spoke about this reddit bot as if it was some damning piece of evidence. It really isn't.
>I've already explained the irrelevance of your Google search (more than once), therefore this statement of yours is dismissed.
No, you've just asserted it. You can go through pages of that and continually find both mainstream media **and** random bloggers and non-mainstream media saying "Ukraine" over and over.
>It was a big enough push for me to hear about it, whereas I never heard about it prior to 2022.
Oh wow, so you heard about it. I guess it must've had its own BBC live chat feed. Dear me.
"You spoke about this reddit bot as if it was some damning piece of evidence. It really isn't."
Your mere gainsaying is dismissed. Get back to me when you can explain the motive behind creating the Reddit bots in 2022 if, as you claim, "There was never any mainstream usage of 'the' beforehand though."
"No, you've just asserted it."
False, by definition. As I said, "I've already explained the irrelevance of your Google search (more than once), therefore this statement of yours is dismissed."
"You can go through pages of that and continually find both mainstream media **and** random bloggers and non-mainstream media saying "Ukraine" over and over."
You didn't link to any "random bloggers and non-mainstream media saying 'Ukraine' over and over," but regardless of that, you can also go through pages and pages of "the Ukraine" results from Reddit (which consists of random people and bots) during your 2009-2014 time frame:
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Areddit.com+%22the+ukraine%22&sca_esv=579144136&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A10%2F29%2F2009%2Ccd_max%3A10%2F20%2F2014&sxsrf=AM9HkKnsHxskKnA-Q1uw3Fz71QHi7ntsBg%3A1699049642786&ei=qnBFZfTHL5vi5NoPhJOKkAQ&ved=0ahUKEwj0xKeT7aiCAxUbMVkFHYSJAkIQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=site%3Areddit.com+%22the+ukraine%22&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiHXNpdGU6cmVkZGl0LmNvbSAidGhlIHVrcmFpbmUiSPQqUPIMWP0mcAF4AJABAJgBUKABsgOqAQE2uAEDyAEA-AEB4gMEGAEgQYgGAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
"Oh wow, so you heard about it."
Yes, that's what I said. And since I don't consume mainstream news media content on any sort of a regular basis, it's indicative of the big push in 2022, obviously. It's also obvious that there will inherently be a much bigger push when all of a sudden the Ukraine is thrust into the headlines worldwide on a regular basis for months on end.
"I guess it must've had its own BBC live chat feed. Dear me."
BBC? You think I'm a Brit?
>Your mere gainsaying is dismissed. Get back to me when you can explain the motive behind creating the Reddit bots in 2022 if, as you claim, "There was never any mainstream usage of 'the' beforehand though."
Because some rando wanted to make it? There are reddit bots that do all kinds of stupid shit.
>False, by definition. As I said, "I've already explained the irrelevance of your Google search (more than once), therefore this statement of yours is dismissed."
No, you've asserted it. No idea what "false by definition" is supposed to mean. I'm also not obliged to give the slightest fuck about your dismissal here. The fact that most results indicate that most sources called Ukraine "Ukraine" during that period is good enough for me and I don't give a fuck what you think.
>You didn't link to any "random bloggers and non-mainstream media saying 'Ukraine' over and over," but regardless of that, you can also go through pages and pages of "the Ukraine" results from Reddit (which consists of random people and bots) during your 2009-2014 time frame:
You are so fucking disingenuous. Here's the results for "Ukraine" literally using your same argument. https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Areddit.com+%22ukraine%22&sca_esv=579144136&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A10%2F29%2F2009%2Ccd_max%3A10%2F20%2F2014&sxsrf=AM9HkKnaL93uPsDzCAf6o8btzMos6elXsw%3A1699104018319&ei=EkVGZe2JE5qlhbIP3fSH0AE&ved=0ahUKEwjt2srbt6qCAxWaUkEAHV36ARoQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=site%3Areddit.com+%22ukraine%22&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiGXNpdGU6cmVkZGl0LmNvbSAidWtyYWluZSJIkgpQnQZYnQZwAngAkAEAmAE6oAE6qgEBMbgBA8gBAPgBAeIDBBgBIEGIBgE&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
>BBC? You think I'm a Brit?
I'm poking fun at the idea that because you noticed something that must've meant it was massive news. I followed the Ukraine shit quite closely at the beginning of the war. The "Ukraine vs. the Ukraine" dichotomy was not big at all.
>Yes, that's what I said. And since I don't consume mainstream news media content on any sort of a regular basis, it's indicative of the big push in 2022, obviously. It's also obvious that there will inherently be a much bigger push when all of a sudden the Ukraine is thrust into the headlines worldwide on a regular basis for months on end.
This is such laughable logic it's comical. You literally spotted the bot on reddit because you use reddit. That doesn't mean that it had headline grabbing, iconic, massive wall-to-wall media coverage.
I repeat: people have used "Ukraine" to refer to Ukraine for a long time, possibly since its independence. That's over 30 years now. Calling it "Ukraine" instead of "the Ukraine" is not some phenomenon that only started happening in 2022.
"Because some rando wanted to make it? There are reddit bots that do all kinds of stupid shit."
You're not the fastest car on the lot, are you? What are the chances of me ever seeing the bot if, as you laughably asserted, "There was never any mainstream usage of 'the' beforehand though,"? In any case:
https://www.reddit.com/user/UkraineWithoutTheBot/
It's been there for ~2 years and it's posted the same comment enough times to have 61,346 "comment karma," despite not being active for the past 10 months. Most of its posts got little to no "upvotes," and some of them are in the negative, so that would amount to a ton of posts over a year or so. I'll let you count them all if you want.
"No, you've asserted it."
Your mere gainsaying is dismissed.
"No idea what "false by definition" is supposed to mean."
That's because you're slow. The definition of "explain" vs. the definition of a mere "assertion" is what proves your assertion false, i.e., false by definition. Anyone can scroll up and see that I explained why your Google search link is irrelevant, more than once.
"I'm also not obliged to give the slightest fuck about your dismissal here."
