I'm writing an english paper about a military man who was a 1st Lieutenant. In the paper can I refer to him as Lieutenant (name) or do I need to call him 1st Lieutenant (name)?
2007-01-02 15:53:03 · 11 answers · asked by mwt006 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
It depends on your audience. If military people are reading it, it is helpful to include 1st. If it is mainly for civilians, Lt is fine. Journalists do this all the time. There are a million different types of Sargeants, but thats all they are called in the papers usually.
Also, if his rank is significant to the story, you might want to include 1st too. For example, if you write that he was promoted at some point from 2nd lt to 1st, you may need to refer to him as 1sr lt, just to keep from confusing your readers.
2007-01-02 15:56:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You can do either. Most Lieutenants (in the AF, at least) don't really care that horribly much about the distinction between 1st and 2nd Lt, so just shortening to Lieutenant is pretty standard. On alot of AF Bases, customs say that there's not even saluting between a 1st and a 2nd Lt. Army might be another story though, I've heard they take rank a bit more seriously.
If I were you, I'd refer to him as 1st Lieutenant (1Lt) Name the first time and then just refer to him as 1Lt Name after that. That's probably the most space saving and efficient way of solving your issue (since 1Lt is the shortened rank of a 1st Lieutenant in the same way that Capt is short for Captain)
2007-01-03 05:09:42 · answer #2 · answered by promethius9594 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In my opinion, when writing a paper about a person, it's best to be as specific as possible. In your case, address that person as 1st Lieutenant. There's a difference between the silver and gold bar.
2007-01-02 20:21:37 · answer #3 · answered by silverpet 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When talking to him, you call him LT...Smith.... When writing a paper, you must write the actual rank the first time (First Lieutenant John Smith) After that you can simply refer to him as LT. Smith.
2007-01-02 17:43:57 · answer #4 · answered by forgivebutdonotforget911 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's only Lieutenant. Unless you are addressing his rank, then you would say 1st or 2nd Lieutenant so and so.
2007-01-02 17:44:25 · answer #5 · answered by Dana 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would clarify in the beginning with the 1st Lt. After that, you can refer to the person as just Lt. In the Marine Corps, we callled them all Lt. and left off the 1st or 2nd part of the rank.
For Enlisted ranks such as Staff Sgt, or Gunnery Sgt. you always use the whole rank, or the appropriate nickname. For example, in the Corps Gunnery Sgt.'s are commonly referred to as Gunnies. Master Sgt's are often called Top, and Master Gunnery Sgt's are known as Master Gunnies.
2007-01-02 16:11:18 · answer #6 · answered by digsrocknroll 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When referring to a member of the military, it's customary to refer to their rank first, then their name, then the country and branch of the military they serve(d) in.
For example:
General Omar Bradley, U.S. 12th Army
First Lieutenant John Q. Public, U.S. Army
2007-01-02 16:08:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the navy we'd call him Mister (name). At Lieutenant Commander we begin to use rank followed by name.
2007-01-02 16:03:57 · answer #8 · answered by Yak Rider 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
once you list formal rank as 1st lt doe...
refer to as lt doe from then on...
2007-01-02 16:05:09 · answer #9 · answered by cork 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1st LT
2007-01-02 16:05:44 · answer #10 · answered by Bob S 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