How should one distinguish Georgia as U.S. State vs. eastern European country?
It’s one of the few contextual proper names I’ve not ever seen have to be differentiated, though it seems it would need to be when speaking to a global audience.
For that matter, as an author, under what circumstance should you need to differentiate, if all audience is global?
Is it adequate to assume that since Google filters and has been filtering content by language for years, that Georgia in search results and relevant pages is almost always the Georgia they seek?
As someone in western europe, if it's non-US media it's probably Georgia the country, which is merely mentioned "rarely" as opposed to "only in us election week". If it's US media, it's probably Georgia the state. That said, countries are generally considered more important, so if it's not obvious you're talking about the US, I think the onus would be on people referring to Georgia, USA to specify.
Most countries are just not interested in internal divisions of other countries so it doesn't come up often. Just like I don't have the need to distinguish Munster (Ireland) and Münster (Germany) even though the latter often loses its umlaut in English text, or run into confusion between Northern Territory (Australia) and Northwest Territory (Canada). And the English language isn't short context sensitive words in other areas too, the most frequent example being "read" vs "read".
I've lived in Georgia (the U.S. state) my whole life, and when I read "Georgian" as an adjective, I usually assume it means Georgia the country. People here typically use "Georgian" only as a noun to refer to a resident of the state. In adjective form, you usually just hear "Georgia" (e.g., Georgia coast, Georgia pines).
I did think about that issue. In this case, the word Georgian is immediately followed by the phrase African American in the title. That should be sufficient to make it clear it's the US state we are talking about, not the country.
Well, in the context of "Georgian African American" I didn't have any trouble. I'm surprised you did, as the other Georgia isn't currently, and has never in the past, been "American"
Watch out because this site has links to hundreds of other newspapers too dating back to the 1700s. I made the mistake of checking one of them out yesterday and lost the next four hours of my day reading about historical events. Really amazing stuff.
It’s interesting to see the difference in how African Americans were depicted and covered.
It is well-known that the “white” press of that time often demonized its black citizens and escalated tensions that helped prolong the period of white terrorism, voter suppression and lynching throughout the Reconstruction period.
This sadly continues even today both in the US (to a lesser degree) and internationally.
We see similar treatment of minorities in the Chinese press (Hong Kong residents, Uyghurs) and in the US conservative press about migrants and immigrants.
> This sadly continues even today both in the US (to a lesser degree) and internationally.
To a lesser degree? I am inclined to believe that this[0] Vietnamese-language paper publishing an entirely fabricated story about Black men (and representing a photograph of tragically murdered Ahmaud Arbery to identify a fictitious perpetrators) was intended to prey upon the incredulity of Vietnamese-Americans.
> Georgia's toll of 458 lynch victims was exceeded only by Mississippi's toll of 538. During the 1880s and 1890s, instances of lethal mob violence increased steadily, peaking in 1899 when twenty-seven Georgians fell victim to lynch mobs. Between 1890 and 1900 Georgia averaged more than one mob killing per month.
White is a complicated term. Definitely before the 1920s, it wasn’t necessarily European, because it excluded, for example, non-Protestants like the Irish, Italians, and Russians.
I think it would be a lot clearer if they did. I'd love if they renamed the years of segregated baseball "White Major League Baseball" or started calling it "The White Constitution of the United States."
Reading through the front pages, one would never know this was an ‘African American’ newspaper, as it is no different from any other. It is quite racist to even mention that fact that it is ‘African American’.
You may not be familiar with US history, but it was an extremely segregated society back then with many lynchings occurring for any black people who stepped out of line. Black Americans frequently had to make parallel systems just for their communities since they were often not served by services run by white Americans.
So in this case the skin color of the people who created these newspapers is an important historical contextual point. Additionally, it’s simply a fact of the matter being discussed and as such it isn’t racist to mention a basic fact.
> Australia's Trove is getting humans to translate them‽
Your link clearly refers to correcting an existing transcription:
"While viewing digitised newspaper and gazette articles, you may notice that the text transcript doesn’t always match the text in the article. You have the power to fix this by editing the transcript to match the article text."