That's nice, but I only dismiss things which are logically invalid, so you not giving "the slightest fuck" about it is utterly irrelevant. Pretty soon everything you type will be legitimately dismissible, at which point you'll be done. You'll no doubt continue to reply with nothing but logical fallacies, but you'll objectively be done nonetheless.
"The fact that most results indicate that most sources called Ukraine "Ukraine" during that period is good enough for me and I don't give a fuck what you think."
No, that's not a fact. You've only established that most mainstream media outlets have been toeing the "politically correct" line for many years, i.e., you pointed out the obvious. You haven't established that most random people omitted the "the," obviously.
"You are so fucking disingenuous."
Your non sequitur is dismissed.
"Here's the results for "Ukraine" literally using your same argument."
No, that's not "[my] same argument," Slow Doug. The problem for you is that you said, "There was never any mainstream usage of 'the' beforehand though," and I've absolutely proven that wrong. On the other hand, I never said, "There was never any mainstream usage of 'Ukraine' sans 'the' beforehand though," nor have I said anything similar, so your link doesn't prove anything I said wrong. All along my claim has been, that the big push started in 2022, and is therefore a recent thing.
"I'm poking fun at the idea that because you noticed something that must've meant it was massive news."
It has to be big for me to hear about it, because I don't seek out "news." It has to be big enough to get random people talking about it, and the push was never big enough to get any random people I ever encountered talking about it until 2022.
"This is such laughable logic it's comical."
Your non sequitur is dismissed. Also, Comical Irony Alert.
"You literally spotted the bot on reddit because you use reddit."
I saw it because it posted a shitload of times, and since it only posted when someone typed "the Ukraine," that means there were still a shitload of random people using the term "the Ukraine," obviously. Reddit is a massive site; one of the biggest in the world both in terms of content and traffic, yet you imagine that I would have seen a Reddit bot that, if your ridiculous assertions were true, would have hardly ever posted. LOL at that, and LOL at you too, you know, while I'm at it.
"That doesn't mean that it had headline grabbing, iconic, massive wall-to-wall media coverage."
Your non sequitur is dismissed.
"I repeat: people have used "Ukraine" to refer to Ukraine for a long time, possibly since its independence. That's over 30 years now."
Thank you Captain Obvious, but that's yet another non sequitur from you, since I've never claimed otherwise. Consider it dismissed out of hand.
"Calling it "Ukraine" instead of "the Ukraine" is not some phenomenon that only started happening in 2022."
Again, the big push [to convince people to say "Ukraine" instead of "the Ukraine"] started in 2022, as I've said all along. The reason is obvious, too, i.e., in 2022 the Ukraine suddenly became a very common topic of conversation, whereas it was an uncommon topic of conversation before. It's impossible to have a period of time when something is simultaneously an uncommon topic of conversation and there's a big push to change the terminology of said something, because the big push itself would make it a common topic of conversation, obviously. You've already conceded that the "Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public," which means you've also inherently conceded that there wasn't a big push.
>You're not the fastest car on the lot, are you? What are the chances of me ever seeing the bot if, as you laughably asserted, "There was never any mainstream usage of 'the' beforehand though,"? In any case:
I see random bots on reddit all the time. I forget most of them.
>It's been there for ~2 years and it's posted the same comment enough times to have 61,346 "comment karma," despite not being active for the past 10 months. Most of its posts got little to no "upvotes," and some of them are in the negative, so that would amount to a ton of posts over a year or so. I'll let you count them all if you want.
So fucking what? Bots just automate post. And again, I literally never said that no-one ever used "the Ukraine". I said that it wasn't uniformly used, or majority used prior to 2022.
>That's because you're slow. The definition of "explain" vs. the definition of a mere "assertion" is what proves your assertion false, i.e., false by definition. Anyone can scroll up and see that I explained why your Google search link is irrelevant, more than once.
You dismissed it. You didn't provide a good argument. I'm also not obliged to give the slightest fuck about your dismissal here. The fact that most results indicate that most sources called Ukraine "Ukraine" during that period is good enough for me and I don't give a fuck what you think.
>I saw it because it posted a shitload of times, and since it only posted when someone typed "the Ukraine," that means there were still a shitload of random people using the term "the Ukraine," obviously. Reddit is a massive site; one of the biggest in the world both in terms of content and traffic, yet you imagine that I would have seen a Reddit bot that, if your ridiculous assertions were true, would have hardly ever posted. LOL at that, and LOL at you too, you know, while I'm at it.
I never said it "hardly ever posted". I said it wasn't significant in the grand scheme of things. I already responded to your google reddit search to show that plenty of people also referred to Ukraine as "Ukraine" and did so prior to 2022. Your thoughts on that, or do results that contradict you simply not exist?
>Thank you Captain Obvious, but that's yet another non sequitur from you, since I've never claimed otherwise. Consider it dismissed out of hand.
Right then. So the notion it only started happening when Russia invaded Ukraine is complete nonsense.
>Again, the big push [to convince people to say "Ukraine" instead of "the Ukraine"] started in 2022, as I've said all along.
More of a small push, since plenty of people were already calling it "Ukraine". And I am willing to bet that the Ukrainebot on Reddit, if I were to check, mostly replies to tankies or russians or otherwise anti-Ukraine, anti-western posters who deliberately use "the Ukraine".
That Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public prior to 2022 doesn't mean most people would've defaulted to "the Ukraine" if they ever referenced them. This is just an assertion by you without evidence.
"I see random bots on reddit all the time. I forget most of them."
And you're not bright enough to realize that if you see a bot on Reddit it has almost certainly made a shitload of posts. The chances of any one person encountering a random bot on a site as vast as Reddit that hardly ever posts are slim to none.
"So fucking what?"
^^^ Further evidence of your dull skull.
"Bots just automate post."
Thank you, Captain Obvious. Every one of its at least tens of thousands of posts over a ~one-year period corresponds with an instance of someone typing "the Ukraine," which proves your asinine assertions wrong. The Google results for Reddit that I linked to also prove your assertions wrong.
"And again, I literally never said that no-one ever used "the Ukraine". I said that it wasn't uniformly used, or majority used prior to 2022."
You said:
"There was never any mainstream usage of 'the' beforehand though."
Countless instances of random people on various "subreddits" using "the" is absolutely mainstream usage, which means you've been proven wrong.
"You dismissed it. You didn't provide a good argument."
You've proven that you're not even remotely qualified to determine that. Not only was it a "good argument," but it was irrefutable, which you've demonstrated by failing to refute it.
"The fact that most results indicate that most sources called Ukraine "Ukraine" during that period is good enough for me and I don't give a fuck what you think."
The fact that most mainstream media outlets did the "politically correct," "style guide correct," and grammatically incorrect thing by calling the Ukraine "Ukraine" (which is all that your Google search link demonstrated, i.e., it demonstrated the obvious) is not, and never was, a point of contention, which inherently means it's utterly irrelevant.
"I never said it "hardly ever posted"."
Actually, what you said was even more ridiculous; you said that it never posted. Again, you said:
"There was never any mainstream usage of 'the' beforehand though."
Which is the exact same thing as saying that it never posted, obviously. Since it only ever posted in reply to usage of "the;" if, as you claimed, there was never any such usage, it would have never replied to anyone, ever, obviously.
"I said it wasn't significant in the grand scheme of things. I already responded to your google reddit search to show that plenty of people also referred to Ukraine as "Ukraine" and did so prior to 2022."
Your laughable attempt to backpedal is dismissed.
"Your thoughts on that, or do results that contradict you simply not exist?"
I already posted my "thoughts on that," Special Ed; i.e., it doesn't contradict anything I said and is therefore irrelevant. My fundamental assertion is, and always has been, that the big push to get everyone to conform to the "politically correct" and grammatically incorrect term for the Ukraine is a recent thing. It doesn't matter what percentage of people used the grammatically incorrect term prior to 2022, because it doesn't change the fact that the big push started in 2022, which correlated with the Ukraine suddenly becoming a big topic of conversation.
"Right then. So the notion it only started happening when Russia invaded Ukraine is complete nonsense."
I've put forth no such notion; you're simply confused as usual. See above.
"More of a small push, since plenty of people were already calling it "Ukraine"."
No, a big push. The small push started in 1991. It couldn't become a big push until there was an underlying reason for mainstream media outlets, and random people in general, to be talking about the Ukraine all the time, which didn't happen until 2022.
"And I am willing to bet that the Ukrainebot on Reddit, if I were to check, mostly replies to tankies or russians or otherwise anti-Ukraine, anti-western posters who deliberately use "the Ukraine"."
Your poor stab at soothsaying is dismissed.
"That Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public prior to 2022 doesn't mean most people would've defaulted to "the Ukraine" if they ever referenced them."
Reading Deficiency Alert
In reality, what I said is: that the Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public prior to 2022 (which you've admitted) inherently means there was no big push prior to 2022 (which you've also admitted to by logical extension). I never said anything about what people would have defaulted to, nor is it even relevant, obviously.
"This is just an assertion by you without evidence."
Negated by your reading deficiency-fueled strawman (see above), therefore dismissed.
>And you're not bright enough to realize that if you see a bot on Reddit it has almost certainly made a shitload of posts. The chances of any one person encountering a random bot on a site as vast as Reddit that hardly ever posts are slim to none.
Tons of bots make tons of posts on Reddit. What's your point?
Also who said I hardly ever post on Reddit?
>^^^ Further evidence of your dull skull.
You continue to hurl insults like a manchild.
>Thank you, Captain Obvious. Every one of its at least tens of thousands of posts over a ~one-year period corresponds with an instance of someone typing "the Ukraine," which proves your asinine assertions wrong. The Google results for Reddit that I linked to also prove your assertions wrong.
And how many people also said "Ukraine"? You can, as I did, trivially use google to find tons of posts of people typing "Ukraine" way before 2022.
>The fact that most mainstream media outlets did the "politically correct," "style guide correct," and grammatically incorrect thing by calling the Ukraine "Ukraine" (which is all that your Google search link demonstrated, i.e., it demonstrated the obvious) is not, and never was, a point of contention, which inherently means it's utterly irrelevant.
You have no way of knowing that all the results are purely from mainstream outlets. This is another claim made by you without the slightest shred of eivdence. You're also a massive hypocrite as you presented, with any self-awarness, your own google results of "the Ukraine" being used.
>I already posted my "thoughts on that," Special Ed; i.e., it doesn't contradict anything I said and is therefore irrelevant. My fundamental assertion is, and always has been, that the big push to get everyone to conform to the "politically correct" and grammatically incorrect term for the Ukraine is a recent thing. It doesn't matter what percentage of people used the grammatically incorrect term prior to 2022, because it doesn't change the fact that the big push started in 2022, which correlated with the Ukraine suddenly becoming a big topic of conversation.
There was no "big push". It's all in your head. Plenty of people were calling it "Ukraine" long before 2022, as I have demonstrated both with Reddit results and google results.
>I've put forth no such notion; you're simply confused as usual. See above.
I await evidence that calling it "the Ukraine" was more common than "Ukraine" before 2022.
>No, a big push. The small push started in 1991. It couldn't become a big push until there was an underlying reason for mainstream media outlets, and random people in general, to be talking about the Ukraine all the time, which didn't happen until 2022.
"Big push" apparently being some news articles and a reddit bot.
>Your poor stab at soothsaying is dismissed.
There's no need to do so. I can actually go through its replies if I wanted.
>In reality, what I said is: that the Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public prior to 2022 (which you've admitted) inherently means there was no big push prior to 2022 (which you've also admitted to by logical extension). I never said anything about what people would have defaulted to, nor is it even relevant, obviously.
It was relevant to my initial point which was that "Ukraine" was already normalised.
"Tons of bots make tons of posts on Reddit. What's your point?"
Your non sequitur is dismissed.
"Also who said I hardly ever post on Reddit?"
Reading Deficiency Alert: Part II. I said:
"The chances of any one person encountering a random bot on a site as vast as Reddit that hardly ever posts are slim to none."
"[...] that hardly ever posts" refers to the bot, not to you. You should have been able to figure that out since I used the word "that" rather than "who." Unlike you, I don't embrace bad grammar.
