# I have married my son to Maria



## Roymalika

I have married my son to Maria.

Is this sentence correct?


----------



## PaulQ

What do you think it means?


----------



## Roymalika

PaulQ said:


> What do you think it means?


I am a father. I have a son. I have found a beautiful and good girl whose name is Maria. I have thought her to be perfect for my son, so I've married my son to her.

Is that clear?


----------



## DonnyB

Only a priest, registrar or somebody licensed to conduct marriages can "marry" somebody to somebody else.

I think the expression you probably want there is marry off.


----------



## PaulQ

In Indian/subcontinental English, that is probably fine. You are may know that in the West, the custom of arranged marriages is looked on with disapproval or mild alarm   .


DonnyB said:


> I think the expression you probably want there is marry off.


I see that as having a nuance of "I was not bothered who my son married but he needed to be married", or having a financial motive.

Speaking about your actions, I would say "Roymalika's son has married the girl in a match that his father arranged."

You might say, "In line with tradition, I arranged the marriage of my son to his wife."


----------



## Roymalika

PaulQ said:


> I see that as having a nuance of "I was not bothered who my son married but he needed to be married", or having a financial motive.
> 
> Speaking about your actions, I would say "Roymalika's son has married the girl in a match that his father arranged."
> 
> You might say, "In line with tradition, I arranged the marriage of my son to his wife."


In the society I live, almost all the marriages are arranged. 
By "I've married my son to Maria" I mean that I've found a perfect girl for my son, have met the girl's parents in order to get their consent for their daughter's marriage to my son, and after their consent have done all the arrangements for wedding, and finally have brought my daughter-in-law to home. 
In short it can be said that from finding a girl for my son to bringing her at home, I (as a father) perform all the responsibilities, and that's what I mean by "I've married my son..."

In the rare cases where young boys and girls marry on their own without the consent of their parents, it can be said that "X(boy/girl) themself (not his/her father) has married to Y(girl/boy)".

"Marry off" just means finding a girl for one's son. It isn't the verb I need.


----------



## entangledbank

I agree that 'marry off' has the bad connotation of "dispose of", and that in this case simple 'marry' is best. The father marries his son to Maria, whereas the priest etc. marries the boy and the girl.


----------



## Barque

Roymalika said:


> Is this sentence correct?


It's understandable but I'd prefer something like: _I arranged for my son and Maria to marry [each other]_, or _I got Maria and my son married _(which sounds a little more casual, I think).

But this too sounds a little as if the father did it out of necessity, or because it was a practical choice. I think it's probably because the idea of a father taking responsibility for and arranging for the marriage of his adult children is more an Asian thing than a western one.


----------



## sdgraham

Roymalika said:


> In the rare cases where young boys and girls marry on their own without the consent of their parents, it can be said that "X(boy/girl) themself (not his/her father) has married to Y(girl/boy)".


I married my wife in 1964. (no "to")
Her father, a minister, married us. (i.e. performed the ceremony - no "to")
Donald Trump is married to Melania. (use "to" in the passive.)
Prince Henry has married an American. (no "to")


----------



## lingobingo

In short, although the sentence initially strikes Western ears as odd (since we’re not accustomed to the tradition of arranged marriages), it makes perfect sense in the right context. 

But that context doesn’t have to be Eastern. It could be historical, especially in relation to Europe’s monarchies and ruling classes:

In his peace with Henry in 1594, he married his son to Henry's sister Catherine de Bourbon. ​Finally he married his son to the weak-minded daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella…​The king had married him to Matilda, who was daughter and heir of Eustace, Count of Boulogne…​


----------



## WestSideGal

What about *"betroth*"?    I have betrothed my son to Maria.  Betrothal is a promise of marriage, no?  Or something like that...


----------



## sdgraham

WestSideGal said:


> What about *"betroth*"?    I have betrothed my son to Maria.  Betrothal is a promise of marriage, no?  Or something like that...


This thread: difference between betrothed and finacée suggests that "betrothed" has become archaic, which is also my impression.


----------



## Hermione Golightly

I think it's best to say "I have arranged a marriage for my son."  We don't use the word 'betrothed'.


----------



## Roymalika

Hermione Golightly said:


> I think it's best to say "I have arranged a marriage for my son."  We don't use the word 'betrothed'.


In the light of the context that I've given, is my original sentence ok to you?


