Is the UK a Suffix Snob?

Canada, Australia and New Zealand try so hard to look good to the United Kingdom. We go so far as to make the United Kingdom’s head of state our own head of state. How more obvious do you want us to be? And it’s even called the United Kingdom. Aren’t we by definition part of the Kingdom? I know it’s a Queendom right now but I still think it counts.

So let’s look at the people who inhabit the United Kingdom right now. There are the English, the Scottish, the Irish and even the Welsh. All those inhabitants have sh and most have ish suffixes describing them. And why not? As a whole they are called the British.

And we descendants from the newer worlds are called Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders. We simply don’t have the magic suffix in our names. Even our nicknames: Canucks, Aussies and Kiwis don’t contain the magic suffix. Is it any wonder we get snubbed by the United Kingdom?

The British pretend that we were simply too far away when our countries were formed to make one cohesive unit. That’s the official line, but I can’t help but think the reason we are separate states is because of the magic suffix.

‘Wait’, someone might say, ‘why doesn’t the United Kingdom contain the other ish inhabitants of the world?’ Like the Danish, Finnish and Swedish? Let us not forget that 2 of these lands were once the world source of Vikings along with Norway. Obviously Norwegian and Finnish was a Viking slip up, like Greenland and Iceland. These people should be called the Norish and the Finwegians.

Why does this love affair exist between the British and the Vikings? It’s because in the middle ages, parts of Britain were controlled by the Vikings. The British and Vikings were under one flag before.

The other ish people I am aware of are the Spanish and Polish. I could make up something about the Spanish Armada having come so close to taking over Britain that the British think of the Spanish as being one of their own. But really, the Spanish are also called Spaniards and that is where we’ll leave them for the purposes of this post. The Polish felt so much like brethren that even Chamberlain drew a line there against the Nazis. And they, too, have a second name – the Poles.

So if the newer world truly wants to be as one with their British colonizers, might I suggest adopting new names for the inhabitants? Very shortly you will begin to hear about the Canadish, the Australish and the New Zealandish. Can a world spanning United Kingdom be far behind?

About Larry Russwurm

Just another ranter on the Internet
This entry was posted in Geography, History, Humour, Politics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Is the UK a Suffix Snob?

  1. Bob Jonkman says:

    If people from Poland are called Polish, and people from Finland are called Finnish, then people from New Zealand should be called New Zealish.

  2. Larry says:

    That makes sense. And to add to your case there are the English and Scottish.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *