[Ads-l] soldier = sailor

Fri Aug 14 11:53:20 UTC 2026

Caitlin Conley, NY HR candidate, on Morning Joe:

"You have soldiers going back on the USS Lincoln who were supposed to be
assigned to the Pacific theater but then got re-directed to this war in
Iran without proper training, without proper preparation and guidance."

OK. She's referring to all the personnel in the Lincoln. That includes both
sailors and marines.  Thus she's committed a double no-no, at least
according to Marines. (And note socially required distinction between
"Marine" and "marine.")

After fourteen years of this, I'm not sure which sounds weirder to me as a
generic: "soldier" or "warrior."  In my day, we didn't need no generic
beyond "military personnel."

Though "warrior" is politically preferred, I suspect civilian "young
people" commonly subsume all military personnel - including Air Force
personnel,, Coast Guards, and "Guardians" -  under both.

So tangled a web is language.

JL

On Sat, May 30, 2026 at 5:11 PM Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/cartoon-villain-hegseth-shredded-cringe-201736182.html
>  :
>
> Hegseth shredded for ‘cringe’ pep talk to Navy soldiers about Iran war
>
> JL
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 7:52 PM Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>> -----------------------
>> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>> Poster:       Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at GMAIL.COM>
>> Subject:      Re: soldier = sailor
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> This shows that all was still well with the world three years ago. Or does
>> it?
>>
>> Newsweek felt compelled to print the  following correction to a movie
>> review
>> it published in October, 2006:
>>
>> [http://www.newsweek.com/id/44948]  CORRECTION:  In "Inside the Hero
>> Factory" (Oct. 23), we said the flag raising at Iwo Jima was conducted by
>> six soldiers, when in fact the flag was hoisted by five Marines and a Navy
>> corpsman.
>>
>> JL
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Dave Wilton <dave at wilton.net> wrote:
>>
>> > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>> > -----------------------
>> > Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>> > Poster:       Dave Wilton <dave at WILTON.NET>
>> > Subject:      Re: soldier = sailor
>> >
>> >
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > I believe the "pursuit" was dropped and "fighter" adopted when the Army
>> Air
>> > Forces became the USAF in 1948. At least all the P-planes became
>> F-planes
>> > at
>> > that time.
>> >
>> > The last official fighter-bomber that I know of was the FB-111, the
>> > strategic version of the F-111. That's a different use (i.e., fighter
>> that
>> > is being used as a strategic bomber) of "fighter-bomber" than the WWII
>> use.
>> >
>> > A howitzer is a low-velocity cannon that fires shells with high
>> > trajectories. A gun is a high-velocity cannon that fires shells with a
>> low
>> > or nearly flat trajectory. It's a fine distinction that can safely be
>> > ignored in all but the most technical of contexts.
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
>> Behalf
>> > Of
>> >  Wilson Gray
>> > Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 2:24 PM
>> > To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>> > Subject: Re: soldier = sailor
>> >
>> > During The War, the term, "fighter-bomber," was in common use. It's
>> > not as though this sort of thing is a new tactical development. But
>> > what's now called a "fighter plane" - F-Numeral - was called a
>> > "pursuit aeroplane," e.g., the Curtiss _P_-40 used by the Flying
>> > Tigers. That change is (relatively) new. (No doubt, the
>> > then-still-ongoing shift from "aero-" to "air-" annoyed purists of the
>> > day. The only form that I have ever used is "airplane," though I can
>> > recall that some people in Marshall used "aeroplane" [&@r at pl&In],
>> > including my fella-chirren, and was still used in the dictionary and
>> > in literature, by the time that I could read such big words.)  What's
>> > new is no longer bothering to make the distinction, presumably on the
>> > assumption that "a difference that makes no difference is no
>> > difference."
>> >
>> > As for submarines, I agree with Jon. During The War, there were only
>> > submarines, pig-boats, and u-boats, in the funny-books of the era.
>> >
>> > Merely asking for information: what is a howitzer, if not, like a
>> cannon, a
>> > gun?
>> >
>> > -Wilson
>> >
>> > On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Dave Wilton <dave at wilton.net> wrote:
>> > > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>> > -----------------------
>> > > Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>> > > Poster:       Dave Wilton <dave at WILTON.NET>
>> > > Subject:      Re: soldier = sailor
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > ---
>> > >
>> > > There are different levels of error in "fighter plane" (referring to
>> any
>> > > combat aircraft) and "fighter sub."
>> > >
>> > > "Fighter" is the jargon term for a class of aircraft, it is not a
>> jargon
>> > > term for a class of submarine. The term the movie critic should have
>> used
>> > is
>> > > "attack sub," or perhaps "fighting sub."
>> > >
>> > > From the use of "fighter sub" I would not say that this movie critic
>> had
>> > > "professional-level skills," at least not in writing about naval
>> > subjects.
>> > > The use of the term, in fact, displays remarkable ignorance of the
>> > subject
>> > > matter. That said, I've seen many uses of "soldier" to mean "service
>> > > member," "warrior," or "warfighter," subsuming sailors in its
>> definition,
>> > > but usually in email, conversational speech, or other non-editorial
>> > contexts
>> > > and generally not in published writing.
>> > >
>> > > Also the CNN error is more understandable in that as years have gone
>> by,
>> > > fighter aircraft have taken on more and more of the bombing or
>> > ground-attack
>> > > role. "Attack aircraft" (i.e., light bombers) have largely disappeared
>> > from
>> > > the American military arsenal, replaced by multi-purpose fighters.
>> (Case
>> > in
>> > > point: the F-117 Stealth Fighter, which is designed for bombing, not
>> > > air-to-air combat.) In the USAF and USN today, the two classes of
>> combat
>> > > aircraft are intercontinental-range strategic bombers and fighters
>> (with
>> > a
>> > > few older attack aircraft still hanging on). The CNN error is more
>> akin
>> > to
>> > > calling a "howitzer" a "gun" or "shell fragments" being called
>> > "shrapnel,"
>> > > although not nearly as technically nitpicky.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
>> Behalf
>> > Of
>> > > Jonathan Lighter
>> > > Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 8:37 AM
>> > > To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>> > > Subject: soldier = sailor
>> > >
>> > > Weve already discussed whether or when marines are ever soldiers.  But
>> > the
>> > > following ex., obviously written by someone with professional-level
>> > > skills, shows that "soldier" now subsumes sailors too, at least for
>> some
>> > > people:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > 2007 _Moviefone_ [
>> > > http://insidemovies.moviefone.com/2007/03/07/feature-page-5-1-films/
>> ]:
>> > > German director Wolfgang Petersen's U-boat drama realistically
>> captures
>> > the
>> > > claustrophobia and uncertainty of a fighter sub and portrays the
>> German
>> > > soldiers as real people, not Aryan monsters.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Perhaps, as skeptics will chuckle, this is merely a slip. Maybe. But
>> if
>> > so,
>> > > it is a bizarre slip IMO. The writer obviously knows what the movie is
>> > > about.
>> > >
>> > > Consider too the peculiar phrase "fighter sub." That supports the idea
>> > that
>> > > the writer is not very familiar with even everyday military/naval
>> usage,
>> > at
>> > > least as little boys grew up learning it in the '50s.  I've heard Fox
>> > News
>> > > refer to all combat aircraft as "fighter planes."
>> > >
>> > > (If you don't understand my point, you may be proving it.)
>> > >
>> > > The explanation (if one is needed) may be that over the past couple of
>> > > decades, all members of the armed forces have come to be described in
>> > > journalism as "warriors" generally. (There are several reasons for
>> this.)
>> > > But if "warrior" can subsume "sailor," why can't "soldier"?
>> > >
>> > > Inglish. Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid.
>> > >
>> > > JL
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > "If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the
>> > truth."
>> > >
>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>> > >
>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > -Wilson
>> > ---
>> > All say, "How hard it is that we have to die!"--a strange complaint to
>> > come from the mouths of people who have had to live.
>> > -Mark Twain
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the
>> truth."
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>>
>
>
> --
> "If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."
>

-- 
"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."

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