Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Slovak-World] Re: Emigration to AUSTRALIA

Expand Messages
  • S
    The way I learned it, if the direct prepositional clause has Joe leaving from a country, he is emigrating from it.... So the second example below seems wrong
    Message 1 of 20 , Nov 23, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      The way I learned it, if the direct prepositional clause has Joe leaving from a country, he is emigrating from it.... So the second example below seems wrong to me, no matter if I view him from SK or USA. But it does appear right for him to immigrate to America from SK, because the prepositions are switched.


      Susan

      On Nov 23, 2012, at 8:49 AM, "votrubam" <votrubam@...> wrote:

      >
      > Jozo emigrated from Slovakia to America. (Jozo viewed from SK)
      > Jozo immigrated from Slovakia to America. (Jozo viewed from the US)
      >
      > Martin
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • votrubam
      ... Things are said that ain t so, and some repeat them without considering whether they re true. By the same logic, it would also be incorrect to say:
      Message 2 of 20 , Nov 23, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        > The way I learned it

        Things are said that ain't so, and some repeat them without considering whether they're true. By the same "logic," it would also be incorrect to say:

        imported from Brazil
        invaded from the west
        imposed from overseas
        inserted from below

        ... "because the Latin prefixes mean 'into,' so you cannot say 'from where' with them."

        That is certainly not the case. The thing with emigrate/immigrate and the English prepositions from and in is one of a number of inventions some repeat about how language works. The fact that something is repeated does not make it true.

        Should Latin be an argument (it ain't), then the authors who wrote what's below would not have known their Latin:

        ... trans mare mediterraneum emigrarit in regiones Europaeas vel Africanas.

        ... emigravit in coelestem patriam.

        ... emigrarent in exteram regionem.

        Joannes Morus ... satis in terra jam se moratum ratus, lubens emigravit in coelum.

        Variae Saxonum Coloniae emigrarint in Marchiam subactam.


        Martin
      • S
        I was only writing about immigrate and emigrate, and still think what I wrote is correct. I do think it an interesting discussion, for what it reveals about
        Message 3 of 20 , Nov 23, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          I was only writing about immigrate and emigrate, and still think what I wrote is correct. I do think it an interesting discussion, for what it reveals about our understanding about language. i also agree that just because I have never heard your way of thinking about this before, and mine has been successfully used all my life, that mine is not necessarily the best. I like hearing your ideas....but remain unconvinced. Broadening to other Latin based examples is not logical, because they are not held to the same narrow restriction as immigrate and emigrate. Sure, one can say beef, or even a human commodity like slaves, is/are imported from Brazil or exported from Brazil, as well as exported to Brazil imported to Brazil. But a person initiating a homeland change emigrates from old place and immigrates to new place on my editing pad. How do we determine if something that works for us and others by consensus over 50 years is indeed true or false? What/who is your authoritative reference or source for this idea?
          Hmmmm....



          Susan

          On Nov 23, 2012, at 1:48 PM, "votrubam" <votrubam@...> wrote:

          > > The way I learned it
          > Things are said that ain't so, and some repeat them without considering whether they're true. By the same "logic," it would also be incorrect to say:
          >
          > imported from Brazil
          > invaded from the west
          > imposed from overseas
          > inserted from below
          >
          > ... "because the Latin prefixes mean 'into,' so you cannot say 'from where' with them."
          >
          > That is certainly not the case. The thing with emigrate/immigrate and the English prepositions from and in is one of a number of inventions some repeat about how language works. The fact that something is repeated does not make it true.
          >
          > Should Latin be an argument (it ain't), then the authors who wrote what's below would not have known their Latin:
          >
          > ... trans mare mediterraneum emigrarit in regiones Europaeas vel Africanas.
          >
          > ... emigravit in coelestem patriam.
          >
          > ... emigrarent in exteram regionem.
          >
          > Joannes Morus ... satis in terra jam se moratum ratus, lubens emigravit in coelum.
          >
          > Variae Saxonum Coloniae emigrarint in Marchiam subactam.
          >
          > Martin
          >
          >


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • votrubam
          ... Only for some of us and only for some others. The sources are books on language use, usage by respected writers, whatever someone may remember from 50
          Message 4 of 20 , Nov 23, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            > How do we determine if something that works for us and others

            Only for some of us and only for some others. The sources are books on language use, usage by respected writers, whatever someone may remember from 50 years ago, frequency, etc. E.g., parts of how language works is based on parallelism, _emigrate/immigrate_ and _export/import_ are powerful parallels, as is _an immigrant from/immigrate from_. But indeed, people have various beliefs and preferences about the language they use.

            The problem kicks in when someone begins to publicly criticize others about their usage, which was the only starting point here. Without that, there is no problem with whether anyone avoids saying _emigrate to_, or does say so. SK-W is about Slovakia-related issues, not about changing someone's use of the English language.

            Dat is all I vill heff too sai about dis.