"And how many people also said "Ukraine"? You can, as I did, trivially use google to find tons of posts of people typing "Ukraine" way before 2022."
For the umpteenth time, simple fellow, it doesn't matter, because I never made any claims with regard to "how many people also said 'Ukraine.'" You're the one who said, "There was never any mainstream usage of 'the' beforehand though," so it does matter when I point out a shitload of "the Ukraine" posts, because it proves your asinine assertion wrong.
"You have no way of knowing that all the results are purely from mainstream outlets."
Reading Deficiency Alert: Part III. I've used the term "primarily" and similar qualifiers more than once. Also, it doesn't matter because it has nothing to do with what I said, which is: "There has only been a big push to omit the 'the' recently." And then in my next reply I even reiterated that again, with the words "a big push" in bold this time, and it still didn't manage to penetrate your drop-forged forehead.
To dumb this down for you as much as I can: the prevalence of "Ukraine" vs. "the Ukraine" between 1991 and 2022 has absolutely fuckall to do with the big push that started in 2022.
"You're also a massive hypocrite as you presented, with any self-awarness, your own google results of "the Ukraine" being used."
Reading Deficiency Alert: Part IV. As I've already explained to you multiple times, results for "Ukraine" being used are irrelevant, because they don't disprove, nor even address, anything I've said. On the other hand, results for "the Ukraine" being used are relevant, because they disprove the following laughable assertion from you: "There was never any mainstream usage of 'the' beforehand though." That means there is no hypocrisy on my part, obviously, dim bulb.
"There was no "big push". It's all in your head."
LOL at your denial of blatantly obvious reality. There was a push, albeit a relatively small one, that started in 1991, and never went away. The idea that the Ukraine could suddenly become the hot topic for months on end in 2022 without there being a corresponding increase in the push is utterly absurd. The more that people talk about the Ukraine, the more opportunities there are for "politically correct" types to "correct" people who say "the Ukraine":
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&geo=US&q=Ukraine&hl=en
Do you see that massive spike in 2022 for the search term "Ukraine"? And you imagine that with exponentially more people suddenly talking about the Ukraine, there was no corresponding increase of the push to get people to say "Ukraine" instead of "the Ukraine"?
I'll dumb this one down for you too. Suppose that on a typical day in, e.g., 2021, the Ukraine was the topic of 10,000 conversations in the English-speaking world, and half of them used the grammatically correct term "the Ukraine." Also suppose that 1% of the English-speaking world cared enough about "political correctness" to "correct" people who said "the Ukraine." That comes to 50 "corrections" per day (these aren't intended to be attempts at accurate estimates of course; they are just simple round numbers to illustrate the point to a simpleton).
Now suppose that there are 1,000,000 conversations about the Ukraine per day in 2022, with half of them using the term "the Ukraine." That amounts to 5,000 "corrections" per day, and that doesn't even take into account how many "new recruits" there would be to the "politically correct" camp due to so many more people seeing/hearing the "corrections."
"Plenty of people were calling it "Ukraine" long before 2022, as I have demonstrated both with Reddit results and google results."
Utterly irrelevant (see above, in many places).
"I await evidence that calling it "the Ukraine" was more common than "Ukraine" before 2022."
Since I never made any claims about that one way or another, your non sequitur is dismissed.
"'Big push' apparently being some news articles and a reddit bot."
Your non sequitur is dismissed.
"There's no need to do so. I can actually go through its replies if I wanted."
It doesn't matter what you "can" do if you want; the fact is, you didn't go through the replies, therefore you made a poor stab at soothsaying, which can legitimately be dismissed out of hand, obviously.
"It was relevant to my initial point which was that "Ukraine" was already normalised."
It was relevant to your initial irrelevant point? LOL at that.
>For the umpteenth time, simple fellow, it doesn't matter, because I never made any claims with regard to "how many people also said 'Ukraine.'" You're the one who said, "There was never any mainstream usage of 'the' beforehand though," so it does matter when I point out a shitload of "the Ukraine" posts, because it proves your asinine assertion wrong.
Yes, it does matter. Because your premise rests upon the notion that saying or typing "Ukraine" as opposed to "the Ukraine" was less common than prior to 2022. You have failed to demonstrate this in the slightest.
>Reading Deficiency Alert: Part III. I've used the term "primarily" and similar qualifiers more than once. Also, it doesn't matter because it has nothing to do with what I said, which is: "There has only been a big push to omit the 'the' recently." And then in my next reply I even reiterated that again, with the words "a big push" in bold this time, and it still didn't manage to penetrate your drop-forged forehead.
You have absolutely no evidence that it is "primarily" from mainstream media outlets either. And it wasn't a "big push". You have provided no evidence that it was a "big push". You can keep insisting it all the time and insulting me like a petulant little baby, but I will continually respond the same way each time.
>LOL at your denial of blatantly obvious reality. There was a push, albeit a relatively small one, that started in 1991, and never went away. The idea that the Ukraine could suddenly become the hot topic for months on end in 2022 without there being a corresponding increase in the push is utterly absurd. The more that people talk about the Ukraine, the more opportunities there are for "politically correct" types to "correct" people who say "the Ukraine"
No reason to believe this at all. Some articles being posted to mainstream media outlets for a few days and a reddit bot does not remotely constitute a "big push".
>Do you see that massive spike in 2022 for the search term "Ukraine"? And you imagine that with exponentially more people suddenly talking about the Ukraine, there was no corresponding increase of the push to get people to say "Ukraine" instead of "the Ukraine"?
The spike has way more to do with RUSSIA INVADING UKRAINE giving the country big international attention than any "big push" to get people to say Ukraine.
>Since I never made any claims about that one way or another, your non sequitur is dismissed.
This is the crux of my argument here. That "Ukraine" was more common than "the Ukraine" before 2022 when it came to people talking about it. At least in the wider english-speaking western world.
>I'll dumb this one down for you too. Suppose that on a typical day in, e.g., 2021, the Ukraine was the topic of 10,000 conversations in the English-speaking world, and half of them used the grammatically correct term "the Ukraine." Also suppose that 1% of the English-speaking world cared enough about "political correctness" to "correct" people who said "the Ukraine." That comes to 50 "corrections" per day (these aren't intended to be attempts at accurate estimates of course; they are just simple round numbers to illustrate the point to a simpleton).
