QUESTION:
Supin from South Korea had this question: “I want to know about the difference between ‘immigrate,’ ‘migrate,’ and ‘emigrate.’”
Tan from Thailand also asks, “Could you please explain the difference between ‘migrant’ and ‘immigrant’?”

ANSWER:
An “immigrant” (verb = “immigrate”)  is someone who moves from a foreign country to this country to live permanently.

An “emigrant” (verb = “emigrate”) is someone who leaves their own country to live permanently in another country.

A “migrant” (verb = “migrate”) is someone who moves from one place to another within a country, usually to do seasonal (available during the same season (summer, spring, winter, fall, or period of time each year) work.

The difference between “immigrant” and “emigrant” is your point of reference (where you are located or where you are beginning).  If I move to Spain to live, I would be an American emigrant and a Spanish immigrant.

In the U.S., of these three terms, you’ll most often hear the term “immigrant.”  Anyone who comes to live in the U.S. is an immigrant.  People talk about “immigrant groups,” “immigrant communities or enclaves (where a group of people from the same foreign country or region live together in the same area or neighborhood),” and “immigrant rights (what each person should be allowed to do or to have).”  A major issue in the U.S. is illegal (not allowed by law) immigration, or people who enter and stay in the U.S. without permission.

We use the term “emigrant” far less often, probably because we, as a country, are more concerned about people moving in than people moving out.  You will sometimes hear people use the term émigré, a term we’ve borrowed from the French. An émigré is someone who leaves their own country to live somewhere else, usually for political reasons.  Before and during World War II, for example, there were a lot of Jewish émigrés from Europe.  A far more common term we use these days to refer to people who flee a country (leave a country quickly because of danger) is refugee. People usually become refugees when there are political or religious changes or conflicts (problems) and their lives are threatened (in danger).

Finally, you’ll hear the term “migrant” most often used to refer to farm workers who travel from place to place to work in the fields, usually harvesting (taking food from the fields to sell or eat) or picking produce (fruits and vegetables).  As the seasons change, migrant farm workers move to the areas where there is farm work to be done.  Sometimes, farm workers travel the same route (way or course) every year.

Note that even though many people in the U.S. move from one part of the country to another, we don’t use the term “migrant” to describe these people.  I moved from Arizona to California, and Jeff moved from Minnesota to California, but no one would call us “migrants.”  Instead, we use a phrase like “not a California native” or “not a native of California” to describe people like us.  For example:  ”Joe is not a Texas native” OR “Leslie is not a native of Louisiana.”

I hope that answers your questions, Supin and Tan, and that you and our other listeners (and readers) find this useful.

~ Lucy

There’s an old saying that “all politics is local,” meaning that all political elections, even for president, depend on the conditions in the city or area where you are living. If the economy is bad in your city, it doesn’t matter that it is good in other cities – you only care about your city, your local conditions, and you will vote accordingly (following that logic or reasoning).

We could also say that “all language is local.”  Most Americans speak English, but the kind or variety of English depends on where you live.  We all know this, I think, but sometimes it is good to remind ourselves that what we say in our city may not be the same as in other cities, even when we speak the same language.

Slang – informal language used by a particular (specific; certain) group or in a particular context (situation) – is also local, and changes depending on where you live.  Researchers have recently studied the kind of language people use in text messages and tweets, or messages on the Internet service Twitter.  They analyzed tweets in the U.S. that were geotagged, meaning the person who sent the tweet also indicated their location on their iPhone or Blackberry.  They then looked to see how people used language in one area versus (compared to) another.

Using some powerful statistical techniques, the scientists were able to predict the general area where a person lived just by looking at the kind of slang they used.  They also gave examples of slang associated with certain cities:

• In Northern California (San Francisco, the Silicon Valley), the word “hella” is very popular in tweets.  Hella is an expression of enthusiasm.  According to the Urban Dictionary, it can mean “very,” “a lot of,” or “something really good or great.”  For example: “People in San Francisco think they are hella (much; a lot) smarter than people in SoCal (Southern California, which includes Los Angeles).”  Hella is apparently (it seems) very popular in San Francisco, but not in Los Angeles.  (I’ve never used it before writing this blog post, for example.)
• In Southern California, people use an abbreviated (shortened) form of the word “cool” (meaning good, popular, hip), “coo.”  In Northern California, they tweet “koo” for “cool,” perhaps using a “k” instead of a “c” due to (because of) their lower level of education (that’s a joke!).
• Southern Californians tweet “fasho” to mean “for sure,” when they are expressing agreement with something.
• New Yorkers use the letters “nm” to mean “not much” in tweets and texts, while people in Boston write “suttin” to mean “something.”