            Martin
          • Susan Durisek
            aj ja ... From: votrubam To: Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 3:43 PM Subject: [Slovak-World] Re: Re em...imm discussion ... Only
            Message 5 of 20 , Nov 23, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              aj ja

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: votrubam
              To: Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 3:43 PM
              Subject: [Slovak-World] Re: Re em...imm discussion



              > How do we determine if something that works for us and others

              Only for some of us and only for some others. The sources are books on language use, usage by respected writers, whatever someone may remember from 50 years ago, frequency, etc. E.g., parts of how language works is based on parallelism, _emigrate/immigrate_ and _export/import_ are powerful parallels, as is _an immigrant from/immigrate from_. But indeed, people have various beliefs and preferences about the language they use.

              The problem kicks in when someone begins to publicly criticize others about their usage, which was the only starting point here. Without that, there is no problem with whether anyone avoids saying _emigrate to_, or does say so. SK-W is about Slovakia-related issues, not about changing someone's use of the English language.

              Dat is all I vill heff too sai about dis.

              Martin





              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • CurtB
              Susan, I think Martin got it about right. If you think you have a preposition rule about immigrant or emigrant it s up to you to cite a reputable or standard
              Message 6 of 20 , Nov 23, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Susan,
                I think Martin got it about right. If you think you have a preposition rule about immigrant or emigrant it's up to you to cite a reputable or standard source.

                The standard ones do not have a preposition rule. See Fowler's English usage, Chicago manual of Style, New York Times style manual. Unfortunately they are not online. They all just say perspective as does wikipedia:

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emigration

                Curt B.
                --- In Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com, S <durisek@...> wrote:
                >
                > I was only writing about immigrate and emigrate, and still think what I wrote is correct. I do think it an interesting discussion, for what it reveals about our understanding about language. i also agree that just because I have never heard your way of thinking about this before, and mine has been successfully used all my life, that mine is not necessarily the best. I like hearing your ideas....but remain unconvinced. Broadening to other Latin based examples is not logical, because they are not held to the same narrow restriction as immigrate and emigrate. Sure, one can say beef, or even a human commodity like slaves, is/are imported from Brazil or exported from Brazil, as well as exported to Brazil imported to Brazil. But a person initiating a homeland change emigrates from old place and immigrates to new place on my editing pad. How do we determine if something that works for us and others by consensus over 50 years is indeed true or false? What/who is your authoritative reference or source for this idea?
                > Hmmmm....
                >
                >
                >
                > Susan
                >
                > On Nov 23, 2012, at 1:48 PM, "votrubam" <votrubam@...> wrote:
                >
                > > > The way I learned it
                > > Things are said that ain't so, and some repeat them without considering whether they're true. By the same "logic," it would also be incorrect to say:
                > >
                > > imported from Brazil
                > > invaded from the west
                > > imposed from overseas
                > > inserted from below
                > >
                > > ... "because the Latin prefixes mean 'into,' so you cannot say 'from where' with them."
                > >
                > > That is certainly not the case. The thing with emigrate/immigrate and the English prepositions from and in is one of a number of inventions some repeat about how language works. The fact that something is repeated does not make it true.
                > >
                > > Should Latin be an argument (it ain't), then the authors who wrote what's below would not have known their Latin:
                > >
                > > ... trans mare mediterraneum emigrarit in regiones Europaeas vel Africanas.
                > >
                > > ... emigravit in coelestem patriam.
                > >
                > > ... emigrarent in exteram regionem.
                > >
                > > Joannes Morus ... satis in terra jam se moratum ratus, lubens emigravit in coelum.
                > >
                > > Variae Saxonum Coloniae emigrarint in Marchiam subactam.
                > >
                > > Martin
                > >
                > >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
              • votrubam
                ... I was concerned that something untoward might have happened to you, Chuck. I see it was your decision -- consider not making it long-term (most of us get
                Message 7 of 20 , Nov 24, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  > I have refrained from comment.

                  I was concerned that something untoward might have happened to you, Chuck. I see it was your decision -- consider not making it long-term (most of us get bitten, as well as bite, on occasion: it heals).


                  > he is unfamiliar of the tale

                  Thank you very much for checking into this, it would have been good to know the details. I'm grateful you mentioned it, yours may be the last reference to the circumstances in anyone's memory.