>Now suppose that there are 1,000,000 conversations about the Ukraine per day in 2022, with half of them using the term "the Ukraine." That amounts to 5,000 "corrections" per day, and that doesn't even take into account how many "new recruits" there would be to the "politically correct" camp due to so many more people seeing/hearing the "corrections."
So the corrections would go up because the amount of people talking about it goes up. The actual rate of corrections increases at the same rate of interactions - it's proportionate. So how does this illustrate your point at all?
Also, why are you immune to the character limit on moviechat? I have to cut my post up multiple times.
"Yes, it does matter. Because your premise rests upon the notion that saying or typing "Ukraine" as opposed to "the Ukraine" was less common than prior to 2022."
No, it doesn't, dumb guy, as I've already told you many times. Even if, say, 99% of the world had already kowtowed to "political correctness" and bad grammar by 2021, it wouldn't change the fact that there was a much bigger push that started in 2022.
I'm going to skip most of your legitimately dismissible bullshit here, because you've already gotten to the point that your posts consist of nothing but repeating things that have already been refuted multiple times and other fallacies.
"So the corrections would go up because the amount of people talking about it goes up. The actual rate of corrections increases at the same rate of interactions - it's proportionate. So how does this illustrate your point at all?"
Is that a joke or are you really that daft? To dumb down the already dumbed down illustration:
Suppose there are 10 people standing against a large wall and 10% of them are pushing against the wall. That's 1 person pushing, which is a relatively small push. Now suppose 10,000 people congregate at the wall and there are still 10% of them pushing against the wall. Now there are a thousand people pushing against the wall, which is obviously a much bigger push, regardless of the percentage of people pushing being the same.
To sum this up:
By admitting that the "Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public," you also inherently admitted that there wasn't a big push before. Also, it logically follows that the more the Ukraine comes up in conversation among the general public (which happened to an exponential degree in 2022), the bigger the push will be. Like I said in the first sentence of my first reply to you:
"There has only been a big push to omit the 'the' recently."
Any future replies from you that don't address this (such as replies about the prevalence of "Ukraine" vs. "the Ukraine," which are utterly irrelevant) will be legitimately dismissed as non sequiturs.
>No, it doesn't, dumb guy, as I've already told you many times. Even if, say, 99% of the world had already kowtowed to "political correctness" and bad grammar by 2021, it wouldn't change the fact that there was a much bigger push that started in 2022.
You continue to act like a little baby with personal insults. My point initially was there was no need for any strong push because "Ukraine" was already normalised.
>Is that a joke or are you really that daft? To dumb down the already dumbed down illustration:
You're pointing out that more people were asked to say "Ukraine" rather than "the Ukraine" because more people were referencing Ukraine in the first place. Your own example noted that the requests increased proportionately with mentions of Ukraine.
>By admitting that the "Ukraine didn't come up much amongst the general public," you also inherently admitted that there wasn't a big push before. Also, it logically follows that the more the Ukraine comes up in conversation among the general public (which happened to an exponential degree in 2022), the bigger the push will be. Like I said in the first sentence of my first reply to you:
There wasn't a push to talk about Ukraine because Ukraine wasn't a big topic. Then Russia invaded Ukraine and it was. There was a general upsurge in Ukraine interest fundamentally unrelated to the best way to say it.
>Any future replies from you that don't address this (such as replies about the prevalence of "Ukraine" vs. "the Ukraine," which are utterly irrelevant) will be legitimately dismissed as non sequiturs.
It's based on a presupposition that there was a "big push" in the first place. There were some news articles and a reddit bot. Tha's not a big push.
"You continue to act like a little baby with personal insults."
Comical Irony Alert. Also, if you weren't saying stupid things there would be no stupidity for me to point out, obviously. It was clear that you aren't the sharpest thorn in the bush when you unleashed this howler:
I wait evidence of "the Netherlands" being used, as a normality, by English speakers.
>It doesn't matter whether your assertion that it was already normalized is true or not, nor does it matter that you think your assertion means there was no need, because it doesn't change the fact that they was a big push in 2022 which inherently accompanied the exponential increase in the Ukraine as a topic of conversation.
There was no "big push". You keep insisting this without any evidence. A few media write-ups and a reddit bot is not evidence of a "big push".
>Which results in a bigger push, obviously. The dumbed down on top of dumbed down people-pushing-against-a-wall illustration (which you avoided addressing) didn't clear that up for you? Tell me: in my illustration, was the wall being pushed against harder when only 1 person was pushing or when 1,000 people were pushing?
A "push" proportionate with the amount of usage of the term. Generally speaking, the more a term is misused or perceived to be misused by the general public, the more likely it will be to be corrected. That Ukraine became a hot-button topic due to Russias invasion is what caused that.
The analogy of it being a physical wall just doesn't make any sense.
>Thank you Captain Obvious. The Ukraine becoming an exponentially more popular topic results in exponentially more people "correcting" other people who say "the Ukraine," regardless of the reason for it becoming such a popular topic all of a sudden. I've already given a dumbed down illustration of this, and I've also given a dumbed down illustration of the dumbed down illustration.
Right, but before 2022 and after 2022 most people still used "Ukraine" over "the Ukraine" in English-speaking countries. It was already normalised and had been so since its independence.
>2. In 2022 the Ukraine suddenly became a hot topic for months on end, which removed the reason that the push never got very big before.
"Suddenly". As if it happened by magic, by media conspiracy.
>There was, obviously. When there's a longstanding push that's small due to the topic being unpopular, the push getting much bigger when said topic is suddenly popular [for any reason] is inevitable.
There was no "big push". You keep insisting this without any evidence. A few media write-ups and a reddit bot is not evidence of a "big push".
>They are examples of the big push, obviously. It's utterly impossible for anyone to provide an exhaustive list of examples, but it isn't necessary, because anyone with the sense that God gave a turnip can deduce it from the following facts:
They are the only examples of this "big push" that exist. You are just baselessly speculating and calling it "big" when it was a minor component of Ukrainian discussion in 2022.
