eSOANEM wrote:It irks us however because it is symptomatic of a problem widespread in the US, not understanding the distinction between the following terms: England, Great Britain, The British Isles and the UK. All of these terms are distinct and all of them have very specific meanings, ones which are generally ignored by Americans. It's as if we showed no apparent understanding of the difference between the following: North America, the US, New York and the Contiguous United States.
Now, when you say "ignored by Americans", do you mean ignored by people from the new world, or from North America, or the US, or the contiguous states, or just New York? For that matter, by "New York" do you mean the state, or the city, or the greater metropolitan tri-state area?
…my point, of course, being that it is clear you meant people from the US, as that is a standard meaning of "Americans", and in context there is no ambiguity. If you intended something other than the default meaning of the term, I have complete confidence you would have chosen a more precise descriptor. With "New York" there actually is some ambiguity, but unless the distinction is somehow relevant it's not worth the effort to clarify.
If someone wanted to have fun with this, they could make a movie with a scene that plays off the ambiguity by describing someone as having a British accent, then let the audience hear a distinctive Scottish or Welsh or other accent from Britain. One character could say something like, "That's not a British accent", and perhaps the person with the accent would insist that it is. Something similar could be done with, say, a person described as "American", then reveal to be, I don't know, Panamanian or something.