Reply
Wed 17 Jan, 2007 08:10 am
Dictionaries tell us that Mongols=Mongolians when used to refer to people. But it seems that Mongols is more often used in this usage. What do you think is the main difference in usage?
Mongols has only 7 letters and 2 syllables vs Mongolians which has 10 letters and 4 syllables.
or in terms of types and tokens
Mongols has 7 tokens of 6 types vs Mongolians has 10 tokens of 8 types.
I am joking.
fansy, if you continue to joke around like that you may lose your posting privileges. We are a serious group and such behavior is not tolerated.
A "Mongolian" is a citizen of Mongolia, whereas a "Mongol" is either a member of the barbarian tribe, famously led by Genghis Khan, or else a member of the ethnic group related to that tribe. Thus, the
CIA World Factbook entry for Mongolia states that 94.9% of Mongolia's population belongs to the "Mongol" ethnic group. So a person could be a Mongolian (citizen of Mongolia) without being a Mongol (member of the Mongol ethnic group) and vice versa.
I should thank the author of the second reply to my question. But I'd like to apologize (used in the older sense of the word) for my reply to the first reply to my question, for I thought he/she was joking. We are all serious. But occasionally some humor is needed to bring us closer. Don't you agree.
Gus has no sense of humor.
He also has no sense of smell.
Or taste.
That is, he has no sense of taste or taste.
He is, however, sensitive to touch.
Joe(just don't touch the same places more than once)Nation
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace