From what I understand the term is in reference to “Latinos Americanos” meaning people with Latin heritage that live in the Americas, and both the Spanish and Italian languages are essentially slang Latin (no disrespect intended) But, I do understand if they aren’t considered Latino/Latina.

46 comments

  1. No they are not. For consensus purposed they are considered to be Caucasian.

  7. “Latino” does not include speakers of Romance languages in Europe. It only refers to origin/ ancestry in Latin America.

  8. I’m repeating information I’ve heard from others, so apologies for any mistakes.

    Latino/Latina refers to people of Latin American descent – so Mexico, nearby islands like Cuba or Puerto Rico, and most if not all of South America – places that are largely cultures built from the descendants of Spanish colonists and the native people of those areas.

    This is distinct from Hispanic, which refers to general Spanish descent – it applies to Latino/Latina people, but not all Hispanic people are Latino.

    Neither descriptor fits Italy, so Italian people would not be considered Latino.

  10. No… No… Latin Americans are from the former colonies of Latin Language speaking countries. So basically everything in the “New World” that isn’t Canada or the United States of America is considered Latin America. It gets more complicated with immigrant groups and cultural fusion and language proliferation but that’s the general idea.

  11. >From what I understand the term is in reference to “Latinos Americanos” meaning people with Latin heritage that live in the Americas

    The premise of your question is incorrect. In the US, Latino is used as a descriptor for people from Latin America or of Latin American descent.

  12. Maybe in Europe they are but not in the context of the word Latino in the US.

    That word basically went like this:

    Latinos are people of Latin Europe

    New World is discovered, Latin Europeans name the parts they ended up dominating as Latinoamericano (Latin America)

    Latinoamericanos who moved to the US shortened it back to Latino only now with a different meaning than the European meaning

  13. No, the term, at least in the United States, refers to people of [Latin American](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_America) heritage, not to people of “Latin heritage” who live in the Americas. So a person of Italian ancestry living in the United States would not be considered Latino if they had no ties to Latin America.

    However, there are plenty of people of Italian ancestry who happen to be Latino. A plurality of Argentinians are of Italian descent, for example. They would be considered Latino because of their Argentinian nationality, but not because of their ties to Italy.

  15. No, because “Latin American” means “from the part of the Americas that is Latin, as opposed to Anglo.” Italy isn’t in the Americas, and if you’re an Italian American born here, your hyphenated American isn’t the Latin one, your ass is an Italian Anglo American.

    The question you want to ask is, “are the Quebecois Latin Americans?” Good question.

  16. Latino does not mean latin, just like Romanian doesn’t mean Roman. They are just two words with different but coincidentally somewhat connected meanings

  17. Latin American is a specific reference to people and territories of South America, Central America, Mexico, and the Caribbean who can link their culture to a combination of African, Indigenous, and Romance languages/cultures. A lot of people who are of Latin descent also do not refer to people from Spain as Latin American. They are Spaniards and if we are taking about race they would be considered Caucasian or White in the US.

    That being said: You are right that by cultural and language Italian would apply. The only issue is there are no countries in Latin America that predominantly speak Italian. Though some are heavily influenced by Italian culture (like Argentina). Although if there was country that popped up like that then those people would fall under the umbrella. Latin American, but not Hispanic of course. Common misconception from many is that Latin American only includes Spanish speakers, but that actually isn’t true.

  18. No

    It’s not about the language, it’s about Latin American culture which is distinct due to its colonial heritage and history. Spaniards aren’t Latinos either, they’re Europeans.

  19. No. Latino refers to people from Latin America. It’s just a way to distinguish between English/French speaking America and Spanish/Portuguese speaking America. It starts in Mexico (keeping in mind that southwest US was once Mexico), works it’s way down. It’s basically the remnants of old Spanish and Portuguese colonies.

  21. When addressing this question, there are a few things to keep in mind. First, we have to remember that the term “Latino” is not a universal term; it’s used differently in America than it is elsewhere in the world, and in America, it *specifically* refers to people of Latin American descent.

    Italians are *not* seen as being part of this group.

    Outside of the US however, the word Latino means something completely different.

    For example, in Italy, “Latina” is the name used for the Latin language of the Romans, and “Latini” are any group of people whose culture is derived from Rome; aka any Romance language speaking group.

    In Spain, especially in intellectual circles, Rome is often called “La vieja cuna de nuestra civilización” which means the old cradle of our (Latin) civilization. Spain, Italy, France etc are commonly seen as “Hijas de Roma” (daughters of Rome) in acknowledgement of the shared Latin ties.

    In this sense, Latin Americans would also be seen as being Latini or nietas de roma (granddaughters of rome).

    To conclude, outside of the United States, it’s not crazy to acknowledge the common origin that Italian culture shares with Spain and the Americas. But in the United States, because of absurd, meaningless concepts like “white” “black” and “brown” there are stupid technical lines drawn between them.

  24. Nope.

    The term “Latin” may have originated from Rome and present-day Italy, but the derivative term “Latino” specifically refers to those from Latin America, where Spanish and Portuguese, not Italian, are the primary languages. That being said, Argentina and Brazil both have significant populations of Italian descent, and I guess *those* ethnic Italians can be considered “Latino”. But not so much for those actually from Italy.

  26. No.

    Being Latino (from an American perspective at least) means you are from, or descended from people who were from Latin America, ie Central and South America.

    Hispanic means you’re from a Spanish speaking Latin American nation. So nearly all of Latin America, MINUS Brazil and a few other small nations.

    So the term definitely has a cultural element, but I’d say it’s mostly a geographical thing.

    >both the Spanish and Italian languages are essentially slang Latin (no disrespect intended

    No disrespect taken, I understand what you mean, you’re basically referring to the Romantic Languages as they’re called…Romanian, Italian, Spanish, French, and Portuguese. You probably wouldn’t consider a Romanian Latino, though.

  27. …No. Have you ever, in your life, heard of Italians being considered latino?

  28. This is a much more complicated and wonky topic than it might seem! Italians are really not considered Latino/a/X. But there are ongoing questions about Brazilian American and Filipino American identities and self or government categorizing of people as Latino or hispanic. You’re right to be a little confused about the lines here.

  30. You have to understand what Latino/Latina means. It’s what a Latin American is called when they are outside of Latin America. So an Italian American is not Latino, but an Italian-Argentine or an Italian-Brazilian in the US or Canada is Latino. A German-Argentine in the US would also be Latino

  32. Latino/a is someone from the Americas who speaks a Romance (Latin-based) language. This is invariably Spanish or Portuguese though the French speakers technically also count (Haiti, for example). Hence “Latin America.” It never applies to someone straight from Europe, even if they are from Spain or Portugal. Definitely not Italians, who had no colonial presence here.

  35. So, Latino means something different in the US. It specifically refers to individuals from countries within the Americas that the majority of people speak a Latin derived language.

    Italian-Americans don’t form their own nation and have, outside of a few pockets, been assimilated into just being white Americans.

    Now say Italy colonised eastern Canada and formed a nation back in the day. Those people would then be Latino.

  36. Latin America just refers to the parts of North and South America where people speak Romance languages. The notable exception to this would be French speaking Canada which is not typically thought of as being part of Latin America.

    While Italian is a Latin language, it’s not on the American continent so it’s speakers aren’t considered Latin Americans. We don’t really refer to non-Americans as being Latin.

  37. Latin America is a region of the Americas. Latino refers to people whose ancestry trace through there.

    Someone from Spain who came to the US would not be Latino for example.

  39. No. Latino = Latin America. Specifically the parts of the west that were at one time widely colonized by Spain or Portugal. That’s pretty much the entire Western Hemisphere from Mexico and southward, with the exception of Suriname and French Guiana.

    It does not refer to people from countries that use Latin-derived languages.

  40. Nope.

    Latin Language, check.

    *In the Americas*, no check.

    French, Portuguese, and Spanish are prevalent among Latin Americans, because those languages are spoken in Latin America. Columbus himself may have been Italian, but he was working for Spain.

  41. Nope. Some might look like a stereotypical hispanic person, but then again I’ve met hispanic who look a lot like me with my German and Czech ancestry. Also to me it’s more of a language thing as I’d argue a Mexican who has Irish and German ancestry but has lived in Mexico since emigration is a Latino/Latina.

  42. Neither. Hispanic refers to countries that primarily speak Spanish, and Latino refers to Mexico, South America, etc. Somebody from Spain is Hispanic but not Latino, for example.

  44. Only if they’re from Latin America. Outside of that, then no. Latin American means the countries that speak a Romance language south of the United States, so Quebec and Canada as a whole would be excluded. If you’re not from these regions, then you’re not Latin American/having Latin American heritage. There’s big Italian diaspora communities in Latin America, like Argentina and Brazil, but the living in those countries part would make them Latin Americans, not being of Italian descent.

  45. Officially, the answer is no.

    But logically, yes they are. If a Latin American is “of Latin descent” then Italians obviously fit this category. But words are not defined by logic, they’re defined by feeling. And so although the logic of what people say the official definition of “Latino” is supports Italians being Latino, people will still disagree.

  46. Latin America is a group of Western Hemisphere countries that dominantly speak a Latin-based romantic language (Spanish, Portuguese and French).

    People with strong roots from these countries can identify as Latin, Latino/a, etc.

    Italians, last time I checked, are from Italy. So, no.

    Same reason people from Spain aren’t Latino.

Leave a Reply
You May Also Like