Are the words emigrant and immigrant interchangeable?

Broadly speaking, to emigrate is to exit, and to immigrate is to arrive, and emigrant and immigrant are related in the same way. i.e. One might emigrate from his home in Ireland, and immigrate to England.

A former copy editor who repeatedly reduced me to tears taught me that your country may be full of immigrants but not of emigrants, because all of the latter have left.

Yes, these relative terms can be quite confusing. For instance, and American offers to 'go with you to the movies', a Brit to 'come with you to the movies'.

And then there's the "bring" vs "take" controversy.

One would expect that any immigrant is also an emigrant, elsewise he would have either to go from point A to nowhere or arrive at point B without having come from anywhere.

Here in the south we still hear "carry" used for "take"...
as in, He had to carry the car back to the mechanic, or
I carried my aunt to the doctor twice this week.

I try to ignore those mental pictures, I do....

we still hear "carry" used for "take"

Do you also hear it used for "bring"?

Hi all!
Bring/take/go/come:'grateful for some places and people':-)

I don't think they are interchangeable , but I think a country can have both immigrants and emigrants.
Isn't emigre the more common word?

I never understood why there was so much controversy 9over bring vs take. The rule is simple and unequivocal. Bring means to move someone or something toward the speaker, take means to move the object away.

My latest pet peeve is introduce, as in someone standing there on television "Let me introduce you to the next President of the United States." ARGH, as James J. Kilpatrick is wont to say, "Let me introduce to you the ext President of the United States."

take means to move the object away.

But one of the definitions of take (in Webster's) is: to convery, lead, carry, or cause to come along with one. So you could conceivably "take" something with you to go somewhere.

I'll use bring when I say something like "I'll bring the salad." but I'll use take when I say something like "don't forget to take your umbrella with you."



I don't understand your "introduce" pet peeve though TEd. I'm sure I'm misunderstanding something in your sentences.

Well, when I wrote that it was clear and unequivocal. Perhaps I spoke a bit too soon.

I think this is what I was getting at:

If I tell you that I will visit and have something with me, I would say, "I will bring it with me." I am carrying it towards you, the person to whom the sentence is addressed. If I am leaving your presence and have something with me, I would say, "I will take it with me." I am carrying it away from you, not towards you.

I would never say, "I am taking a gift for your party." Instead I would say, "I am bringing a gift for your party." This is of course assuming that you are going to be at your party.

I guess it's so deeply ingrained in me that I don't see anything controversial about take/bring.

As to the introducing thing, it is the matter of the direct and indirect objects of the word introduce. If I say I am going to introduce the audience to the president, that means I am going to say to the president, "Mr. President, I'd like you to meet the audience. That's Joe, That's Bob, over there's Matilda, Keeshawn's the one in the red dress."

But if I say I am going to introduce the president to the audience, I am saying, "Audience, this is the President."

Think of it this way, "Gin, I am going to introduce you to the concept that there indeed may be no concepts." I'm saying, "Concept, this is Gin." Absurd, of course.

But if I say, "I am going to introduce to you the concept that there indeed may be no concepts," the meaning of the sentence is quite clear.

Hmmm. I see what you mean. Maybe the problem is with the use of "to you" in these circumstances. Wouldn’t it be better to say “Let me introduce the next President of the United States," or "Gin, I am going to introduce the concept that there indeed may be no concepts."

"Let me introduce to you the next President of the United States" does not roll off of the tongue easily. The "to you" seems unnecessary and clumsy.

see anything controversial about take/bring.

OK, Let's say you're at work and you're talking to a fellow member of your church about the church's dish-to-pass dinner next Wednesday evening. Do you say you're taking beans-n-franks or you're bringing beans-n-franks?

"Lemme introduce to you the one and only Billy Shears".

Neither. I HATE beans-n-franks.

I would say, "I am taking a main course," if I were not at the church when I spoke. If I happened to be at the church I would say, "I am bringing a main course."

Mr. Klinger in HS freshman English drilled these rules into my head more than 40 years ago, and they stuck.

There is a term for this: deixis. See this website:

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler/aue/bring.html

BTW, this would have been a GREAT hogwash word.

Had to think about this one a minute, Faldage--Yes, since the one who carries someone to the place they need to be will probably also carry them back again, at which point they're probably plumb wore out!
And those "pass a dish" church dinners are here called "carry-in dinners," which means you're bringing or taking food to share--and if you just carry it, you don't have to think which word to use!

And those "pass a dish" church dinners are here called "carry-in dinners,"

we call 'em, "pot lucks"... and franks-and-beans...

There is a term for this: deixis.

It's a great set of lectures. I'd suggest reading them. I took a semantics class co-taught by Chuck Fillmore and Paul Kay (of Berlin & Kay Basic Color Terms). It was a blast. Etymology: < deiksis 'mode of proof; exhibition; demonstrative force or reference' < deiknumi 'to bring to light, display, exhibit'; adjectival form deictic.

One interesting point is how personal pronominal paradigm matches up with adverbs of place: I/we ~ here, thou/ye/you there, he/she/it/they ~ yon. Though the paradigm is now defective in English (as yon is archaic), Spanish and other languages preserve it.

So 'bring' works only for the instance when you are at the place to which the thing will be carried and 'take' works for eveything else? Even if, say, you work right across the street from the church, but live three miles away, across town? Just trying to set limits here, mind.

http://wordsmith.org/board/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=words&Number=9198

That was a low blow, TEd.

Take it outside TEd, bring it outside!