Most countries are just not interested in internal divisions of other countries so it doesn't come up often. Just like I don't have the need to distinguish Munster (Ireland) and Münster (Germany) even though the latter often loses its umlaut in English text, or run into confusion between Northern Territory (Australia) and Northwest Territory (Canada). And the English language isn't short context sensitive words in other areas too, the most frequent example being "read" vs "read".
In the pictured headline, if "Georgian African American newspapers" is using "Georgian" as a demonym, then it means newspapers published by African Americans from Georgia.
But if the headline is using "Georgian" as an adjective, then lacking hyphenation, it's ambiguous whether it means newspapers published by African Americans from Georgia /or/ newspapers published in Georgia by African Americans.
We rarely use the adjectival form of U.S. states ("Georgia Peaches", not "Georgian Peaches"), so I found the headline a little garden path and initially started parsing it as if it were referring to the country of Georgia.
Then, right below the headline, the text reads "Georgia African American newspapers" which isn't ambiguous and means newspapers published in Georgia by African Americans. That's confirmed by the rest of the article.
Of course, the African Americans in question were likely also from Georgia, so to be pedantic, it's Georgian African American Georgia newspapers.
(I doubt any African Americans from Georgia emigrated to the Russian Empire at the time, otherwise we could be talking about African American Georgian Russian Georgia newspapers ... or something.)
Anyway if I were the headline writer, I think I would have used "African American Georgia newspapers..."
Your careful analysis might explain my brain. (In this particular case. If that is even possible, because my brain...)
I guess it's one of those unspoken rules we don't know we know.
That slightly alters the meaning by not using the demonym: newspapers published by African Americans from Georgia vs newspapers published in Georgia by African Americans.
I guess you could also go with African American Georgian Georgia newspapers to be explicit that it's newspapers published in Georgia by African Americans from Georgia.
Sorry, I guess I have Georgia on my mind now.
To me, that calls to mind Georgian architecture, not stuff from the state of Georgia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgian_architecture
But the reality is that HN has some guidelines concerning titles (plus a character limit). So I did the best I could within the constraints as I best understand them, but I will certainly keep your remarks here in mind for any future titling challenges.
WHICH GEORGIA?! I swear people in this thread are writing specifically to make the rest of us mad :P
[1]- https://www.blackpast.org/global-african-history/black-prese...
[2]- https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/black-skin-red-land-a...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abkhazians_of_African_descen...
It’s one of the few contextual proper names I’ve not ever seen have to be differentiated, though it seems it would need to be when speaking to a global audience.
For that matter, as an author, under what circumstance should you need to differentiate, if all audience is global?
Is it adequate to assume that since Google filters and has been filtering content by language for years, that Georgia in search results and relevant pages is almost always the Georgia they seek?