The Americentric Writer

Or: How To Avoid Sounding Like An Ass

---

I once read a diatribe against the words amongst and whilst, by an otherwise very pleasant American lady of apparently average intelligence. Let’s call her C.

Whilst C expounded on how unsuitable she found these words, considering them to be outmoded and arguing that “people” just don’t use them anymore, I was quietly considering how provincial she sounded.

To compound her error, this same woman then claimed she didn’t have an accent.

Let me repeat that: She actually seemed to believe she has no accent.

The two positions appear to stem from the same blissful, self-absorbed ignorance we know as Americentrism.

Generally, I like Americans. I lived in So Cal for four and a half years, my son was born in America, and I find that American culture has its pros and cons like any culture.

So if you’re not one of these twerps - this is not aimed at you.

Nevertheless, certain observational truisms exist for a reason. Scots are indeed more inclined to drunken aggressiveness than other nations I’ve visited, the Englishman does tend to say “I’m sorry” rather a lot, and Americans as a nation have a dreadful pnenchant for assuming anything beyond American shores exists only as a backdrop to America.

Americentrism has reached truly epic proportions on certain sites.

Despite there existing many thousands of subscribers from all areas of the globe on, for example, Medium, Americentrics (hashtag notallamericansobviously) attempt regularly to bulldoze the world with their country-specific beliefs and behaviours—and those who tweet often forget the world has time zones.

Large swathes of geographical, economic, societal, historical and cultural context from the vast world outwith the borders of America are, by some, commonly discounted. It’s as though Americentrists, like the otherwise good lady C, have a genuine blind spot for the existence of the rest of the world.

The Somebody Else’s Problem field, while apparently fictional, would certainly explain a great deal.

When the USA referred to the American/Canadian baseball league as the “World Series” I’d assumed they were trolling on an epic scale.

Apparently, they were serious.

Accent-uate the negatives

I really can’t fathom how anyone reaches adulthood so bafflingly lacking in an understanding of such a basic concept as an accent.

How do you manage to actively avoid or discard such enormous slabs of self awareness and general knowledge?

It’s a truly dazzling spectacle of specific and deliberate obtuseness to determinedly ignore the inarguable reality that if you strike up a conversation with any person not native to the USA you will be instantaneously recognised as an American.

Because of your accent.

Yesterday, I was speaking on the phone to an American man. I knew, without asking, that he was a man and an American, because of his voice and his accent.

Occasionally some might confuse an American with a Canadian accent, in much the same way people confuse Australian and New Zealand, or Irish and Scottish accents. Because the inflections, to an unfamiliar ear, can sound similar.

But everyone — every single human being on the planet who can talk — has an accent. Yes, Mid-Westerners, that means you too.

It feels ridiculous having to make this assertion. In other news, water is wet.

Incidentally, I’m reliably informed that an accent can also be detected amongst those who use sign language.

In the vein of those who claim the moon is made of green cheese, C’s stance was so breathtakingly uninformed, I barely knew where to begin.

But it’s not just C. I’ve seen this claim made elsewhere. Here’s another example of this puzzling posturing.

Team America — World Vocabulary Police

To return to the other issue of the insistence upon reactionary and arbitrary vocabulary:

C’s irritation with whilst and amongst seemed to stem from the notion that she personally doesn’t use those words, and that since her restricted education doesn’t promote their use, the entire English speaking planet does not or should not use those words.

I wonder if she knows the word Americentrism?

It’s not the first time I’ve seen this sort of an attempt to homogenise language. One foolish troller informed me that one of my recent rants had too many adjectives, didn’t read.

Incredibly, he actually posted tma;dr - and he claims to be a fully grown adult too. I wish this was satire.

Putting aside the fact that he read enough to comment and sound imbecilic, why on earth would he imagine I’d cater to his personal dialogic preferences?

If you wish to limit your lexicon, please do so. No need to announce it.

Does an unfamiliar word really make some so uncomfortable that they feel an irrepressible urge to promote globalised Newspeak? Are they genuinely unable to extrapolate that people outwith their limited perspective might have different norms?

I find myself considering the late great Douglas Adams and his social commentary regarding the inhabitants of Krikkit.

“They flew out of the cloud. They saw the staggering jewels of the night in their infinite dust and their minds sang with fear. For a while they flew on, motionless against the starry sweep of the Galaxy, itself motionless against the infinite sweep of the Universe. And then they turned round. “It’ll have to go,” the men of Krikkit said as they headed back for home.”

For the record, I do use whilst and amongst, not only in writing, but in everyday speech. Depending on the audience and several other factors I also use fuck, cunt and “away and bile yer heid ya numpty”.

I code-switch regularly and without conscious consideration, undoubtedly partially because I grew up in (very) working class Scotland but still had to navigate the systems of our colonisers, the English.

