It was probably just used colloquially and was picked up interchangeably…? Speaking as someone looking to immigrate elsewhere, I’ve said and use both. I feel like expatriation even shows more of an intent to split in all ways from your country of origin, but that’s just my subjective opinion on the words.
Reading the rest of the thread, I guess I was incorrect in my assumption of the origin of the word ‘expat’.
It was used colloquially, for sure… by rich corporate migrants that didn’t want to self-ID as migrants. Or at least by the HR people and corpo consultants handling the international relocations and avoding the taboo word.
Which is what the previous post is saying and it certainly matches my experience as one of the “expats”. I always self-identified as a migrant myself, though.
I’ve seen it used in media far more than in person. Mostly for soldiers that stuck around after wars wound down or wealthy people buying fancy homes in tropical locations.
The people I’ve worked with in tech from Scotland and England who have lived in the US long term but without becoming citizens don’t even use the term. Honestly most people don’t really use labels, just refer to someone in tech being ‘from a country’ when it comes up whether they became citizens or not.
We had enough of them at a time that “the expats” was a relevant group of people you needed to refer to for specific things. Language lessons, HR support, what have you. I definitely heard the anglo guys refer to themselves as that frequently, and that then became the word people used.
I had a chip on my shoulder about telling people I was a migrant, but I was pretty alone on that. The anglo guys mostly said they were “expats”.
ah, so you have an alternative explanation?
It was probably just used colloquially and was picked up interchangeably…? Speaking as someone looking to immigrate elsewhere, I’ve said and use both. I feel like expatriation even shows more of an intent to split in all ways from your country of origin, but that’s just my subjective opinion on the words.
Reading the rest of the thread, I guess I was incorrect in my assumption of the origin of the word ‘expat’.
It was used colloquially, for sure… by rich corporate migrants that didn’t want to self-ID as migrants. Or at least by the HR people and corpo consultants handling the international relocations and avoding the taboo word.
Which is what the previous post is saying and it certainly matches my experience as one of the “expats”. I always self-identified as a migrant myself, though.
I’ve never heard the term used for anyone with dark skin or from anywhere other than the US, Canada, or western Europe.
I’ve definitely seen it used for non-white coworkers and coworkers from other regions, but typically in the context of relocating for corporate work.
But then, I worked for a western corpo but with a ridiculously diverse group of people during that time.
I’ve seen it used in media far more than in person. Mostly for soldiers that stuck around after wars wound down or wealthy people buying fancy homes in tropical locations.
The people I’ve worked with in tech from Scotland and England who have lived in the US long term but without becoming citizens don’t even use the term. Honestly most people don’t really use labels, just refer to someone in tech being ‘from a country’ when it comes up whether they became citizens or not.
We had enough of them at a time that “the expats” was a relevant group of people you needed to refer to for specific things. Language lessons, HR support, what have you. I definitely heard the anglo guys refer to themselves as that frequently, and that then became the word people used.
I had a chip on my shoulder about telling people I was a migrant, but I was pretty alone on that. The anglo guys mostly said they were “expats”.
Do you seriously need someone to explain to you why there are multiple words with similar meanings in the world?
well when you challenge an opinion you usually offer an alternative opinion.
Usually. But if the premise is particularly stupid I might choose to prompt the speaker to actually think about what they’ve said for a moment.
Or you could just read any of the numerous other comments here which offer other explanations.
i did think about it and it matches my experience. i will read the rest of the thread.
Edit: i have now read the rest of the thread. nobody seems to agree and i see no sources.
You’re looking for a source for the answer to a question so idiotic that it has probably never been asked before in the history of man?
You can’t be a real person.
They aren’t used interchangeably so this implies a different definition or at least distinct connotations.