----------



## DonnyB

Hermione Golightly said:


> I think it's best to say "I have arranged a marriage for my son."  We don't use the word 'betrothed'.


I was going to suggest that but I'm not sure that it doesn't leave it open to doubt as to whether the marriage has taken place or not.  Maybe the simple past would work better: "I arranged for my son to marry Maria".


----------



## Hermione Golightly

No, it isn't. But if the marriage has already taken place then use the past tense. "I arranged a marriage for my son to ...".
You do/did not _perform _the marriage: you arrange/d for your son to marry somebody.

_Crossed with Donny's._


----------



## sdgraham

Roymalika said:


> In the light of the context that I've given, is my original sentence ok to you?





Hermione Golightly said:


> No, it isn't. But if the marriage has already taken place then use the past tense. "I arranged a marriage for my son to ...".
> You do/did not _perform _the marriage: you arrange/d for your son to marry somebody.


  
See post #4


----------



## Chasint

Roymalika said:


> I have married my son to Maria.
> 
> Is this sentence correct?


The meaning of this was clear to me when I first read it. I assumed it was an arranged marriage, possibly historical. I see no difficulty with it.


----------



## PaulQ

Roymalika said:


> By "I've married my son to Maria" I mean that I've found a perfect girl for my son,


Yes, I am fully aware of that (I spent many years hearing about arranged marriages) but, to normal ears, *to arrange a marriage *means to organize the ceremony and the reception (wedding party). 

You need (if you are addressing a Western audience, i.e. in BE or AE) to make the distinction between that and actually telling an adult who he will marry.


----------



## sdgraham

PaulQ said:


> Yes, I am fully aware of that (I spent many years hearing about arranged marriages) but, to normal ears, *to arrange a marriage *means to organize the ceremony and the reception (wedding party).


I've never been accused of being normal, but on this side of the Pond, I think we use, "plan a wedding." At least that's what I used when our offspring were married 
See: The Wedding Planner (2001) - IMDb


----------



## PaulQ

"Plan a wedding" is rather strange to my ears: it sounds as if you worked out a plan of the way that the preparations, the marriage ceremony, and the reception, etc. would proceed, and then told someone to "get on with it." (The more I think about it. the better idea this seems.  )

Whereas,
A: My wife was ill, my daughter/son and <insert the intended> had not yet arrived in the country, so I had to arrange the marriage from start to finish.


----------



## sdgraham

PaulQ said:


> "Plan a wedding" is rather strange to my ears: it sounds as if you worked out a plan of the way that the preparations, the marriage ceremony, and the reception, etc. would proceed, and then told someone to "get on with it." (The more I think about it. the better idea this seems.  )


We do, indeed, seem to be divided by a common language.


----------



## bicontinental

sdgraham said:


> ..but on this side of the Pond, I think we use, "plan a wedding."



I agree... _I arranged a marriage_ would likely be misunderstood, in my opinion.


----------



## PaulQ

bicontinental said:


> I agree... _I arranged a marriage_


I must be careful here: my example was "to arrange a marriage", which when conjugated would be "I arranged *the* marriage" and, because of "the", there must have been some context.

This is to be compared with:

A: "My daughter's biological clock is ticking - she needs a husband."
B: "I could try to arrange a marriage *to my nephew* for her." (which has the OP's meaning and would not be taken seriously.)

which contrasts with
A: "My daughter has just told me that she is going to marry her boyfriend at last."
B: "My brother has a beautiful hotel in the hills - I could arrange a/the marriage for them."


----------



## bicontinental

You're right Paul, context is obviously important and maybe I was being a little too dogmatic above. That said, personally I find it more natural to use 'wedding' about the event or the ceremony, whereas as I think of marriage as the union, the relationship itself.  My "B" answer in your example above would have been, _I could plan/organize/arrange the wedding (ceremony) for them._


----------



## PaulQ

Your point about wedding/marriage is well taken.


----------



## Hermione Golightly

We _plan weddings_ in the UK too. It's big business. There may be some people who wouldn't understand what was meant by 'arrange the marriage', but I think the vast majority would realise the reference to an arranged marriage. It would be even clearer to say "I arranged for my son to marry a wonderful girl".