There’s nothing really new in this research, but it does confirm (verify; show again that it is true) that what we say depends on where we live. Every language in every country has similar differences, even if you are not aware of them.

~Jeff

P.S. The scientific article is available here in PDF format.

P.P.S.  ESL Podcast has been on Twitter nearly (almost) since the very beginning of the service, back in 2006.  You can follow us @eslpod.

Image Credit: Twitter logo (low resolution), Wikipedia PD

In his new book, Loyalty, journalist Eric Felten discusses the reasons why people have loyalty to (commitment to, usually with a willingness to help and defend) their country, their family, and their friends. Most of us would probably agree that we should be loyal to our family and our close friends, even though we may not be able to explain exactly why we should be loyal.  But when it comes to (when we begin to discuss) loyalty to one’s country, there is often disagreement about what that should consist of (include).

The word often associated with (connected to) loyalty to one’s country is patriotism.  Some people think that patriotism is the belief that one’s own country is superior to or better than any other country.  But, as Felten points out, this isn’t the only way to define “patriotism,” and certainly not the best one.  According to Felten, patriotism correctly understood (defined in the right way) is similar to the loyalty you have to a member of your family.  As British writer G.K. Chesterton once wrote, the idea behind someone saying, “my country, right or wrong” (that is, I will be loyal to my country regardless of what it does) is the same as saying, “my mother, drunk or sober.”  (To be drunk means to have drunk too much alcohol; to be sober is when your body has no alcohol or drugs in it.)

We love our mothers even though they may do things that are wrong, even though they are not perfect.  We love them because they are our mothers.  We are grateful to them for giving us life, for caring for us.  You do not need to believe that your mother is the best mother in the world to be loyal to her, to be willing to defend her and to help her.  Of course, if your mother drinks too much, you want to help her change her actions.  Being loyal, in other words, doesn’t mean you agree with everything your family (or country) does.  It means simply that you will continue to support them and be willing to take action to change them if they make mistakes.  You will not just abandon (leave) them when times get tough (the situation becomes difficult).

A mistaken (wrong) sense of patriotism has been used in many cases for bad ends (purposes), and for that reason it has sometimes been associated with an excessive, even dangerous loyalty and attachment (sense of closeness) to one’s country. But it doesn’t have to be that way, argues Felten.  We can celebrate what makes our countries different without saying that those differences make us better than everyone else.  We can love our country, in other words, simply because it is ours.

Do you agree?

~Jeff

Photo Credit: American flags by Lipton Sale, Wikipedia CC

This month the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) added FYI, LOL, and OMG to their online edition. Previously (before now), OED had added IMHO, TMI, BFF, and others to the online dictionary.

These expressions are examples of initialisms, abbreviations that are made up of the first letters of a name or expression. For those of you who may not be familiar with them, here’s how the OED defines them:

• OMG – “Oh my God” (or sometimes “gosh,” “goodness,” etc.)
• LOL – “Laughing out loud”
• FYI – “For your information”
• IMHO – “In my humble opinion,” sometimes only IMO – “In my opinion”
• TMI – “Too much information”
• BFF – “Best friends forever”

When we pronounce (say) initialisms, we say the letters: for example, O-M-G or C-E-O (Chief Executive Officer, the top manager of a large company) or F-B-I (Federal Bureau of Investigation).

When we pronounce an initialism as a word, we call it an acronym. AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome), NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), and laser (light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation) are familiar acronyms.

In making the announcement, the OED noted (mentioned something interesting or important) that the intention (goal or purpose) of an initialism is usually to signal (show or express) a very casual (informal) mood or feeling. They have become popular because they are short and easy to type in an e-mail, tweet, or text message. The OED says that these initialisms are used sometimes to parody the way people act and write online. Parody means to copy (repeat) someone or something in a way that makes people laugh. A good example of parody on television is Saturday Night Live, where the actors parody politicians and popular entertainers to make the audience laugh. Sometimes we call this “making fun of” someone or something.

