• Home
  • Blogs
  • Public Eye
Public Eye
April 7, 2006 2:17 PM

'Hispanic' Or 'Latino'?

Posted by Brian Montopoli
With immigration in the news, I thought it would be worth looking at the way media outlets use the words "Hispanic" and "Latino." A cursory news search shows that many outlets use the words interchangeably. But they are not, strictly speaking, synonymous. Consider this usage note from the Yahoo! dictionary definition of "Hispanic":
Though often used interchangeably in American English, Hispanic and Latino are not identical terms, and in certain contexts the choice between them can be significant. Hispanic, from the Latin word for "Spain," has the broader reference, potentially encompassing all Spanish-speaking peoples in both hemispheres and emphasizing the common denominator of language among communities that sometimes have little else in common. Latino which in Spanish means "Latin" but which as an English word is probably a shortening of the Spanish word latinoamericano refers more exclusively to persons or communities of Latin American origin.
The note goes on to point out that some are troubled by the word "Hispanic":
For a certain segment of the Spanish-speaking population, Latino is a term of ethnic pride and Hispanic a label that borders on the offensive. According to this view, Hispanic lacks the authenticity and cultural resonance of Latino, with its Spanish sound and its ability to show the feminine form Latina when used of women. Furthermore, Hispanic the term used by the U.S. Census Bureau and other government agencies is said to bear the stamp of an Anglo establishment far removed from the concerns of the Spanish-speaking community.
CBS News has no policy on the words, according to Linda Mason, CBS News Senior Vice President, Standards and Special Projects. The word "Hispanic" seems to appear more in stories appearing on the CBS News Web site, though "Latino" also appears. The Associated Press Stylebook, which many in the news business use as a guide on these sorts of issues, says that "Hispanic" is "the preferred term for those whose ethnic origin is in a Spanish-speaking country. Latino is acceptable for Hispanics who prefer that term."

You can read more about the debate here and here.
Tags:
usage ,
Hispanic ,
Latino
Topics:
Media Issues
Share:
Digg
Yahoo! Buzz
Mixx

More From Public Eye

Add a Comment
by innov8ion April 10, 2006 5:08 PM EDT
Sanfelz - I believe it's important for immigrants to be able to read and speak English. The point is that when our country was founded, immigrants actually integrated into American society. This includes learning and using the English language. Nowadays, many immigrants don't seem to integrating and this is causing problems and fragmenting our society. For example, health care costs are skyrocketing in California because the health care system is mandated to support hundreds of languages. This is ludicrous and prevents many people from obtaining care. I think we would all be well served if immigrants maintained their identity while integrating into American society. And for cripes sakes, learn English (or pay the extra cost for not integrating. don't pass the buck on the populace to pay for your ignorance.)
Reply to this comment
by atyndall-2009 April 8, 2006 4:36 PM EDT
Digistic--well said. Neither Latino nor Hispanic has any racial meaning whatsoever. Using either term in a racial sense is an "artificially-created untruth" as you point out. Fr Bob Carr--well said. When we refer to the ethnic or cultural heritage of Americans of European descent we go the hyphenated route: Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans, Polish-Americans and so on. It just seems lazy to lump everyone whose origins are from elsewhere in this hemisphere together under one label. Of course we should use Cuban-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Nicaraguan-Americans and so on. As for the issue of language, if we want to refer to people who speak Spanish as a group, why go through all the convolution of the "Hispanic" label? Why not simply use the term "Spanish-speakers?" Regards Andrew Tyndall
Reply to this comment
by sanfelz April 8, 2006 2:04 PM EDT
digistic is absolutely correct. These racial classifications are artificial and provide no relevant information. I wonder why some of the proposed immigration bills insist on immigrants learning English before becoming citizens. I personally know people who only speak a foreign language and are citizens of the U.S. Is the language the basis for what makes one a U.S.citizen?
Reply to this comment
by April 7, 2006 11:58 PM EDT
Well, let me add another dimension. I am trilingual (English, Spanish, Portuguese) and the question of which word to use is one that I struggle with often. Latin Americans I work with tell me that the words are interchangeable. However, Hispanic is more common in the East of the US and Latino is more common in the west. (I prefer Latino and the Latin Americans I work with call themselves Hispanos.) Brazilians tell me that they are also Latinos, but not Hispanic. So, often I use the term Iberoamericans for Spanish and Portuguese speaking Americans when they are together. Chicanos specifically refers to Mexicans. Iberoamericans are very proud of their country of origin. So, it is also acceptable to use the national identity if you are speaking to a group from one country. Puerto Rico is considered a country, by the way, south of the border. So, you can say Salvadoreqos, Guatemaltecos, Hondureqos, etc. but make sure your title is accurate. As one Guatemalteco told he when I called him a Salvadoreqo. "That is like me calling you a Canadian."
Reply to this comment
by innov8ion April 7, 2006 7:47 PM EDT
My mistake, and I thought we were of the human race? Race as is meant in this article has no meaning in science. If science is the pursuit of truth, then the continued use of race for anything other than the human race is an untruth. This is yet another example of political correctness (incorrectness) at its best (worst.) Maybe it's time people started to appreciate the subtle differences in the human race and stop creating controversy based on artificially-created untruths. Check this article for more information: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/kron/archive/1998/02/23/race_part1.dtl&type=special
Reply to this comment
by atyndall-2009 April 7, 2006 7:03 PM EDT
If Hispanic means Spanish speaking and Latino means of Latin-American descent... Is a Brazilian a Latino too, or must Latinos speak Spanish? Is an English-speaking Puerto-Rican Hispanic or a non-Hispanic Latino? Some areas of the United States are of Spanish-speaking heritage. Draw a line roughly from Houston to San Francisco and many of the Spanish names date from the period before the Gadsden Purchase or the incorporation of the Republic of Texas into the union. Are Spanish-speaking descendents of indigenous residents of these states Latinos, even though they are from North America not Latin America? Or are they non-Latino Hispanics, just like Spanish-speaking Filipinos or Spaniards? If all Spanish speakers are called Hispanics, does Spanish have to be their mother tongue? Or may they be bilingual? Does an Anglo who marries into a Spanish-speaking household and speaks Spanish at home become Hispanic? Just wondering. Have a great weekend Andrew Tyndall
Reply to this comment

About Public Eye

Description for Public Eye