←back to thread

204 points lil_csom | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source

I'm in my 4th year living in Denmark as an expat, and I finally decided it’s time to properly learn Danish. I do have a Danish girlfriend, after all. One way I’ve been practicing is by trying to text only in Danish, but I often find myself stuck. I start my message in Danish, then hit a wall because I don’t know a word or how to fit something naturally into the sentence.

Especially in those cases, I used to give up and translate the entire message from English, which kind of defeats the purpose and interrupts the learning process.

So I started prompting GPT. I’d write my message with wildcards or notes for the parts I didn’t know, and it would return a corrected version. That worked well, but reusing the prompt each time became tedious.

So I built a wrapper around it.

Now I can type in the target language, mark unclear parts with curly braces {like this}, and get an instant corrected version with explanations. I also added a history feature so I can review what I got wrong, and I plan to build more on that soon (eg. summary of areas or words to review).

This app is for language learners who want to practice writing without feeling insecure about mistakes or breaking their flow by switching to a translator.

I hope you find it useful!

Show context
parpfish ◴[] No.44571834[source]
I really hate the term “expat”
replies(5): >>44571892 #>>44571909 #>>44571960 #>>44572660 #>>44577610 #
Cupprum ◴[] No.44571960[source]
Whats wrong with it?
replies(3): >>44572055 #>>44572209 #>>44573649 #
IggleSniggle ◴[] No.44573649[source]
It generally means that while you live somewhere permanently with no timeline on returning "home," you do not allow yourself to think of your new country as "home."

It comes across as a refusal to immigrate. It means that what you care about is that you are no longer living "at home," rather than caring about assimilating with your new home.

It's like going to a new place and identifying yourself as an "emigrant" instead of an "immigrant."

"Patriation" is about giving away authority so that the other country assumes authority. "Expatriate," then, would be that authority of the old country no longer applies, with no acknowledgement of your new circumstances.

Oh here's a good one; what if you got married, divorced, and married again? You would be an ex-husband or ex-wife, and it would be entirely appropriate for someone to refer to you as such in certain contexts, but it would be really off-putting...especially to your new spouse.

Imagine introducing yourself as an "ex-husband." If you're with a bunch of your ex-wife's old friends and associates, then it might make sense to introduce yourself this way under some circumstances...but usually, even then, it would be far more polite and in better taste to introduce yourself in some other way.

Much better to clarify your former relationship only when it's pertinent, and maybe even then "we lived together for awhile" might be a gentler framing. Otherwise, you are simply drawing attention to your divorce, and to what purpose?

replies(3): >>44575331 #>>44575496 #>>44576379 #
triceratops ◴[] No.44575496[source]
> It's like going to a new place and identifying yourself as an "emigrant" instead of an "immigrant."

All immigrants are emigrants, and vice versa. You have to emigrate from someplace in order to immigrate somewhere.

replies(1): >>44575734 #
1. IggleSniggle ◴[] No.44575734[source]
Correct. So, you can emphasize your new identity as an "emigrant from A" or as an "immigrant to B." "Expat" goes one step further by not only emphasizing that you are an emigrant from A, but also that you are no longer a political participant or under the authority of A. It is not semantically incorrect to call yourself an "expat" if you are an expat, nor would it be semantically incorrect to call yourself an emigrant from A or an immigrant to B.

I'm attempting to pin down why some people might feel that someone calling themselves an "expat" has some negative connotations for the expat. It doesn't have anything to do with the correctness of any of the terms involved.

To say it a different way, I think people find it distasteful because it focuses on the political shapes you no longer are bound to, rather than who you are "now." It's normal to celebrate your cultural heritage, but it's kind of odd to focus on your status as a non-member of your former state.

replies(1): >>44576214 #
2. parpfish ◴[] No.44576214[source]
You’re not going to find an answer to this by parsing out the technical definitions of the words. It’s about how the words are used and the connotations they have developed over time.
replies(1): >>44582287 #
3. IggleSniggle ◴[] No.44582287[source]
I agree that it's about usage and connotations over time..isn't that what etymology is at the end of the day?