On vacation, spouse and adult children plus one staying with my wife’s mother. Old friend who lives in area visited. After he leaves I am asked where he’s from (slight accent notable). I respond “Canada by way of Atlanta.”
Kids believe that means from Atlanta and moved to Canada, while I meant the opposite, early childhood in Canada (the accent) and rest of childhood in Atlanta.
Obviously a phrase best avoided if it is unclear but which is it to you?
I would interpret that answer as meaning Canada, (current residence), but most of his life was spent in Atlanta.
They know that he currently lives in Philly and previously was in Chicago for education (where we had been roommates for two years).
But you’d hear as most recent of the list was Canada?
I would interpret it as Canada first, then Atlanta.
Likewise.
(“I came here from Canada, by plane,” is also a line I’d take as meaning that you were in Canada first — while “I came here from plane, by Canada,” sounds like you’ve head a had injury.)
If the most recent location of the speaker is known and that’s not the question, that does change things a little. But to my ears it would still be the most recent location. “By way of” to me sounds like “came through” the location. Sort of like “via” I guess? But that still muddies things. Hmmmm…now you’ve got me reassessing. I guess context would really matter as to understanding the phrase.
I’d read it as you intended. Started in Canada, “passed through” Atlanta on the way here.
I’m not a kid though. I blame the Tik Toks or something.
I struggle to understand how anyone could interpret “I came from X by way of Y” to mean anything other than “I came from X, and I went through Y on the way (i.e. between X and here).”
I blame myself. I have failed my parental responsibility to educate. At least they all know Monty Python.
I would agree. To me it suggests Atlanta as a stopover on the way to Canada.
It’s not as bad as the tortured British-ism I sometimes run across in old novels (i.e. Agatha Christie mysteries):
“He is by way of being an authority on the subject”
Seems a lot clearer and less bulky to say “He’s an authority on the subject”. In those days was it considered plebeian and crude to come right out and say what you mean?
Ditto.
Yeah, I don’t understand how they got the other interpretation.
Is that what it means?
I always took it to mean ‘he knows something about the subject and thinks he’s an authority on it, but he isn’t really.’ I might easily be wrong, though.
The dictionary definition I linked to (and the context I remember from books) make it appear to be a roundabout and labored way of speech.
"Chiefly British
in the condition or position of
by way of being a fine pianist"
You are correct. You children are wrong and their interpretation is weird.