Dumb and Dumber

Americans are not alone in agitating for dumbing language down to “double plus ungood”.

In my youth, growing up in less than salubrious conditions, I was repeatedly accused of “using big words” to “try to sound posh” by “friends” and acquaintances. These dullards of ages past had this much in common with their American counterparts — they themselves considered the word unusual, so assumed the speaker was at fault, not their own limitations.

Unbeknown to such nitwits, I generally went out of my way to try to use less complex words in an attempt at conformity. Just as some are naturally athletic and can sweep a ball out of the air with grace and confidence while I stand there lumpishly being whacked in the face, my mind (particularly when younger) automatically fossicked for luminous lexicology without conscious prompting.

It is particularly galling to be accused of “using big words on purpose” when you’ve already curtailed your language to a dismaying degree to try to avoid offence.

The consequences of ignorance

You could argue that calculated ignorance of the rest of the world doesn’t cause the blogger or commenter much harm, since she’ll contentedly live and die in her own bubble. While I find the thought of such a diminished worldview disheartening, that’s really just a matter of personal taste. Perhaps I’d embrace Celticentrism with more relish. If such a concept existed.

However, for writers there is one detrimental consequence to making Americentric claims: you may lose chunks of your audience.

As soon as I realise the article is Americentric- not per se about America, but trying to extrapolate American views or impose American requirements on other cultures—as soon as I come across an attempt to police language in favour of American bias—I generally click away.

That sort of insular inability to acknowledge that there’s an entire world independent of the USA is just too reductive and exhausting for to me to allow it my precious time.

In the case of the screenshot above (which is quite old now as this is an updated article) I took a few seconds to make a comment, then left the article never to return.

I gave no further time to the piece, and muted the author.

I rarely hate read; life is just too short to seek out fruitless provocation from those who cannot read the label from their position inside the jar.

But certainly, If you’d prefer a worldwide readership, you’d do well to consider that you are also addressing those humans who don’t live in the USA. Which includes nearly all of us.

Though you’re absolutely entitled to continue prosleytising as though unaware of an entire planet with different perspectives, beliefs, behaviours, histories, vocabularies and terminologies beyond American borders.

And I’m entitled to click away before a skim becomes a read.

Flex Your Lexicon

So, to return to what prompted my latest soapbox sermon.

I read a comment on an article querying the use of a word. Apparently, because this writer would not choose that word, or is not well acquainted with that word, they felt it necessary to write a comment instructing the author that a different word should replace it.

But writers are entitled to flex their linguistic muscles. They can and should aim to be wordsmiths, to tinker with phrases, to bring life and light to language, not merely dump sentences in an ordered heap like a set of IKEA instructions.

How bewildering that anyone claiming to be a writer could imagine that their own limited colloquial bubble could possibly incorporate all the phraseology, nuance, grammatical choices, linguistic customs and vernacular conventions, not to mention the unique cultural heritage, identity and ability of other writers to the point where they’d feel entitled to question a perfectly acceptable, if somewhat rare or unique choice of word.

Allow me to remind you: just because you find the word unfamiliar, that doesn’t make it incorrect or unsuitable. Look it up. Does the word or phrase fit the context of the sentence? Is the usage broadly correct? Is it spelled (and I do mean spelled not spelt) correctly in any dialect? (Please don’t make the mistake of thinking American English is the default). Excellent.

Now you’ve learned that other people may use a distinctive vocabulary, and that different cultures incorporate idiomatic expressions, colloquialisms and styles different to your own. You may even have enriched your word power.

Once you accept that your chosen and instinctive phraseology and vocabulary applies only to your own tiny portion of the planet, you need never embarrass yourself by assuming that your deficiency is another writer’s error.

If a word appears unusual to you, particularly on a site occupied by writers, assume that the lack is yours, and if you must approach the writer do so in a direct message, carefully and respectfully.

Perhaps they’re not using “big words”. Perhaps you’re not as astute as you believed.

Perhaps your own vocabulary is a little meagre. Perhaps you’re just unsophisticated and provincial and need to take a more global approach.

Perhaps you need to get out more, as it were.

So let’s make a pact. Or a deal if you prefer.

I promise not to berate you for using too simplistic a phrase, or point out that your delivery could benefit from some lexical flair and sparkle.

And you can keep your notions about constraining and homogenising language to yourself and not request that others impoverish their expression, for your comfort and convenience.

“I am always ready to learn although I do not always like being taught.” — Winston Churchill

PS — I like your American accent.

---

Originally published August 2021, revised and updated January 2025

Sources:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/geography-survey-illiteracy
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01292980903293338

https://scottishleftreview.scot/brutality-of-empire/