born to the son of..

[light]

hello,
I have 2 questions:
1) what is the function of to in the following sentence?

"He was born to the son of a mill worker."

why is to used but not as?

the version without to is more common, isn't it?

2)what is the word for women or men who really look after themselves e.g. hair care, skin care, make up, etc.? can we say well-kept??

thanks in advance

 

[jlinger]

1. First, the millworker had a son. Then the son had a son. This grandson was "born to the son of a millworker." He was not born as the son of a millworker unless his father was a millworker, too. Even then, I would say, he was born the son of a millworker, without the to at all.

2. Well groomed is better. No hyphen necessary when an adverb (well) is the modifier.

 

[light]

jlinger thank you very much for your quick reply.

so "born to the son of.." means "he is the grandson of.." I really didn't know that, I thought it meant "he is the son of.."

These two sentences are original:

"Explorer, navigator, Columbus was born in 1451, in the Republic of Genoa to the son of a weaver."

"Columbus was born in the Italian port city of Genoa, the son of Domenico Colombo, a weaver, and Suzanna Fontanarossa."

As you see, one uses to the other doesn't. That's why I thought they were equal. So there must be a kind of misinformation in the sentences.

 

[Anglika]

jlinger thank you very much for your quick reply.

so "born to the son of.." means "he is the grandson of.." I really didn't know that, I thought it meant "he is the son of.."

These two sentences are original:

"Explorer, navigator, Columbus was born in 1451, in the Republic of Genoa to the son of a weaver."

"Columbus was born in the Italian port city of Genoa, the son of Domenico Colombo, a weaver, and Suzanna Fontanarossa."

As you see, one uses to the other doesn't. That's why I thought they were equal. So there must be a kind of misinformation in the sentences.

It appears that the first sentence has an intrusive "to".

 

[jlinger]

Actually, both sentences are true. Both Domenico and his father (Chris' grandfather) were weavers. In fact, so was Chris' great-grandfather. But the weaving business was not so profitable for poor Domenico, so he went into cheese instead, and his son set out sailing and hoodwinking royalty.

 

[Anglika]

Christopher Columbus - Featured Biography at Biography.com

 

[light]

Anglika;
when you use intrusive do you mean unnecessary? So you don't agree with jlinger that "born to the son of..." means "he is the grandson of.."?

 

[light]

so, still a bit confused:-?

"he was born to the son of a millionaire" means he is the grandson of a millionaire?

If the father is a millionaire, then it is "he was born the son of a millionaire"?

can someone please confirm?

 

[Anglika]

so, still a bit confused:-?

"he was born to the son of a millionaire" means he is the grandson of a millionaire?

If the father is a millionaire, then it is "he was born the son of a millionaire"?

can someone please confirm?

You are absolutely correct.

The extract relating to Columbus seems to contain a typo [the unnecessary/intrusive "to"].

 

[light]

Anglika thanks for your quick reply but I must be an idiot tonight 'cos I'm looking at the screen like this:-? :-?

Because you say "you are correct" which makes "to" meaning "grandson" then you say in Columbus example it was a typo. (remember jlinger said his grandfather was a weaver too, so why to is unnecessary?)

Imagine my granfather is a priest, what am I going to say?
and my father is a miller, what is the sentence?

ps: sorry if I bored you with these questions

 

[jlinger]

You were born the child of a miller and the grandchild of a priest.

(Sorry; I don't know if you are a son or a daughter...)

 

[Anglika]

Anglika thanks for your quick reply but I must be an idiot tonight 'cos I'm looking at the screen like this:-? :-?

Because you say "you are correct" which makes "to" meaning "grandson" then you say in Columbus example it was a typo. (remember jlinger said his grandfather was a weaver too, so why to is unnecessary?)

So far as I can see, that added a complication to your question. The grandfather is irrelevant in the extract. You made comparison to two statements about Columbus's paternal origin, and there is really no reason why the grandfather would be referred to and not the father.
Imagine my grandfather is a priest, what am I going to say? I was born to the son of a priest
and my father is a miller, what is the sentence? I was born to a miller.

ps: sorry if I bored you with these questions

Not boring at all. Apparently simple questions can lead to complex problems.

 

[light]

Anglika,
your sentence "I was born to a miller" is a different structure, isn't it?
why didn't you say "I was born the son of a miller"?

(I have a strong feeling, I will understand this soon )


jlinger: thanks for your answer but your answer is another structure too isnt it?

please say OK if these are correct?
1. jack's grandfather is a priest and I want to mention this in his bio.
"Jack was born to the son of a priest."
2. tom's father is a merchant.
"Tom was born the son of a merchant"

 

[Anglika]

Because I was concentrating on the use of "born to". There are others ways to say this, but you seemed concerned with this collocation. If possible, I would avoid using it unless there is a good reason to.

There is a danger of making statements too complicated. Better to keep it simple:

Jack's grandfather was a priest
Jack was/is the grandson of a priest

Tom's father was/is a merchant.
Tom is the son of a merchant.

Jack was born to a priestly clan.
Tom was born to the merchant class.

 

[light]

the idiot asks this, not me..

so my sentences 1 and 2 are wrong then? "to the son of .." doesn't mean "the grandson of..."?

(in case I have to use the structure "born (to) the son of.., I want to make it clear in my mind; and I know the simple structures you mentioned, but I want to be able to use the complex ones too)

 

[Anglika]

the idiot asks this, not me..

so my sentences 1 and 2 are wrong then? "to the son of .." doesn't mean "the grandson of..."?

(in case I have to use the structure "born (to) the son of.., I want to make it clear in my mind; and I know the simple structures you mentioned, but I want to be able to use the complex ones too)

To be born to the son of someone is of course to be the grandson of that someone - but unless there is a very good reason to mention the grandfather [he was the Pope or a Nobel Prize winner], it is an odd way to say this.

 

[light]

thanks for all your efforts

 

[jlinger]

Have we finally confused you sufficiently?

But wasn't that an interesting lesson about Columbus in the meantime!

 

[light]

:-D (this is an idiotic smile)

let me bore you to death...

"He was born to the daughter of a Nobel winning scientist" what do you understand from this?

(I thought in 'he was born to the son of a priest" he and the son referred to the same person, but I was wrong?)

 

[jlinger]

His maternal grandparent won a Nobel prize.