<p>That would be the expected answer on that interpretation, but I respectfully submit that that is ridiculous. My wife is most certainly an American, and incidentally the first American in her family, even though she is an American by naturalization as an adult rather than by facts of birth. I really, honestly think it does violence to the English language and to any of the more than a dozen other languages I have studied to describe her as anything but a “first-generation American” on those facts.</p>
<p>THe real issue is the interpretation by the “governing body”…in this case, the administrators of the scholarship. For example…would one consider me first-generatin college educated? My mother and father never graduated from college. My grandmother and grandfather(either side) never graduated from college. My great-grandparents never graduated from college. My great-great grandparents never graduated from college. Two Aunts graduted with PhD’s. However, about 17 generations ago, a well-known direct ancestor did graduate from college.</p>
<p>When I applied for a scholarship under the premise of 1st-generation college student…I was denied because I did not meet the requirements. Most people wouldn’t think that the effects of an ancestor born during the 1500’s would prevent me from receiving such a scholarship…but it all comes downto interpretation.</p>
<p>The same would apply to this situation. It doesn’t really matter what Wikipedia states (especially since most professionals, educators, professors, etc don’t acknowledge Wikipedia information as reliable). It doesn’t matter what the origin of the term meant. It doesn’t matter where the term derived. All that matters is how the scholarship committee views the term.</p>
<p>To the OP…you might find it more helpful to ask the scholarship committee what ther definition is. Also, read the fine-print of the scholarship. Does it discuss first-generation American or first-generation American born.</p>
<p>I think the governing body, yes, they are the final judge on this matter. Op asked us for our guesses on how the school defines the phrase and we are answering. As far as Nikkiil’s experience goes, I see a big difference between “college educated” and college grad. Would I consider Nik first generation college educated? Well, I’d ask if any of Nik’s ancestors attended college- not if any of them graduated college. One has to complete a college education to be a college grad, but does not have to complete college to be college educated. A person could attend 2 yrs, for example, then quit.
I also think Hunt and Nik hit the nail that the usage matters. We have found in this thread that different sources define Op’s phrase differently, making it difficult to find one absolute correct meaning. While some here feel the centuries old original meaning must also define today’s meaning, I don’t agree with that. Usages change all the time. I cited a number of common examples of that earlier. While I cannot disagree with what is stated as the original meaning, I think that is different than today’s usage. I agree with H that the use is the most important. </p>
<p>Additionally, here’s a perspective that hasn’t been addressed yet. I believe if the school asking Op “Are your first generation American” had actually meant -Are you a naturalized citizen(as some here define first generation)- isn’t that what they would have asked? The school did not ask “are(were) you an immigrant?”. I believe that by NOT asking about naturalization, it lends support to the idea that the school is most likely using the phrase first generation American meaning first born here. </p>
<p>Clearly, the Op here has to ask governing body “By ‘first-generation’ do you mean first generation to become an American, or first generation to be born in America”?</p>
<p>This is an interesting conversation. My initial reaction was to scoff at the notion that foreign-born Americans should be considered first-generation; my understanding of the term has always been that it means those born in the U.S. of foreign-born parents. </p>
<p>The parents didn’t need any other term to describe them - they were foreign-born, citizens or not. And since common usage gives a term its meaning over time, whether the meaning “does violence” to the language doesn’t really enter into it.</p>
<p>I still don’t think this is the commonly understood meaning of the term, but a bureaucracy this large carries considerable weight. </p>
<p>Some of my comments here are tongue-in-cheek, and I heartily support the notion of checking with the source (college or scholarship sponsor) before claiming first-generation status.</p>
<p>“When I applied for a scholarship under the premise of 1st-generation college student…I was denied because I did not meet the requirements. Most people wouldn’t think that the effects of an ancestor born during the 1500’s would prevent me from receiving such a scholarship…but it all comes downto interpretation.”</p>
<p>1) How would you know that about an ancestor born during the 1500’s, considering that you would have hundreds, if not thousands, of direct g-g-g-(however many great) grandparents in that generation?
2) How would the school have known about that one ancestor if you didn’t tell them?</p>
<p>I know because I am active in discovering my genealogy and havebeen fortunate in documenting my ancestory back to the early 1300’s and am working on documenting it even further back. They knew because I was completely honest on my application. Who would have thought that a college grad from 1500’s would disqualify me for the scholarship. Back during that era, many people went to college. I truly thought by showing this information, they would see I was a first-genertion college attendee and (future) college grad.</p>
<p>Young,</p>
<p>No one in my family has attended or graduated from college (except my Aunts) since the 1500’s.</p>
<p>However, the issue isn’t my scholarship (as this occurred 10+ years ago and I have already obtained my degree.) The point I was trying to make is that it is all in the governing bodies discrepency as to who they consider first-generation.</p>
<p>I seriously doubt that they looked at your application and said, “She doesn’t qualify because 400 years ago, one of her many great-great (at least a dozen) grandparents went to college in the old country.”</p>
<p>It’s more import-ant where REGIONALLY [alililiy?] you grow up. for instance Asians and Latin americans are much much happier [YOUTH] in California/west america, where as European, western[inc carib] and English/IRISH/Scand types are much happier on the NATO cultural domaign/region.
note that ft hood hasan & v-tech cho were both “1st gen”, no fam history except for the SAME asian town [quantified TYN health statistic] and had NO GIRLFRIEND, very very sad [hetero!!! POW’s…] and left coast left handers [like BRITISH QUEEN VICTORIA] …raised KURT COBAIN & JIMI HENDRIX have NO! published family history… just a cloud of drugs & purle haze. no fam hist, no regional hope. foreign parents won’t understand, RESPONCIBILITY geographic justice [quality quantification] “T.Y.N. man” must go to OZ…</p>
<p>When I was majoring in history, the guys writing books about immigrants were calling the people who came to the new country the first generation. And their children born there, the second.</p>