Please help me understand: Latino vs. Hispanic

[OneGrassRoot]

I realize I'm ignorant not to understand. Honestly, until recently I never gave it much thought, thinking the words were interchangeable. I've become MORE confused after trying to research the appropriate use of the words....so I come here humbly asking for your help. I understand the history of the use of Hispanic (the 1970 census), but I'm interested in understanding the use of both words today.

Would you mind providing your view of the usage of each? Like I said, I'm getting lots of conflicting information. I'm editing a novel, and while this is a small aspect of it, I want to be correct and respectful and never offend anyone.

Many thanks in advance.

[Xipe Totec]

1. Latino includes Brazilians

who speak Portuguese and not Spanish.

Hispanic includes people with Spanish last names, even if they don't speak Spanish.

Confusing? Sure.

Don't feel bad. These are both pigeonholes that many do not feel comfortable in.

They are terms that try to force people from different cultures into one all encompassing class, and it is not working too well.

I don't believe you can get into too much trouble using either term. If the person objects, ask that person what term they would prefer and go with that.

[OneGrassRoot]

2. Thank you very much.... :) n/t

[msedano]

3. what's the novel about?

if these are street people or working class types they will be chicanas chicanos or nicaragauenses plural, singular will be inflected, or guatemaltecos or more likely will call themselves mexicana mexicano. if scenes take place in a work environment particularly higher levels, polite usage will be h. at the floor level the usage will be a nationalistic term but intragroup discussion would say "latino".

the terms can be used to imply or indict. research the idea of the internal colony. colonialized mentality eagerly accepts h. look at liberation theology, freire. his ideas heavily influence, whether people knowit, the battle of the name. finally for an academic purview the "battle of the name" gets a few pages in grebler, moore, guzman, the mexican american people, ucla, 74. maybe there was a hyphen. finally listen to "don't call me hispanic" by the alienz.

[Popol Vuh]

4. No biggie timeforarevolution

Most people don't know what the differences are..

Basically "Latino" is reference to Latin, which itself is reference to Italian European. And "Hispanic" is reference to Spanish or Spaniard European. They are both references to European culture/language no matter where the Hispanic or Latino happens to be living.

"Mexican" is reference to all the cultures which are from the valley of Mexico, ie Aztec, Toltec, Teotihuacános, etc. However, not really the Maya or Zapotec or Mazatec since they were not quite from the valley of Mexico. But nevertheless since the name Mexican also is used to reference all Mesoamerican cultures; the Maya, Zapotec, and Mazatec, etc are also referred to as Mexican.

The name Mexican itself is derived from the name "Mexica" (pronounced: Ma-she-ca). The Mexica were the dominant culture of the triple alliance known as the Aztec who's capital city was Tenochtitlan.

Anyway the correct indigenous way to pronounce Mexican and Mexico is: Ma-she-can and Ma-she-co.

[Cleita]

5. To me Latino is any country south of the Mexican border and

the people and culture within it as distinguished from the USA and Canada. It does not include Spain and Portugal, which are European countries. Hispanic is a catch all phrase invented by white, English speaking Americans to group together a disparate bunch of people that they couldn't classify that easily. I will answer to either. Although I find Hispanic somewhat offensive, I can't get away from the fact that government forms and other paper work generators like banks and insurance companies use the term and I must accept it.