During the process of approving these initialisms, the OED discovered (found) that all three of them have been used for many years, long before the beginning of the Internet. OMG was first used in 1917, during World War I, in a personal letter. FYI originated (began) in 1941, during World War II. And LOL started in 1960, but then it stood for (meant) “little old lady,” an elderly (older) woman!

This brings up an interesting point, one that may surprise you. The editors (people who decide what goes into a book) of a dictionary don’t determine (decide) the meanings of words. Rather, they report (describe) how the speakers and writers of a language use words. The editors’ job is, first, to collect examples of different word uses or meanings and, then, to decide whether or not a word meaning is used often enough to be included in the dictionary. So we could say that a dictionary is a collection of descriptions of how the words of a language are used.

If you are a more advanced reader, you might enjoy the story of how the OED started. It’s in a book with the curious (strange or unusual) title The Professor and the Madman: A Tale of Murder, Insanity, and the Making of the Oxford English Dictionary.

~ Warren Ediger – English tutor and coach and creator of Successful English, where English learners find clear explanations and practical suggestions for better English.

Photo by emdot used under Creative Commons license.

QUESTION:
One of our listeners, Alexandr, wants to know the difference is between “theatre” and “theater“?

ANSWER:
How can English speakers best confuse English learners?  One way is to spell the same word in different ways.

One example is “theater” and “theatre.”  In the U.S., most of the time, we use the word “theater” to mean the place where we go to see movies, plays, and other performances.  In British English, they use “theatre.”

However, just to make it more complicated, sometimes Americans use “theatre” as well.  According to this Wikipedia chart, in the U.S., “theater” refers to the building where a play or performance is held, and “theatre” refers to the play or show itself.

My experience is that it’s not so clear-cut (definite; easy to define).  British English has a high level of status (level of respect) in the U.S.  When many Americans hear British English, they think “educated,” “high class,” “formal,” etc.  (There are negative stereotypes (beliefs about an entire group that are often false), too, but we won’t go into (discuss) that right now.)  And because the British spellings of words are a large part of this country’s early beginnings, we sometimes use the British English spellings to associate with those British roots (beginnings; origins) and/or to sound old-fashioned or stately (having a respectable or dignified appearance).  So when we write about going to see a play, we’ll almost always use “theater,” but some playhouses will use the spelling of “theatre” for their building or group, perhaps to make us think of those positive associations (connections). For example, in Los Angeles alone, you can see performances at The El Rey Theatre, the Nokia Theatre, the Pantages Theatre, and the Orpheum Theatre, among others.

I would follow this rule of thumb (general rule):  If you are in the U.S. or communicating with Americans, assume that the spelling is “theater.”  You’ll be right most all of the time.

I also suggest taking a look at the Wikipedia page I mentioned above for other ways the British, the Americans, and other English speakers have conspired (secretly planned) to make learning the English language as difficult as possible for you.

~ Lucy

One of the greatest honors a scientist can receive is to have some concept or idea named after him or her, such as Newton’s Laws of Motion. An even higher honor is to have your own number – some scientifically meaningful number that bears (has; uses) your name.  In chemistry, we have Avagadro’s number for the number of molecules in a mole (and, no, I won’t explain high school chemistry to you because I don’t remember it myself).

Robin Dunbar is an anthropologist (scientist who studies humans and cultures) who has attained (reached; accomplished; obtained) the honor of his own number.  Dunbar’s number is 147.8 (we’ll call it 150).  So what does it mean?  Basically, Dunbar hypothesizes (has a “guess” which can be supported by evidence) that the maximum number of friends the average human can have can be no greater than 150, more or less (approximately).  We can’t maintain (keep) meaningful relationships with more than 150 people at any one time in our lives.  That’s the limit of our “social network,” or the friends and family members we regularly interact (communicate) with.

Facebook, the world’s largest social network connecting people online, provides additional evidence in support of Dunbar’s Number.  Dunbar himself found that the average number of friends people have on Facebook is 120 to 130, which is about right when you consider that some in our social network (babies, for example) may not yet be on Facebook (we hope!).  Of course, there are people who have 5,000 “friends,” but these are not actually people they have any real friendship or emotional closeness to.

We should not think that having less than 150 people in our offline (not connected to the Internet) and online network means we are somehow unusual.  Dunbar’s number is a maximum (highest; top) number for the average human.  Personally, I’d rather have 10 good friends than 150 mediocre (not very good) ones.

~Jeff

Recently, someone asked me about the word “fellow.” Since it has several meanings and can be confusing, I thought I’d talk a little bit about it here.

First, it is used for someone who is in the same position, doing the same activity, or is involved in the same things as you are.  If I were speaking to a group of other podcasters, I may greet them by saying, “Hello, fellow podcasters.”  If you are a university student and you are speaking about yourself and other students, you may say: “I and my fellow students believe that our fees are too high.”  Several U.S. presidents, including John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, have used the phrase “my fellow Americans” in their speeches to the American people.

A “fellow” can also be a university student or graduate who receives a fellowship, a type of scholarship, or money given to pay for school tuition (money required to attend a school) or other expenses.  You can have “research fellows,” “graduate fellows,” “visiting fellows” (from other universities or academic organizations), or just “fellows.”

Finally, “fellow” is an informal and old-fashioned term for a boy or a man.  Here are a couple of examples:
- “Look at that fellow over there.  He’s going swimming in that cold lake!”
- “If you fellows will excuse me, I need to leave now.”

In fact, there is a very well-known song called “For He’s a Jolly Good Fellow,” sung to congratulate someone when a significant event happens, such as a promotion (getting a higher-level job), retirement (when one reaches an age where one can stop working), or winning a competition.  Like the “Happy Birthday to You” song, it’s usually sung by everyone in the room in unison (at the same time).  The lyrics (words) are very simple:

For he’s a jolly good fellow, for he’s a jolly good fellow
For he’s a jolly good fellow, which nobody can deny
Which nobody can deny, which nobody can deny
For he’s a jolly good fellow, for he’s a jolly good fellow
For he’s a jolly good fellow, which nobody can deny!

In this case, “jolly” means “very” (this is an old-fashioned usage) and to “deny” is to say that something isn’t true or to refuse to admit the truth.  No one would deny that the sky is blue or that Jeff is the best singer in the world, would they?

Although this song is meant for men/boys, I’ve heard this song sung to women, substituting “she” for “he,” of course.  So the next time you have a friend with something to celebrate, perhaps you can surprise him or her with this song!

Are there songs of congratulations sung in other languages?

~ Lucy

Photo: Ercole de’ Roberti: Concert, c. 1490. Wikipedia CC

QUESTION:
Elena from Russia asks: “I’ve been listening your podcasts since last spring and I have a question about the word “horse.” Why do you use this beautiful harmless animal in some kind of, I suppose, insulting phrases? For example, you have a phrase “get off your high horse” and another, “clothes horse,” which is also very unpleasant for women. And maybe you have some others with “horse”? Could you tell about them plus the meanings, of course.

ANSWER:
It’s certainly true that “horse” appears in a number of idioms and phrases that are not complimentary (showing praise or approval), and Elena has pointed out two we’ve included in our podcasts:  “to get off (one’s) high horse” (ESL Podcasts 324 & 615) and “clothes horse” (ESL Podcast 619).

When I did a search of our past podcasts, I found that “horse” actually appears in a quite a few of the phrases we’ve used and explained.  Either we have an usual love for horses here at ESL Podcast, or there are simply a lot of phrases and idioms that include horses.  Since I’ve only ridden a horse twice in my life and Jeff tells me he’s never been on a horse, I’m inclined to (tend to) think that it must be the latter (second) explanation.

You may be interested in these other horse-related idioms:

“to put the cart before the horse” (English Cafe 211)
“a wild horse couldn’t drag (one)” (ESL Podcast 370)
“to look a gift horse in the mouth” (ESL Podcast 489)
“I could eat a horse” (ESL Podcast 629)

These are not all of the horse-related idioms in the English language by any means (at all), but they’re some of the more commonly-used ones. Depending on the context (situation), most of these are neutral (not good nor bad).  Let’s see if I can use all six idioms in a little story:
__________

For three days and three nights, Jeff didn’t return home.

On the fourth night, he stepped through the front door of his house and his wife, a clothes horse, said, “Where have you been and why are you wearing my new dress?”

“Hold on (stop) a minute,” Jeff responded.  “Let’s not put the cart before the horse.  I haven’t eaten for three days and right now, I could eat a horse!  Go make me some dinner.”