----------



## Roymalika

lingobingo said:


> But that context doesn’t have to be Eastern. It could be historical, especially in relation to Europe’s monarchies and ruling classes:
> 
> In his peace with Henry in 1594*, he married his son to Henry's sister* Catherine de Bourbon. Finally he married his son to the weak-minded daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella…The king had married him to Matilda, who was daughter and heir of Eustace, Count of Boulogne…


Here the use of "X married his son to Y" is only restricted toEurope’s monarchies and ruling classes as you said, and otherwise it's uncommon? And is the meaning same as my op sentence?


----------



## ewie

Chasint said:


> The meaning of this was clear to me when I first read it. I assumed it was an arranged marriage, possibly historical. I see no difficulty with it.


Ditto


----------



## Loob

Chasint said:


> The meaning of this was clear to me when I first read it. I assumed it was an arranged marriage, possibly historical. I see no difficulty with it.


Ditto + 1


----------



## You little ripper!

Chasint said:


> The meaning of this was clear to me when I first read it. I assumed it was an arranged marriage, possibly historical. I see no difficulty with it.


That’s also how I understood it.


----------



## Andygc

Chasint said:


> The meaning of this was clear to me when I first read it. I assumed it was an arranged marriage, possibly historical. I see no difficulty with it.


Another ditto.


sdgraham said:


> We do, indeed, seem to be divided by a common language.


No, I don't think so. Each of my children planned their weddings - we just sent out the invitations, booked the catering and the premises, and paid most of the bills. We certainly didn't arrange the weddings. But, fortunately, we did approve of their spousal choices.


----------



## Roymalika

Four different people at #29, #30, #31 and#32 have agreed to Chasinat's point that he made in #18. I don't know what the point was!


----------



## Andygc

Roymalika said:


> Four different people at #29, #30, #31 and#32 have agreed to Chasinat's point that he made in #18. I don't know what the point was!


Your explanation in post 3 was what we understood your sentence in the OP to mean.


----------



## Roymalika

Andygc said:


> Your explanation in post 3 was what we understood your sentence in the OP to mean.


I more clearly explained in post 6 what I meant.


----------



## lingobingo

Roymalika said:


> Four different people at #29, #30, #31 and#32 have agreed to Chasinat's point that he made in #18. I don't know what the point was!


Chasint simply said that he found the sentence “I have married my son to Maria” perfectly clear and understandable the first time he saw it, and several people said that they did too.

You can add me to the list of people who immediately understood the sentence perfectly well (there is nothing whatsoever wrong with it). But the fact remains that it refers to a cultural tradition that’s not the norm in most Western societies, so not everyone would automatically appreciate that it refers to an arranged marriage.


----------



## london calling

lingobingo said:


> You can add me to the list of people who immediately understood the sentence perfectly well (there is nothing whatsoever wrong with it).


You can add me to the list too.


----------



## Andygc

Roymalika said:


> I more clearly explained in post 6 what I meant.


Your original sentence was perfectly clear with no need for explanation. Your explanation in 3 merely confirmed that you meant it to mean what it appeared to mean. There was nothing wrong with your sentence and I cannot see why it led to objections or suggested revisions.


----------



## Roymalika

lingobingo said:


> Chasint simply said that he found the sentence “I have married my son to Maria” perfectly clear and understandable the first time he saw it, and several people said that they did too.
> 
> You can add me to the list of people who immediately understood the sentence perfectly well (there is nothing whatsoever wrong with it). But the fact remains that it refers to a cultural tradition that’s not the norm in most Western societies, so not everyone would automatically appreciate that it refers to an arranged marriage.


If


lingobingo said:


> Chasint simply said that he found the sentence “I have married my son to Maria” perfectly clear and understandable the first time he saw it, and several people said that they did too.
> 
> You can add me to the list of people who immediately understood the sentence perfectly well (there is nothing whatsoever wrong with it). But the fact remains that it refers to a cultural tradition that’s not the norm in most Western societies, so not everyone would automatically appreciate that it refers to an arranged marriage.


If you as a native speaker were to express the idea (post 6), would you express it the same way as I did in the op?


----------



## lingobingo

Roymalika said:


> If you as a native speaker were to express the idea (post 6), would you express it the same way as I did in the op?


Yes, but only if I were talking to someone who already knew Maria. Otherwise, the use of her name on its own sounds incongruous to my ears. It seems to require some kind of modification. For example: I’ve married my son to a beautiful local girl called Maria.


----------



## Barque

Andygc said:


> we just sent out the invitations, booked the catering and the premises, and paid most of the bills.


I liked the way you used "just", especially with the last thing.


----------

