What is India's biggest export to the US?

[Wind In My Hair]

That seems like a very black and white approach to the issue. How relevant might the literal translation from a 2000 year old translation be?

For the nice gentleman:

1. Understanding the Latin roots of an English word is not the same thing as translating a text from Latin to English.

2. Most English words can still be traced back to their Latin roots. Case in point from your post: "literal" comes from the Latin "littera" meaning letters, and "translation" from the Latin "trans" meaning across and "latus" meaning side.

3. Words that completely change meaning over time are exceptions. "Nice" is one of those words.

4. Referring to modern dictionaries, the meaning of "expatriate" is still exactly the same as the Latin root. Even if you want to argue with me, you should find a word worth arguing about.

[revhappy]

Same as what you did couple of decades back!

In case of SMS, he has come from a "richer" country so its not a case of immigration but he is the true definition of an expat.

I didn't quite get that. I believe people "immigrate" or "move" because they believe that the move would benefit them in some way, be it monetarily or in terms of a better life experience or quality of life. So while the specific motivation to move to a new country could be different, I don't think one should judge an individual or people of a race based on their motivation to move. And to me an expat is an expat is an expat. Calling someone a "true" expat or ''false" expat based on country of origin doesn't make sense to me! (No offence to the expat in question here )

For me an Expat is someone coming from a "higher cost of living/quality of life" country to a lower "cost of living/quality of life" country and then being compensated monetarily for the downgrade.

An Immigrant is someone who is doing the opposite move and since its an upgrade obviously the individual wont be compensated but on the contrary under cuts the locals in terms of wages.

Thats the classic definition for me. But in reality its not that black and white and most of us are shades of gray in between

For eg. an Indian IT worker who goes to the US on an H1B is closer to the immigrant definition and an American posted as the managing director in the Indian office of American multinational is clearly an expat.

[Wind In My Hair]

Actually I even verified it before posting and IMHO it should not be taken that that literally... I.e. webster says about nativity which may be close to the literal Latin origin, but patria it is not just country, it is fatherland and then the answer is you are always expact regardless citizenship or not. What if you have parents from more than one country and spent some time in both (assuming gender equity and motherland ? Are you then status-schizophrenic living in one of these countries as you always will be both expact and native? So I will rather stick to my "definition".

Fatherland can be understood in modern terms to be country of origin. If you originate from two countries as you describe, then you are native to both and expat in neither, right?

I agree that the question arises if you accept citizenship in another country, which doesn't change your fatherland or country of origin. Are you still expat then? I don't know the answer to this.

By the way, Merriam Webster doesn't even recognize "expat" as a noun. Also, if everyone uses their own definition of a term, that term loses all usefulness in ordinary discourse.

[JR8]

3. Words that completely change meaning over time are exceptions. "Nice" is one of those words.

As are 'patronising' and 'snob'


p.s. You veer towards my point though. Words change meaning, and a forensic deconstruction of the Greco-Latin etymology should not be presented as some kind of presumed de facto interpretation of it's current meaning.

pps. I wanted to sign off with an emo to send you an affectionate gesture, but nothing seems quite right. You'd probably end up thinking you had a stalker with whats on offer, so better not to lol....

[x9200]

I agree that the question arises if you accept citizenship in another country, which doesn't change your fatherland or country of origin. Are you still expat then? I don't know the answer to this.

By the way, Merriam Webster doesn't even recognize "expat" as a noun.

Yes I know, but we've been having here an informal discussion, right? so it is good enough we assure our interlocutor gets what we mean and using some colloquialisms should be acceptable, right?

Also, if everyone uses their own definition of a term, that term loses all usefulness in ordinary discourse.

That's how the language changes And I do not agree BTW that the meaning of majority of the words is of their origin. Unless English is somehow very specific it is just opposite. It evolves and it does pretty rapidly and frequently. Of course not like the core meaning but some shifts can happen already within a single generation. For the expatriate we are here talking about such variations so who knows.

[intellectualsmuse]

In case of SMS, he has come from a "richer" country so its not a case of immigration but he is the true definition of an expat.

I didn't quite get that. I believe people "immigrate" or "move" because they believe that the move would benefit them in some way, be it monetarily or in terms of a better life experience or quality of life. So while the specific motivation to move to a new country could be different, I don't think one should judge an individual or people of a race based on their motivation to move. And to me an expat is an expat is an expat. Calling someone a "true" expat or ''false" expat based on country of origin doesn't make sense to me! (No offence to the expat in question here )

For me an Expat is someone coming from a "higher cost of living/quality of life" country to a lower "cost of living/quality of life" country and then being compensated monetarily for the downgrade.

An Immigrant is someone who is doing the opposite move and since its an upgrade obviously the individual wont be compensated but on the contrary under cuts the locals in terms of wages.

Thats the classic definition for me. But in reality its not that black and white and most of us are shades of gray in between

For eg. an Indian IT worker who goes to the US on an H1B is closer to the immigrant definition and an American posted as the managing director in the Indian office of American multinational is clearly an expat.

