Ira, I am afraid Sigurd is right, no matter from what country or in what language you look at it. I thought the discussion ended with no change. Please change it back. Jens E Brammer, Øverød, Denmark > So I am sorry to observe that Ira has screwed it up with his change in > 3.07. > > In all future releases of Cftw, I will change it back to "Emigrated > to" and "Immigrated from". > > Sigurd Eliassen > Norway

Ira, Since this subject won't go away, I'll put in my two penn'orth as well! Ira, can it be that you are over-interpreting your dictionary definition and overlooking the fact that the definitions you quote do not give an indication of the way the words should be used in sentences. I think the point is that both these words get their meanings from the standpoint of a 'fictitious' speaker/writer, who wants to say that a person 'went away from here' (emigration) or 'came here' (immigration). When a person emigrates he leaves his home country. That is what the dictionary defintion says. But, in the use of the word 'emigrate', his home country is ususally implicitly known and therefore may not need to be mentioned in the sentence. The mention of the country of origin in the sentence is not as important as the destination country which could be anywhere in the world. Therefore the sentence should read: "%N emigrated from %P1 to %P2", whereby %P1 could be omitted because it is often obvious. Similarly, with the word 'immigrate', the country of destination is implicit, but the immigrant could have come from anywhere in the world. Thus it is more important to say where he came from: "%N immigrated into %P2 from %P1". In this case, %P2 could be omitted because it is usually obvious but not %P1. I do hope this is reasonable contribution to the discussion. But perhaps you just forgot to switch back to the original code in the rush to get version 3.07 (=3.06x) out :-). On the other hand CFTW is such a good product, the user can correct it himself! Greetings Harvey