Jag är lärare och grad student i Kanada, och vi talar oftå på "First Nations", vem hade faktiskt hittat Nordamerika. Vad är några ord som vi kan använda för att diskutera dem människorna? Google Translate ger mig ord lik infödda eller inhemska. Är det bra? Tack!
infödda is a good word. Another is ursprungsbefolkning - meaning indigenous peoples. "First Nations" does occur as a term, but only rarely, and I wouldn't use it myself as most people wouldn't know what I meant. But we don't have something that corresponds to the exact meaning of "First Nations" - it's kind of an exclusively Canadian thing, and I don't think we've had use enough of it to invent one.
Just for your interest/education devalanteriel - Australia now uses "First nationers" to refer to our Indigenous/Aboriginal population. But it's still fine to say Indigenous people/Aboriginal people.
I've heard there's differences of opinion, even amongst themselves. Not sure how one would ever reach an official term.
‘First Nations’ or ‘First Peoples’ (capitalised) can refer to the peoples or nations of people who were there from the beginning, prior to the settlement of other peoples or nations. These terms have some general acceptance but can also be perceived as generic or not adequately describing the Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples of Australia.
So basically, the terms are in use but not everybody uses them. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
Jag håll med nowawillow att indigenous people var vem ha upptäcktet (discovered) continenten.
Jag håller med nowawillow om att ursprungsbefolkningen upptäckte kontinenten.
Luckily, I don't think anybody here is disputing that, though. :)
Well, of course. Like Europeans discovered Europe when humans migrated there from Africa 30-50.000 years ago. However, you can say that Europeans also discovered other continents, literally, since they didn't know those existed so it was a discovery for them, like the indigenous people discovered Europe since they found out it existed and didn't know that before.
By that logic, I've discovered penicillin, Neptune, Antarctica, and many rare species.
Exactly. nowawillow - you can and do indeed discover things that other people have already found, invented, discovered or simply lived in for years. I discovered Duolingo in 2015. It had already existed for 3-4 years. I didn't invent it, and I was not even the FIRST one to discover it after its invention, but I discovered it for myself. By your logic, you can basically never use the word discovered."He discovered that his house had been broken into." - Nup, the guy who broke into it already knew that, so by your logic: not a discovery.
Things are discoveries for the subject in question (Christopher Columbus or whatever) whether they have already been found by others or not.
There is a difference between discovering something and discovering that something exists. I suppose you're right: in some instances, we can use the former to describe that we have learned or discovered something for ourselves
But as a duolingnaut, passionate about language, surely you agree that nuance matters. The phrase "_ discovered ___" in almost all historical contexts suggests a first-time discovery. When we learn that Fleming discovered penicillin, we don't wonder who found it first, or believe that he was just discovering it for himself. That he was the first is implicit in the sentence.
Saying that Europeans discovered North America, as a declarative and decontextualized statement, is misleading at best and only technically correct with semantic caveats. Saying that Europeans eventually discovered that North America exists is more in keeping with what you are saying, in my opinion.
To Indigenous peoples, whose histories are just beginning to be recognized as valid by the global mainstream, such nuance matters.
On the contrary - for instance, it is very common to describe Columbus's voyage as discovering America, and the same goes for the vikings. Neither of them were the first to discover the continent, of course, but that's certainly how the word is used. It's not a matter of nuance, not about being "only technically correct with semantic caveats". Of course you can make clarifications when and if needed, but native speakers usually understand the difference easily.
Yes. Apparently learning something exists entitles me to say I discovered it. *I'm unable to reply to your comment, devalanteriel, so I'll do it here. You're arguing about what is grammatically correct, and I'm arguing about what is morally responsible.
It is indeed common to say that Europeans discovered N.America because for centuries their perspective was the only one recognized, and the fact that it's convention does not make it right. As your sources indicate, the word is used especially to discuss first-time discoveries, so most who hear it would assume that interpretation. I'm surprised that you think differently, but now we can agree to disagree and get back to learning Swedish.
Yes, that is correct. Though it does not necessarily entitle you to say you were the first to discover it.
a : to obtain sight or knowledge of for the first time : [find] discover the solution when Europeans first discovered the Americas
b : find out discovered he was out of gas
to find information, a place, or an object, especially for the first time:
Who discovered America?
We searched all morning for the missing papers and finally discovered them in a drawer.
@RogueTannuki - Do we really know people from 30,000-50,000 years ago? How far are you from Split? Tack.
Absolutely. Two minor caveats, though:
1) Do note that it makes a little less semantic sense since it makes the discovery passive, and we generally prefer to phrase such constructions as Amerika upptäcktes ("America was discovered"). But this difference is a small one.
2) This could also mean that America discovered something. But any intelligent person would be able to derive what you mean contextually. :)
It seems somewhat confusing because you say Tysklands Huvudstad to say "The Capital of Germany" but here you keep the same order as in English.
I think it's because when you say Tysklands huvudstad you're literally talking about something that belongs to Germany. When you say "The discovery of America" though, it's not that America owns a discovery (which would be Amerikas upptäckt) but that there was a discovery, which was America.