>1. There was a small push that started in 1991 and never went away. The push never got very big because the Ukraine wasn't a popular topic of conversation in the English-speaking world.
The "small push" did what it needed to do because Ukraine was already normalised as "Ukraine" amongst most English-speaking people.
In-so-much as the "push" re-emerged in 2022, it was due to it being used as a type of shibboleth by people who often used it to denigrate Ukraine's existence who were then more visible in the public eye.
Most of your post consists mere gainsaying, repeating things that have been refuted many times, and non sequiturs. As such, consider it dismissed out of hand. However, one of your paragraphs is valid:
Generally speaking, the more a term is misused or perceived to be misused by the general public, the more likely it will be to be corrected. That Ukraine became a hot-button topic due to Russias invasion is what caused that.
>Your concession on the whole matter is noted.
That's not remotely a concession. If for some reason mentions of Belarus massively increased, and as a consequences, rates of "Belorussia" increased due to a global event would you set out the cry that there had been a "big push" to correct people to say "Belarus" instead of "Belorussia", or would it just be the natural consequence of *more people talking about Belarus* in general?
You think because it's a natural consequence it can't be a big push? That's utterly absurd. Whether or not it's a natural consequence has absolutely fuckall to do with it. A big push is a big push regardless of the cause of it, obviously.
Every "correction" is a push, i.e., an attempt to persuade one or more people to say "Ukraine" rather than "the Ukraine." The more "corrections" there are, the bigger the overall push. You've already conceded that this happened in 2022, and since that's been my point of contention from the start, your concession on the whole matter remains noted.
>You think because it's a natural consequence it can't be a big push?
It's indirect.
>That's utterly absurd. Whether or not it's a natural consequence has absolutely fuckall to do with it. A big push is a big push regardless of the cause of it, obviously.
A "big push" implies a specific campaign to change it. I don't think a reddit bot and some articles on news websites constitutes that.
>Every "correction" is a push, i.e., an attempt to persuade one or more people to say "Ukraine" rather than "the Ukraine."
I was under the impression when you said "big push" you specifically meant a specific media campaign rather than just the natural response to people saying it.
> The more "corrections" there are, the bigger the overall push. You've already conceded that this happened in 2022, and since that's been my point of contention from the start, your concession on the whole matter remains noted.
My main point in all of this was specifically that Ukraine was always primarily called "Ukraine" (at least since '91) by most people who referred to the country. To contrast it with the "Turkey" issue whereby almost no-one english calls it "Turkiye".
"It's indirect."
Utterly irrelevant.
"A "big push" implies a specific campaign to change it."
No, it doesn't. A big push means a big push, obviously, and it doesn't inherently imply anything.
"I don't think a reddit bot and some articles on news websites constitutes that."
Your non sequitur is dismissed.
"I was under the impression when you said "big push" you specifically meant a specific media campaign rather than just the natural response to people saying it."
That's your problem.
"My main point in all of this was specifically that Ukraine [Bad Grammar Alert] was always primarily called "Ukraine" (at least since '91) by most people who referred to the country."
Your mere assertion (which is also an irrelevant assertion even if you could prove it were true) is dismissed, and your concession on the whole matter remains noted.
>Utterly irrelevant.
I fundamentally disagree.
>No, it doesn't. A big push means a big push, obviously, and it doesn't inherently imply anything.
Yes it does. I am not bound by your weird understanding of commonly used terms.
>That's your problem.
So you simply meant "because Ukraine was being referred to more, more people were as a result 'correcting' them". So what?
>Your mere assertion (which is also an irrelevant assertion even if you could prove it were true) is dismissed, and your concession on the whole matter remains noted.
I made no such concession. "Turkiye" is not commonly used by English speakers. "Ukraine" has long been commonly used by English speakers. The request is also more akin to Germans asking people to call Germany "Deutschland". The comparison makes no sense. It would make sense if Ukraine was asking us to say "Ukrayina".
"I fundamentally disagree."
So? It doesn't change the fact that it's utterly irrelevant to the meaning of "big push."
"Yes it does."
Your laughable attempt to redefine the words "big" and "push" is dismissed.
"I am not bound by your weird understanding of commonly used terms."
Comical Irony Alert, you know, coming from the dolt who thinks "big push" means something more than "big push." You're bound by the generally accepted definitions of "big" and "push":
big: large or great in dimensions, bulk, or extent
push: to urge or press the advancement, adoption, or practice of
It's not a non-sequitor. It has everything to do with my initial claim which was that "Ukraine" was already normalised.
And I interpret "big push" in this context, as some sort of meaningful media drive to counteract a relatively common trend.
"It's not a non-sequitor. It has everything to do with my initial claim which was that "Ukraine" was already normalised."
Your initial claim was a non sequitur, as it had nothing at all to do with the big push that started in 2022. You first-replied to me, therefore your post needs to logically follow from mine, otherwise it's a non sequitur, which can legitimately be dismissed out of hand.
"And I interpret "big push" in this context, as some sort of meaningful media drive to counteract a relatively common trend."
Again, that's your problem. And not that it matters, but "the Ukraine" was relatively common going into 2022, otherwise that particular Reddit bot wouldn't have had tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of posts to "correct" in that one corner of the internet. The reason for it being common is because it's grammatically correct, and correct grammar wasn't even contested at all until 1991 (which didn't get much traction because the Ukraine wasn't a common topic of conversation in the English-speaking world until 2022, and the average person in 1991 wasn't as quick to kowtow to "political correctness" as the average person in 2022).
Your concession on the whole matter remains noted.
By your definition, anything that gets any increase of media attention is a "big push". It reduces the term to uselessness.
>Again, that's your problem. And not that it matters, but "the Ukraine" was relatively common going into 2022, otherwise that particular Reddit bot wouldn't have had tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of posts to "correct" in that one corner of the internet.
Reddit probably has hundreds of thousands of posts and comments every day. It's not substantial in the grand scheme of things, and again, there are people and always have been people who are tankies or pro-Russian who deliberately use "the Ukraine". Always have been.
"By your definition, anything that gets any increase of media attention is a "big push". It reduces the term to uselessness."
False. It has to be a push, not just "anything." I already posted the definition of the word "push." It also has to be a significant enough of an increase to qualify as "big," which is what happened in 2022 with the Ukraine, when it went from an uncommon topic of conversation to a "hot topic" for months on end.
"Reddit probably has hundreds of thousands of posts and comments every day. It's not substantial in the grand scheme of things, and again, there are people and always have been people who are tankies or pro-Russian who deliberately use "the Ukraine". Always have been."
You are unbelievably dense. If "the Ukraine" weren't relatively common going into 2022, the Reddit bot wouldn't have had tens or hundreds of thousands of posts to reply to. It would be like a hypothetical Reddit bot that automatically corrects people who refer to e.g., Canada as "the Canada," or England as "the England," or Australia as "the Australia." Maybe it would find a few posts to reply to over the course of about a year, but certainly not anything even remotely close to tens or hundreds of thousands, because practically no one calls Canada "the Canada," nor England "the England," nor Australia "the Australia," and so on.
Your concession on the whole matter remains noted.
BTW it's 'The Canadia'.
share>You don't seem to understand the significance of "the Ukraine" showing up in mainstream media articles and even on the US government website after 1991 and prior to 2022. If sites like that with their "politically correct" policies and style guides were still occasionally calling it "the Ukraine," how much more often do you think the general public was doing it, with no workplace policies or big push to convince them otherwise?
You mean "showing up" since 1991, since that is when it seemed to change with their independence. I also never claimed it was *never* referred to as "the Ukraine" but that "Ukraine" was far more common vernacular long before the annexation of Crimea.
I agree since the invasion there were some articles about not calling it "the Ukraine", but it was already pretty normal to not do such a thing anyway in western hemisphere countries.
>Not everyone I know uses perfect grammar all of the time, but leaving out the "the" from the Netherlands is as big of a gaffe as saying, e.g., "I'm going to store," instead of "I'm going to the store." People I know don't talk like non-native English speakers.
I wait evidence of "the Netherlands" being used, as a normality, by English speakers.
Well, you can find such evidence more or less anywhere, because that is the name of the country in English. But perhaps the number of times it's referred to as 'the Netherlands' in the English language Wikipedia entry for the country will suffice:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands
Fair enough, but in casual conversation it's just as often called "Netherlands" (or Holland, which is more irritating to them iirc). Same with the Turkey phenomenon. No-one's likely to call it "Turkiye" in casual chatter.
shareFair enough, but in casual conversation it's just as often called "Netherlands"
I have seen it used like that in more informative contexts though. I just got used to see it used as "Netherlands" in drop-down lists, in sports commentary where the team is just listed as "Netherlands" (or "Holland")
sharethe team is just listed as "Netherlands"
More *seeing* it in articles than hearing it. And again, in drop-down lists that don't abbreviate it was also either Netherlands or Holland.
shareDrop-down lists are not a great guide to general language usage. You might see 'Cookie' in a drop-down list. And yet if you found one on a plate, it would still take an an article and be the cookie on the plate.
And, no, you'll definitely hear it if you listen to any English-speaking person about the country also known erroneously as Holland.
But I think you're winding me up now, so I'll leave it.
As a Dutch person I regularly have heard foreigners refer to my country with all kinds of names in conversation. "Netherlands" without the article "the" has not been one of them. It's used in any language that uses the plural form.
shareWell, as you've told us elsewhere, it's the same in Dutch too. If you pluralise it, you give it an article too. Very closely related languages, Dutch and English, of course. So... yeah. I'm slightly baffled how an English-speaker could have been unaware of this, but... whatever.
shareIt's shortened often to "Netherlands" in drop-down lists on websites and in stuff like this:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/european-championship/table (group B).
They simply leave out articles in lists like that. It's also THE Republic of Ireland. Any commentator would just say "France are playing The Netherlands tonight".
shareThe Netherlands means the low lands, I realized this hearing it in Spanish (los países bajos).
shareAnd "Ukraine" means "borderland."
shareExactly. Both of these had an article in front of the name because they were considered a *region* by nearby countries. Formally, The Kingdom of the Netherlands, so they still like "the" to refer to geography.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine#Etymology_and_orthography
Similarly, non-countries can be called "The Levant" or "The Sahara".
>False. It has to be a push, not just "anything." I already posted the definition of the word "push." It also has to be a significant enough of an increase to qualify as "big," which is what happened in 2022 with the Ukraine, when it went from an uncommon topic of conversation to a "hot topic" for months on end.
The topic of Ukraine increased because of geopolitical events and as a result the rate of people calling it "the Ukraine" went up, although still a minority.. No-one "pushed it" specifically.
>You are unbelievably dense. If "the Ukraine" weren't relatively common going into 2022, the Reddit bot wouldn't have had tens or hundreds of thousands of posts to reply to. It would be like a hypothetical Reddit bot that automatically corrects people who refer to e.g., Canada as "the Canada," or England as "the England," or Australia as "the Australia." Maybe it would find a few posts to reply to over the course of about a year, but certainly not anything even remotely close to tens or hundreds of thousands, because practically no one calls Canada "the Canada," nor England "the England," nor Australia "the Australia," and so on.
It was "common" or "more common" because people were talking about Ukraine more than they were. The proportion of people saying "the Ukraine" hasn't increase. And your continued petulance is noted. And I never said that no-one, before or after called Ukraine "the Ukraine" but simply that "Ukraine" was much more common in the western world.
You have the maturity of an infant.
"although still a minority."
Not that it matters (because it's a non sequitur), but you haven't established any such thing. Consider your mere assertion dismissed.
"No-one "pushed it" specifically."
Everyone who "corrected" a person or people who said or wrote "the Ukraine" "pushed it specifically," obviously.
"The proportion of people saying "the Ukraine" hasn't increase."
Not that it matters (because it's a non sequitur), but you haven't established any such thing. Consider your mere assertion dismissed.
"And your continued petulance is noted."
Your non sequitur is dismissed. Also, Comical Irony Alert: Part VII.
"but simply that "Ukraine" was much more common in the western world."