Most likely they used OCR software to generate the initial transcript, but allow users to correct the OCR output because they know the software is not perfect.
Are you sure we don't have decent OCR today? I just pulled out a pen, wrote "Pie for breakfast" with my non-dominant hand so it looks like trash, then I scanned it with Google Translate (on an obsolete iPhone, almost in the dark) and it picked it up perfectly. It seems dramatically better than the state of the art 20 years ago.
[+] [-] ceratin6|5 years ago|reply
It’s one of the few contextual proper names I’ve not ever seen have to be differentiated, though it seems it would need to be when speaking to a global audience.
For that matter, as an author, under what circumstance should you need to differentiate, if all audience is global?
Is it adequate to assume that since Google filters and has been filtering content by language for years, that Georgia in search results and relevant pages is almost always the Georgia they seek?
[+] [-] Macha|5 years ago|reply
Most countries are just not interested in internal divisions of other countries so it doesn't come up often. Just like I don't have the need to distinguish Munster (Ireland) and Münster (Germany) even though the latter often loses its umlaut in English text, or run into confusion between Northern Territory (Australia) and Northwest Territory (Canada). And the English language isn't short context sensitive words in other areas too, the most frequent example being "read" vs "read".
[+] [-] gt_grc|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DoreenMichele|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fortran77|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] easytiger|5 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgian_era
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] artembugara|5 years ago|reply
https://blog.newscatcherapi.com/an-ultimate-list-of-open-sou...
[+] [-] uniqueid|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jollofricepeas|5 years ago|reply
It is well-known that the “white” press of that time often demonized its black citizens and escalated tensions that helped prolong the period of white terrorism, voter suppression and lynching throughout the Reconstruction period.
- https://tulsaworld.com/news/tulsa-race-massacre-1921-tulsa-n...
- https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article247928045.html
This sadly continues even today both in the US (to a lesser degree) and internationally.
We see similar treatment of minorities in the Chinese press (Hong Kong residents, Uyghurs) and in the US conservative press about migrants and immigrants.
[+] [-] rexpop|5 years ago|reply
To a lesser degree? I am inclined to believe that this[0] Vietnamese-language paper publishing an entirely fabricated story about Black men (and representing a photograph of tragically murdered Ahmaud Arbery to identify a fictitious perpetrators) was intended to prey upon the incredulity of Vietnamese-Americans.
0. https://tuoitrexahoi.vn/truy-na-4-ke-da-mau-cuop-hiep-2-me-c...
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ku-man|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] williesleg|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] milkrocks|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cambalache|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] cocacola1|5 years ago|reply
https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/history-archaeo...
> Georgia's toll of 458 lynch victims was exceeded only by Mississippi's toll of 538. During the 1880s and 1890s, instances of lethal mob violence increased steadily, peaking in 1899 when twenty-seven Georgians fell victim to lynch mobs. Between 1890 and 1900 Georgia averaged more than one mob killing per month.
[+] [-] bobthepanda|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pessimizer|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tamaharbor|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mrzimmerman|5 years ago|reply
So in this case the skin color of the people who created these newspapers is an important historical contextual point. Additionally, it’s simply a fact of the matter being discussed and as such it isn’t racist to mention a basic fact.
[+] [-] aaron695|5 years ago|reply
Australia's Trove is getting humans to translate them‽ - https://trove.nla.gov.au/help/become-voluntrove/text-correct...
Anyway, very cool, the world needs more of these out of copyright newspapers online. History has been lockup up by historians for to long.
[+] [-] yorwba|5 years ago|reply
There is Tesseract: https://github.com/tesseract-ocr/tesseract
> Australia's Trove is getting humans to translate them‽
Your link clearly refers to correcting an existing transcription:
"While viewing digitised newspaper and gazette articles, you may notice that the text transcript doesn’t always match the text in the article. You have the power to fix this by editing the transcript to match the article text."
Most likely they used OCR software to generate the initial transcript, but allow users to correct the OCR output because they know the software is not perfect.
[+] [-] jeffbee|5 years ago|reply