There really isn't a solution, I think.

Mexicans rarely refer to themselves as norteamericanos, by the way, 
and various LatinAmerican writers have used americano to refer to 
only the territory south of the Rio Grande (Marti most importantly, 
and Lezama, among others). For them the term is almost always 
polemical one way or another.

The history of the word, as I understand it. American and americano 
(anyone know the Canadian history of americain?) were used in 
colonial times to differentiate western hemisphere born Europeans 
from European born Europeans. I would guess that the migration of the 
term to its usual meaning of USian probably has to do with our 
headstart at independence--we were the United States of America when 
Mexico was still New Spain.

Mark


At 11:41 AM 9/11/2007, you wrote:
>Thanks, Mark -- what about "statesider" for estadounidense,
>"unitedstatesian"? Would that work? Not quite.
>
>Stateside (in American, uh oh, Heritage Dictionary) is:
>
>1. Of or in the continental United States.
>2. Alaska. Of or in the 48 contiguous states of the United States.
>
>I can kind of stand it, statesider. Kind of. But
>
>(a) it excludes our colonized Alaskans and Hawaiians and
>(b) of course it doesn't pack the emotional wallop of "American."
>
>I mean, Tammy Wynette and George Jones are (or were in her case) not
>statesiders. They're Murricans -- thanks, Hal.
>
>It's like "man." It's like Popeye. It just am what it am.
>
>This is the tyranny and pleasure of language.
>
>Rachel
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Poetryetc: poetry and poetics
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark Weiss
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:43 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: America's Guardian Myths: Bowering and USAmericans
> >
> > A really fine interview, Rachel.
> >
> > My problem, such as it is (I actually like my footnoted usage, feels
> > like a little mischief) is that most of the available terms are too
> > quirky for the intended audience, hopefully the general reader (tho
> > I'd be happy enough with the sargeant reader). "Citizens" or
> > "residents" of the US doesn't work--would require too many
> > qualifications. What my first paragraph talks about is a cultural
> > myth that I have to undermine. It is a cultural myth (or rather a set
> > of cultural myths), though I know lots of individual US cits or
> > residents who are less starry-eyed about Cuba than Ry Cooder, and
> > less dumb than George Bush.
> >
> > Here's the first bit:
> >
> >          Relations with Cuba have preoccupied the North American
> > imagination[i] far more than one might expect, given the island's
> > small size and minimal power. North American understanding of Cuba
> > has, at the same time, been obscured by mythologies of both the right
> > and the left, in which Cubans have also been known to indulge. Cuba
> > has been imagined as a place simpler than our own, whose people are
> > less inhibited and more passionate, friendly to strangers and prone
> > to dancing in the street, a land strangely set apart in a childhood
> > fantasy, as evidenced by the opulent hulks that cruise its streets.
> > For those of the left, there's the equally simplified Cuba of heroes,
> > where the new man, freed from the shackles of exploitive cultures,
> > has managed to create a society based on cooperation and compassion
> > rather than greed, despite the opposition of the giant to the north.
> >          The reality has always been more complex.
> >
> >
> > [i] With apologies to Canadian readers, I have used "North American"
> > to indicate a citizen of the United States. Most Latin Americans find
> > it annoyingly presumptuous  that we call ourselves Americans to the
> > exclusion of the hemisphere's other inhabitants. Thus far the English
> > language offers no equivalent to the Spanish  estadounidense,
> > "unitedstatesian."
> >
> >
> > Writing anything about Cuba is a tightrope walk.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> > At 08:36 AM 9/11/2007, you wrote:
> > >Peter wrote:
> > >
> > > > How does Bowering deal with this?
> > >
> > >I ask George about this whole subject in the interview we
> > did for Jacket 33.
> > >One of my questions begins:
> > >
> > >'As I think you know I've got no quarrel with your take on
> > the arrogance of
> > >empire or really with "USAmerican," except that I always find myself
> > >involuntarily cycling through all the poems it would have ruined if
> > >USAmericans had adopted it earlier: "The pure products of
> > USAmerica / go
> > >crazy," "I hear USAmerica singing, the varied carols I
> > hear," "Let USAmerica
> > >be USAmerica again." It's so corporate - which is very
> > appropriate on one
> > >level, but as language it curls my ear.'
> > >
> > >To read his answers:
> > >
> > >http://jacketmagazine.com/33/loden-bowering-iv.shtml
> > >
> > >Rachel Loden
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Poetryetc: poetry and poetics
> > > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Cudmore
> > > > Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 8:58 AM
> > > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > > Subject: Re: America's Guardian Myths
> > > >
> > > > The thing is not to find convenient terms of abuse, but
> > > > simply a precise yet
> > > > concise way of speaking. 'American' fits the bill for
> > > > concision, but not for
> > > > precision.
> > > >
> > > > How does Bowering deal with this?
> > > >
> > > > P
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Poetryetc: poetry and poetics
> > > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> > > > > Behalf Of Douglas Barbour
> > > > > Sent: 10 September 2007 16:05
> > > > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > > > Subject: Re: America's Guardian Myths
> > > > >
> > > > > That's precisely why I try to remember to follow our
> > > > ex-Poet Laureate
> > > > > when it's called for. But of course we are all
> > Norteamericanos....
> > > > >
> > > > > Doug
> > > > > On 8-Sep-07, at 9:28 PM, Halvard Johnson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Just don't let George Bowering catch you
> > > > > > calling USAmericans Americans.
> > > > > Douglas Barbour
> > > > > 11655 - 72 Avenue NW
> > > > > Edmonton  Ab  T6G 0B9
> > > > > (780) 436 3320
> > > > > http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/
> > > > >
> > > > > Latest book: Continuations (with Sheila E Murphy)
> > > > > http://www.uap.ualberta.ca/UAP.asp?LID=41&bookID=664
> > > > >
> > > > >     Someone to talk to, for God's sake, some-
> > > > > thing to love that will never hit back
> > > > >
> > > > >             Phyllis Webb
> > > >
> >