Not that it matters (because it's a non sequitur), but you haven't established any such thing. Consider your mere assertion dismissed.
"You have the maturity of an infant."
Your non sequitur is dismissed. Also, Comical Irony Alert: Part VIII.
Your concession on the whole matter remains noted, of course.
>Not that it matters (because it's a non sequitur), but you haven't established any such thing. Consider your mere assertion dismissed.
You have also not established that a majority called it "the Ukraine" prior to 2022.
>Everyone who "corrected" a person or people who said or wrote "the Ukraine" "pushed it specifically," obviously.
So individuals noted it, not really some concerted widespread "big push".
>Not that it matters (because it's a non sequitur), but you haven't established any such thing. Consider your mere assertion dismissed.
Sorry, are you alleging that more people, as a proportion, now say "the Ukraine" over "Ukraine"?
>Not that it matters (because it's a non sequitur), but you haven't established any such thing. Consider your mere assertion dismissed.
You have also not established that a majority called it "the Ukraine" prior to 2022.
>Your non sequitur is dismissed. Also, Comical Irony Alert: Part VIII.
How is it ironic? When have I behaved childishly and hurled insults like you do?
"You have also not established that a majority called it "the Ukraine" prior to 2022."
Nor do I need to, since I never made that assertion, and it's irrelevant anyway.
"So individuals noted it, not really some concerted widespread "big push"."
A push is always from at least one individual (and sometimes from a bot or bots acting on behalf of at least one individual), obviously, and a big push is always made up of a lot of smaller pushes from a lot individuals, obviously.
"Sorry, are you alleging that more people, as a proportion, now say "the Ukraine" over "Ukraine"?"
Reading Deficiency Alert: Part V. I alleged no such thing. I pointed out that you haven't established the thing that you alleged, which makes it a legitimately dismissible mere assertion.
"You have also not established that a majority called it "the Ukraine" prior to 2022."
Nor do I need to, since I never made that assertion, and it's irrelevant anyway.
"How is it ironic? When have I behaved childishly and hurled insults"
In the very sentence that I quoted and replied to, obviously.
Your concession on the whole matter remains noted, of course.
>A push is always from at least one individual (and sometimes from a bot or bots acting on behalf of at least one individual), obviously, and a big push is always made up of a lot of smaller pushes from a lot individuals, obviously.
Literally one person could have made that bot (and probably did). So what? I really wouldn't describe it as a "big push".
If you aren't contesting that "Ukraine" has been normalised for some time, then it really is incomparable to the "Turkiye" phenomenon (for reasons I have spelled out) already.
>In the very sentence that I quoted and replied to, obviously.
And where did I do that? Calling you childish for throwing insults is doing just that. I didn't start any abuse. You did.
Your irrelevant horseshit is dismissed.
As I said in my original reply to you:
"There has only been a big push to omit the 'the' recently."
You already conceded that quite a few posts back (your subsequent ignorance-fueled semantic games regarding the term "big push" notwithstanding), and your concession remains noted.
I reject its characterisation (in so much that it exists) as a "big push". It's that simple. "Big push" to me implies some sort of campaign. I am not bound by your interpretation of terms.
And no answer to your childish personal abuse.
Your irrelevant horseshit is dismissed.
As I said in my original reply to you:
"There has only been a big push to omit the 'the' recently."
You already conceded that quite a few posts back (your subsequent ignorance-fueled semantic games regarding the term "big push" notwithstanding), and your concession remains noted.
Again, I am not bound by your presuppositions. The differences over our interpretation of "big push" is the difference that matters here.
shareYou're bound by the generally accepted definitions of the words "big" and "push," which I've already posted from a mainstream dictionary, and which have fuckall to do with any "presuppositions" on my part. The definitions do not support the interpretation that you pulled out of your ass.
As I said in my original reply to you:
"There has only been a big push to omit the 'the' recently."
You already conceded that quite a few posts back (your subsequent ignorance-fueled semantic games regarding the term "big push" notwithstanding), and your concession remains noted.
>You're bound by the generally accepted definitions of the words "big" and "push," which I've already posted from a mainstream dictionary, and which have fuckall to do with any "presuppositions" on my part. The definitions do not support the interpretation that you pulled out of your ass.
I don't accept that a small % of people out of the larger chatter surrounding Ukraine constitutes a "big push" relative to the overall level of activity. It's disingenuous and misleading when you represent it that way.
So I've conceded nothing, and you don't get to tell me what I think. You are not me.
Your irrelevant horseshit is dismissed.
As I said in my original reply to you:
"There has only been a big push to omit the 'the' recently."
You already conceded that quite a few posts back (your subsequent ignorance-fueled semantic games regarding the term "big push" notwithstanding), and your concession remains noted.
I don't accept that a small % of people out of the larger chatter surrounding Ukraine constitutes a "big push" relative to the overall level of activity unless you want to characterise literally everything said regarding it as a "big push". It's disingenuous and misleading when you represent it that way.
You are not me. Therefore you get no say about what it is I think. Is that clear?
Your irrelevant horseshit is dismissed.
As I said in my original reply to you:
"There has only been a big push to omit the 'the' recently."
You already conceded that quite a few posts back (your subsequent ignorance-fueled semantic games regarding the term "big push" notwithstanding), and your concession remains noted.
Also, you're now on ignore, because you're continuing to clutter up my notifications page long after the argument was over -- that is, long after you [unwittingly] conceded -- with nothing but pure foolishness, i.e., for no good reason. It's tantamount to spam at this point.
I've conceded nothing. You don't get to tell me what I think.
And I'll respond to who the fuck I like, when I like.
I remember an earlier thread where I went and asked one of the school mums, who is Ukrainian, which one was correct and I can’t bloody remember what she said now. If I ask her again she’ll think I’m weird - maybe I’ll get the wife to ask 🤔
shareIf anyone dares to call us Holland ever again, we're gonna bomb their country with tulip bulbs!💣💥🌷
share"I'm guessing because in English, a turkey is an animal name..."
The bird is named after the country. This article explains how this happened:
https://bestlifeonline.com/how-turkeys-got-their-name/