                  Martin
                • whiteox_nelson
                  Dammit! Hungarians have no friends. I m neither here or there with it and even though I speak the language and understand the history AND the current faction
                  Message 8 of 20 , Nov 24, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dammit! Hungarians have no friends. I'm neither here or there with it and even though I speak the language and understand the history AND the current faction strife between Slovakia and Hungary, I lean not one way or another.
                    Closely examining the history of the interaction between the two nations, I blame the Hapsbergs and their policies which forced the Hungarians into Magyarization.
                    It was a simple case of either speaking German or Hungarian, where the Hungarians were most put out by the influx of German (and other) immigrants into 'their historical land' after the Ottomans were driven out. All you need to verify this is the frustration of Esterhazy, the owner of large tracts of Slovak lands who saw the disenfranchisement of the Hungarian nation by the new emigrants from Germany and Austria as early as 1710.
                    All in all, the Hungarians have always seen the Slovaks and Rusyns as brothers and not 'immigrants'. After all they've been there a long, long time. It's not only the Slovaks, but also the Cumans - the dreaded enemy of the Hungarians who were allowed to settle being driven out of their homeland by the Mongols. Romanians too were asked to settle (with the Teutonic Germans) in Transylvania living with the Szekelys. The history of Hungarian settlement is that of acceptance and not abuse. Even the iconic King of Hungary - St Stephen, married a Germanic Frankish princess and Christianized the Nation, much to the horror of the pagan populace.
                    That's hard to believe from today's perspective yet my genealogical studies have shown a remarkable acceptance of Slovaks in the area once known as the Royal Kingdom of Hungary ~ the present day Slovakia. Hungary was never the enemy of Slovaks ~ it was only the protectionism of Magyarization against the Hapsberg Germanic policies that would of forced the Slovaks and all the rest of the 15 or so ethnic groups to speak German within pre 1914 old Hungary. Sure in hindsight it was a mistake and a bad one at that. It could have been handled better, but when a greater power tries to force their language and culture onto a sovereign nation then what can the nation do? Obviously protect itself. No doubt that Hungary's answer was wrong and Magyarization was a knee jerk reaction to a threatening situation.
                    I wish I could apologize for the Hungarians yet my family was intensively Magyarized (assimilated) until there was very little left of their Moravian culture. Nowadays a Hungarian is very rarely a Magyar. What I mean by that is much of the populace speak the language but are Slavik, German or Romanian in origin. Not only that, but the (true) Hungarians will disappear gradually as their birthrate is lower than their death rate. So what was a symbiosis for a thousand years will probably disappear in a century. I fear the fate of Hungarians, like the Circassians, they will disappear.
                    Sorry about the rant.
                    Peter M.
                    --- In Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com, LongJohn Wayne <daxthewarrior@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Martin:
                    >
                    > Sorry to take so long.  It was requested by another member that my participation here was not beneficial to the group.  While I disagreed, I acquiesced.  While I have been monitoring many threads here, I have refrained from comment.
                    >
                    > I did tell this opinionated individual that I would reply once I got an answer to your question.  However, the answer was not helpful or informative.  But I did give you my word to do so.  And I am not the kind of person who breaks his word.
                    >
                    > I had mentioned in a prior thread about how Slovaks were subjugated during the Austro-Hungarian empire by being 'forced' [my words, not the words of some members of this group] to sing certain pieces in Hungarian & being punished for singing or speaking in Slovak -- or other native tongues.  Whether any of this is true, it is part of the fabric & folklore that was handed down to me.
                    >
                    > You had asked, Martin, if I could get any additional information on the song or the lyrics.  I finally heard back from my Uncle.  Unfortunately, he is unfamiliar of the tale told by my other Uncle.  He passed away some years back, so the tale ends w/ him.  The uncle who does not recall that story is the youngest of the family from ME & is the sole survivor of 11 siblings.
                    >
                    > I wish I had better news or information to provide.
                    >
                    > I am still here, & wish all members of this informative & useful NewsGroup a very safe & happy Thanksgiving!  And to return to read your posts in silence.
                    >
                    > Veselé Vianoce,
                    > Chuck W.
                    > [Only 1/2 Slovak]
                    >
                    > --- On Fri, 11/23/12, votrubam <votrubam@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > From: votrubam <votrubam@...>
                    > Subject: [Slovak-World] Re: Emigration to AUSTRALIA
                    > To: Slovak-World@yahoogroups.com
                    > Date: Friday, November 23, 2012, 8:49 AM
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >  
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > > Sorry, but you are incorrect.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > No need to be sorry, both preposition are correct.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > > The prefix "E" literally means "OUT OF" .. like "EX" in Latin.
                    >
                    > > The prefix "IM" (a version of "IN") means 'INTO' ...
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Certainly, and the prefixes have nothing to do with the prepositions. In a sentence, each preposition indicates, separately, "the place of departure" and "the place of arrival."
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Emigrate means "depart, leave, abandon..." They all go with both "the place of departure" and "the place of arrival": The aircraft departed from Slovakia for America. Jozo Kovac left his garden for the post office.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Immigrate means "come, arrive, enter..." They all go with both "the place of departure" and "the place of arrival": The aircraft came to America from Slovakia. Jozo Kovac entered the room from the hallway.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > To say otherwise is like fantasizing that it might be "incorrect" to say, _He entered from the hallway_, "because enter means 'into,' so you mustn't say 'where from.'"
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > The following sentences are perfectly correct, the difference is one of a perspective -- are we viewing Jozo from his home country (emigrated, emigrant) or are we viewing Jozo from his target country (immigrated, immigrant)? Both the place of departure and the place of arrival can be, correctly, expressed in both instances:
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Jozo emigrated from Slovakia to America. (Jozo viewed from SK)
                    >
                    > Jozo immigrated from Slovakia to America. (Jozo viewed from the US)
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Martin
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.