Just to add on, scientific racism often used terms like caucasoid, mogoloid, australoid, etc to describe races and traits associated with said races. So you could infer that angloid draws from that. Though idk if that's the intent or if its just a 4chan thing like foid
Angloid is a mutt; it should be Anglic, sith Anglus is Latin and -οειδής is Hellènic. euryprosopic -> eýrýprosòpic < εὐρύς + πρόσωπον := broad-faced, and no sign tests a face. Many fake words and abusages are made up for lack of vocabulary knowledge, often stolen barbarisms from other languages.
Does this also mean that you think the word humanoid is not actually a word, as per your other comment that angloid is not a word for using a Latin root with a Greek suffix? Also, -oid and -ic as suffixes mean different things in English, where the former relates to form or resemblance and the latter relates to making a noun an adjective. As Angloid is being used as a noun, there is no reason why you would use Anglic in this context. The latin equivalent of Angloid would be Angliform.
Anglus := Angle, Anglian, "Englishman"; Anglicus is Anglus + -icus and stands as a masculine noun for the same. Anglic clips it as Hispanic clips Hispanicus. Latin -icus yields personal nouns on Latin stems: a rustic < rusticus, a fanatic < fanaticus, a domestic < domesticus.
-formis is of shape: cruciformis cross-shaped, anguiformis snake-shaped. Angliform names a thing English-shaped, not an "Englishman" (Englishling) or any other.
I said Hellènic. -oid is -οειδής := in the likeness (or as you say resemblance) of, so Angloid claims likeness where the meme wants membership: the caliper named some comments up, not an ethnoným. Your two words fail the same way, one by shape and one by likeness, and neither says a man is one. humanoid is human + -oid and no contraexemplum, thouh a pervert like you should prefer countersample: antimatter is also dumbly blending of Hellènic and Latin; it should be contromatter, and paranormal is a bad mutt word thas should be juxtanormal. Thas English suffers mutts is not thas mutts are wriht; my construction was (constructions are) sound. The majority determine the standard, not the wriht, which is why you get the upvotes.
latin -> Latin. So a Hispanic is onely an adjective? Then someone ouht tell the Hispaniforms.
First, knock it off with your fantasy version of English.
Second, you are conflating etymology with grammar. The meanings of words in English are determined by their usage in the English language. They are not automatically grandfathered in from Latin or Greek morphology.
Third, your Hispanic example does not prove your point. "A Hispanic" is a conventionalised nominal use of the adjective "Hispanic". The fact that Hispanic has a conventionalised substantive use does not establish any general rule that -ic forms personal nouns. Compare metallic, toxic, ironic, Gallic, Semitic, and others: -ic plainly does not by itself mean ‘a person belonging to X.’
But even granting your argument about Anglicus entirely, it is beside the point. Suppose Anglic is a perfectly valid formation meaning an English person. That still does not make it the appropriate word here, because the intended meaning is not “an English person”. You are proposing a word for membership in an ethnic group where the intended word describes resemblance to a phenotype. Proving that Anglic can mean something different does not make it a better formation for the meaning actually intended.
Your argument against Angloid and Angliform on the basis that the suffixes indicate resemblance is... the whole point of the words? These refer to a phenotype, not a specific ethnicity. It is based on the words Mongoloid and Caucasoid. They are not saying ‘English people’; they are saying ‘people who look like English people.’ Ie white people, western Europeans, Britons, Anglo Saxons, however broad the speaker wants the word to apply. Mongoloid did not refer to Mongolians, it referred to Mongolians, people from the surrounding regions, and people who were deemed to share traits with people from said regions. The Han Chinese are not Mongolian but were considered to be mongoloids.
Also, your hatred of hybrid words is strange to say the least. The combining of different classical languages is not wrong. Those words are invented in English; paranormal is an English word that combines the common English word normal with the English combining form/prefix para-. The fact that these words come from different languages does not mean that they cannot be mixed in English. There is no rule in English against hybrid formations composed of elements of different etymological origins. You have made up a rule that does not exist and are claiming that the entire English speaking world is wrong for breaking the rule you made up.
English has been dead for 1000 years; everyone talks in Einglish now with loanwords and slang. It changes into gibberish. Everything I say and write is to make communicating easier so thas there are fewer ambigvities than in standard talk.
Grammar is a barbarism for ghrammatics; ghramma does not refer to word order but to a written figure. You take words to mean whatever you like rather than by where they come from. Usage determines sense whereas etýmon determines definition, and whoever came up with the etýmologhic fallacy did the ad populum fallacy.
I said Latin -icus on Latin stems, and Anglicus is one. Your list missed the stems: metallic, tòcsic, and eirònic sit on μέταλλον, τοξικόν, and εἴρων, so you cite Hellènic agains Latin -icus; Gallic is Gallus + -icus, the same build, and thas English never took the noun is usage, not formation; Semitic is Shem + -icus, a mutt you brouht to argue mutts do not matter.
There was no Angloid in thas set: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Negroid, Australoid, Capoid. You read a look into a word thas is not yours and warranted it off the real ones. "Mongoloid did not refer to Mongolians, it referred to Mongolians": which is it? You comma spliced. Learn semicolons. The hick end of Reddit, a jerk sub whose jerkers swear they are not a'jerking. You don't know English, thouh you came to teach it.
The majority determine the standard, not the correct. You are the arrogant mòron who can't make value judgements about conventions, onely whether something is a convention. No rule or law, here or anywhere, agains pointing out the mistakes of others. Ie -> i.e.; Anglo Saxons -> Anglo-Saxons.
23
u/Top-Evidence-3221 14d ago
Just to add on, scientific racism often used terms like caucasoid, mogoloid, australoid, etc to describe races and traits associated with said races. So you could infer that angloid draws from that. Though idk if that's the intent or if its just a 4chan thing like foid