"Soldier"

[Laurence Horn]

At 12:28 PM -0500 2/27/09, Jonathan Lighter wrote:
>As I've observed before, it is only in the post-1918 era that a rigorous
>distinction without exception has been insisted upon between the use of
>"soldier" and "marine" - outside of the United States Marine Corps, that is,
>where (presumably) the taboo is older.
>
>The Marine Corps did not take kindly to having its forces in France placed
>under Army command in World War I, and it long ago succeeded in outlawing
>the soldier = marine usage among careful writers.  My impression, though, is
>that most civilians still do not see much difference. ("Marines" to them
>are generally just "soldiers" you "send in" first, esp. by water; it's kind
>of a muddle.)
>
>("Marine," of course, is not used as an overarching term to include
>"soldier." The "synonymy" only goes one way.)
>
>However, any extension of "soldier" to include "sailor" (and presumably
>"airman") is new and bizarre.  Even "troops" applied  specifically to a
>group of sailors at sea sounds weird.
>
>JL

This is basically what I was going to say--essentially, "soldier" is
what I like to call an autohyponym, a word that has a looser more
inclusive sense alongside a stricter sense, and so is a hyponym of
itself.  Thus, a Yankee may be someone from the U.S., or more
strictly someone from the Northern states, or more strictly someone
from New England, or more strictly still someone from New England
with a WASP background and so on.  So JFK wasn't a Yankee in this
sense, Grant was for the first two only, and someone spray painting
"Yankee go home" on their walls doesn't really care about where the
relevant soldier's (or sailor's, or marine's) drivers license was
issues.

Other standard examples "lion" (vs. "lioness"), "dog" (vs. "bitch"),
"shoe" (vs. "sandal") "animal" (vs. "fish"/"bird" but not
"mammal"),...

In some cases we have a clear intuition that the broader sense is the
real one, in others the narrower, and in others it's not really
clear.  Or, as Jon suggests, this can change over time.  But if
someone sings "I didn't raise my son to be a soldier", they probably
weren't hoping for a marine instead, or even a sailor (in the armed
forces).   "Proper terminology" isn't necessarily as straightforward
as it may appear either; in some contexts, calling a female canine a
dog is improper terminology, but does that mean I shouldn't buy dog
food for Lassie and should hold out for bitch food instead?

LH
>
>On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Bill Palmer <w_a_palmer at bellsouth.net>wrote:
>
>>  ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>>  -----------------------
>>  Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>>  Poster:       Bill Palmer <w_a_palmer at BELLSOUTH.NET>
>>  Subject:      "Soldier"
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>  CBS news correspondent Bill Plante reported today that 4,250 "soldiers" =
>>  had died in Iraq, although many of them were US Marines along with a few =
>>  sailors & airmen.
>>
>>  I read an article recently mentioning the 17 "soldiers" who had been =
>>  killed in the USS Cole bombing.
>>
>>  There are many, many other recent examples.
>>
>>  Is "soldier" now taken to mean any member of the armed forces, even =
>>  those who man ships? Or are we now so far into the all-volunteer force =
>>  (>35 years) that none of our journalists have any military experience =
>>  and don't know the proper terminology any more?
>>
>>  Bill Palmer
>>
>>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>>  The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org