That's pretty much what you said in your previous post here as well. My point was that irrespective of where you're from, when you move to another country you are an expat in that country. (Until such time that you obtain other residency status).

To me an "immigrant" is someone who has made the decision to "settle" in a new country.

[sundaymorningstaple]

I daresay the foreign worker considers himself/herself to be an expatriate, or expat, however you want to term it.

[revhappy]

I didn't quite get that. I believe people "immigrate" or "move" because they believe that the move would benefit them in some way, be it monetarily or in terms of a better life experience or quality of life. So while the specific motivation to move to a new country could be different, I don't think one should judge an individual or people of a race based on their motivation to move. And to me an expat is an expat is an expat. Calling someone a "true" expat or ''false" expat based on country of origin doesn't make sense to me! (No offence to the expat in question here )

For me an Expat is someone coming from a "higher cost of living/quality of life" country to a lower "cost of living/quality of life" country and then being compensated monetarily for the downgrade.

An Immigrant is someone who is doing the opposite move and since its an upgrade obviously the individual wont be compensated but on the contrary under cuts the locals in terms of wages.

Thats the classic definition for me. But in reality its not that black and white and most of us are shades of gray in between

For eg. an Indian IT worker who goes to the US on an H1B is closer to the immigrant definition and an American posted as the managing director in the Indian office of American multinational is clearly an expat.

That's pretty much what you said in your previous post here as well. My point was that irrespective of where you're from, when you move to another country you are an expat in that country. (Until such time that you obtain other residency status).

To me an "immigrant" is someone who has made the decision to "settle" in a new country.

Your definition is a way of being nice to an economic migrant and would certainly hurt the ego of a true expat.

BTW, Its not just us who are discussing Expat vs Immigrant, there is another thread on the internet

http://www.orientexpat.com/forum/17944- ... immigrant/

Happy reading!

[intellectualsmuse]

For me an Expat is someone coming from a "higher cost of living/quality of life" country to a lower "cost of living/quality of life" country and then being compensated monetarily for the downgrade.

An Immigrant is someone who is doing the opposite move and since its an upgrade obviously the individual wont be compensated but on the contrary under cuts the locals in terms of wages.

Thats the classic definition for me. But in reality its not that black and white and most of us are shades of gray in between

For eg. an Indian IT worker who goes to the US on an H1B is closer to the immigrant definition and an American posted as the managing director in the Indian office of American multinational is clearly an expat.

That's pretty much what you said in your previous post here as well. My point was that irrespective of where you're from, when you move to another country you are an expat in that country. (Until such time that you obtain other residency status).

To me an "immigrant" is someone who has made the decision to "settle" in a new country.

Your definition is a way of being nice to an economic migrant and would certainly hurt the ego of a true expat.

I'm sorry but that statement somehow reminds me of class distinction. So a "true" expat's ego is "hurt" when he/she is put in the same "class" as an "economic" migrant? Both people move to a new country hoping for positive change, why segregate them based on their motivation to move?

[JR8]

I'm sorry but that statement somehow reminds me of class distinction. So a "true" expat's ego is "hurt" when he/she is put in the same "class" as an "economic" migrant? Both people move to a new country hoping for positive change, why segregate them based on their motivation to move?

Snobbery (with it's original meaning)

[Wind In My Hair]

pps. I wanted to sign off with an emo to send you an affectionate gesture, but nothing seems quite right. You'd probably end up thinking you had a stalker with whats on offer, so better not to lol....

You mean you felt and wanted to but felt afraid of because of our history of and to avoid any risk of you decided to be a and so that we would remain ?

[JR8]

pps. I wanted to sign off with an emo to send you an affectionate gesture, but nothing seems quite right. You'd probably end up thinking you had a stalker with whats on offer, so better not to lol....

You mean you felt and wanted to but felt afraid of because of our history of and to avoid any risk of you decided to be a and so that we would remain ?

Gosh, that was quite amazing darling

[Wind In My Hair]

Gosh, that was quite amazing darling

Aww...

Wait, a reply within 2 minutes...

... are you stalking me?

[JR8]

Lol.... on form today I see WIMH!

[revhappy]

That's pretty much what you said in your previous post here as well. My point was that irrespective of where you're from, when you move to another country you are an expat in that country. (Until such time that you obtain other residency status).

To me an "immigrant" is someone who has made the decision to "settle" in a new country.

Your definition is a way of being nice to an economic migrant and would certainly hurt the ego of a true expat.

I'm sorry but that statement somehow reminds me of class distinction. So a "true" expat's ego is "hurt" when he/she is put in the same "class" as an "economic" migrant? Both people move to a new country hoping for positive change, why segregate them based on their motivation to move?

This segregation is not done by me. But its generally accepted by almost everyone, including the expats and immigrants themselves, lol.

Here's a quote from wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expatriate

The differentiation found in common usage usually comes down to socio-economic factors, so skilled professionals working in another country are described as expatriates, whereas a manual labourer who has moved to another country to earn more money might be labelled an 'immigrant'.