Jeff’s wife looked at the ripped (torn; damaged) dress and said: “A wild horse couldn’t drag me into the kitchen to make you dinner before you’ve explained why you’ve been missing for three days and why you’re wearing my dress.”

Jeff, looking tired and frustrated, said: “You’re looking a gift horse in the mouth.  Isn’t it enough that I’m home and I’m not hurt?”

“You’ve been missing for three days.  You haven’t called me or texted me, and now you’re behaving like I should just be grateful that you’re back.  You need to get off your high horse, Jeff, and explain yourself!”
__________

Okay, it’s not really a story, but you get the idea.  Are there phrases or idioms in other languages involving horses?  Are they positive, negative, or neutral?

By the way, I don’t know where Jeff has been.  Maybe we should ask him, or perhaps you can guess?

~ Lucy

QUESTION:
Levent from Turkey had the following the question: “I want to ask about the verb which you used in your podcast about the museums: “I can’t name all of the museums in this city.” I understand this verb “name.” I guess you mean that you don’t know the exact number of the all museums?”

ANSWER:
It’s not surprising that Levent isn’t clear on the meaning of the word “name.” In fact, as a verb, “name” has several meanings.

In the sentence Levent mentioned — “I can’t name all of the museums in this city.” — “name” means to identify by name, usually by saying it aloud.  When someone asks you to name something, they are asking you to provide a list aloud.  They are not asking you for a number, but rather, the names of each item on the list.  So, a conversation may go like this:
A:  “I’ve been to New York City a lot of times.  I know everything about that city.”
B:  “Okay, then, how many museums are in that city?”
A:  “I think there are 22.”
B:  “Okay, name them!”
A:  “I’m not sure I can name all of them.”

Another meaning of “name,” used as a verb, is to appoint or assign a job to someone.  You probably know the verb “hire,” which means for you, your company, or your organization to give someone a job.  We use “name” in a slightly different way, usually for a position that is important or that carries (includes) some level of honor.  For example, Jeff may be named by the President to be the new ambassador (most important political representative; diplomat) to Ireland.  Jeff is being hired for this job, that’s true, but the job is also an important position that is an honor to receive.

A third way we use “name” as a verb is to mean to specify an amount, a time, a place, a price, or another thing.  If the President offers Jeff the job as ambassador, Jeff may say, “I’ll accept the job only if you will give me a few things.”  Of course, President Obama will say, “Name it!,” meaning that Jeff should simply tell him what he wants and he’ll get those things.  Another example would be if you really wanted to buy your friend’s car, but she is reluctant (not completely willing) to sell it.  You may say to her, “Name your price and I’ll pay it.”

So, you can see that “name” has several meanings as a verb and the way to know the difference is by the context (situation; the words around it).  Thanks, Levent, for the question and I hope this is helpful.

~ Lucy

QUESTION:
Amaury from Colombia wants to know what “taking the moral high ground” means.

ANSWER:
“To take the moral high ground” means to keep one’s beliefs and to behave according to what is generally accepted as a high standard of good and correct behavior.  When we talk about “morality” (noun) or “moral” (adjective) behavior, we are talking about our principles (important beliefs) about what is right and wrong, and what is good or bad.  “High ground” is the term we use for a place or piece of land that is higher than the areas around it.  That’s where you want to be if there is a flood (too much water over land), so you can stay dry.  A person who has or takes the moral high ground in a debate or controversy is someone who has or wants to have the better moral position when compared to others involved, whether it’s in their own eyes (from their own point of view) or in the eyes of others.  If, for example, people at work are trying to curry favor (get someone to like them more by trying to please that person) with the boss by telling lies about their coworkers, you may want to take the moral high ground and not do the same thing, even if it means you will not gain the same advantage as your coworkers.

The opposite of taking the moral high ground is to sink to (someone’s) level.  “To sink” means to fall or to drop to a lower level.  “To sink to (someone’s) level” means to lower one’s standards so that one behaves in a way that is similar to another person who has lower standards.  For instance, if you’re in car race and one of the racers routinely (regularly) wins by paying off (giving money to someone so they’ll do or not do something) his competitors, you might say, “I won’t sink to his level to win.”

So people who take the moral high ground are people who won’t sink to the level of others.  We often think highly or well of people who take the moral high ground, especially if it means there is some sacrifice (giving up of something important) for them to do so.

Thanks, Amaury, for your question and I hope this is helpful.

~ Lucy