When filling out an administrative form or reading a news article, the terms “immigrant” and “emigrant” often arise without knowing which to use. The problem does not stem from a lack of vocabulary: it is a question of geographical perspective. Understanding the difference between immigrating and emigrating involves asking from which country one observes a person’s movement.
Immigrant, foreigner, descendant of an immigrant: three categories that the press confuses
Most explanations available online limit themselves to opposing the prefixes “em-” (out of) and “im-” (into). This linguistic approach is correct, but it masks a more concrete problem: in the French public debate, three distinct statistical notions are regularly confused.
The Insee defines an immigrant as a person born foreign abroad and residing in France, even if they have since obtained French nationality. A foreigner, on the other hand, can very well be born in France and have never crossed a border. A descendant of an immigrant, finally, is born in France to at least one immigrant parent.
These distinctions are not mere statistical subtleties. When a media outlet headlines the “number of immigrants in France” while including foreigners born on the territory, it produces a figure that corresponds to none of the official categories. Understanding the difference between immigrating and emigrating also involves understanding these statistical frameworks; otherwise, incompatible data is compared.
Emigrate and immigrate: the same journey seen from two shores
The mechanism can be summarized in one sentence: to emigrate is to leave one’s country, to immigrate is to enter another. The same person is therefore simultaneously an emigrant (from the perspective of their country of origin) and an immigrant (from the perspective of the host country).
The prefixes as practical markers
The prefix “em-” comes from the Latin “ex,” which means “out of.” One emigrates out of one’s home. The prefix “im-” comes from “in,” which means “into.” One immigrates into a new country. This etymological detail is the most reliable way to avoid hesitation.
Concrete examples to clarify the distinction
- A person leaves Morocco to live in France: they emigrate from Morocco and immigrate to France. From the perspective of Morocco, they are an emigrant. From the perspective of France, they are an immigrant.
- A French person moves to Canada: they emigrate from France (they are a French emigrant) and they immigrate to Canada (they are an immigrant under Canadian law).
- An Italian family that arrived in France in the 1950s emigrated from Italy and immigrated to France. If its members have acquired French nationality, they remain statistically immigrants according to the Insee’s definition, because they were born foreign abroad.
A common trap is to believe that an immigrant ceases to be one when they obtain the nationality of the host country. In law, yes. In French statistics, no.
Expatriate or migrant: a vocabulary that is not neutral
In common usage, there is a noticeable disparity in treatment. A French executive sent to London is referred to as an “expatriate.” A Senegalese worker arriving in Marseille is referred to as a “migrant” or “immigrant.” Both have emigrated from their country and immigrated to another.
The word chosen often reflects a power relationship more than a legal reality. The terms “expatriate” and “immigrant” do not appear in distinct legal categories. French law recognizes only foreigners in regular or irregular situations, and immigrants in the statistical sense.
This asymmetry in vocabulary has concrete consequences. When talking about “French expatriates in Quebec,” it implies a voluntary, professional, temporary departure. When discussing “immigrants” in a neighborhood, the connotation shifts towards permanent settlement, cultural difference, and sometimes precariousness. Both situations, however, fall under the same migratory mechanism.
How to remember the distinction between immigrating and emigrating in everyday life
The simplest method relies on the direction of one’s gaze. One asks a single question: from which country am I describing the situation?
- If one is in the country of departure, the person is emigrating. We talk about emigration, emigrant, emigrating.
- If one is in the country of arrival, the person is immigrating. We talk about immigration, immigrant, immigrating.
- If we describe the movement itself, without taking sides, we use “migrate” or “migration,” a neutral encompassing term.
Another mnemonic marker consists of two letters: “E” for “Exit,” “I” for “In”. It is schematic, but it works in the vast majority of cases.
Why “migrant” has taken precedence in the press
For several years, the term “migrant” has become dominant in Francophone media. It has the advantage of avoiding the choice between emigrant and immigrant and of describing a person in motion without fixing them in a status. Opinions vary on this point: some linguists consider the word more respectful, while others believe it erases the administrative reality of settlement.
Regardless of the term used, the mechanics remain the same. A person does not change nature by crossing a border: it is the observer’s perspective that determines the word used. Keeping this principle in mind is enough to avoid confusing emigrating and immigrating, whether in a French assignment, a conversation, or reading an official report.
