Talk:Lieutenant

message: "In contemporary American English, the word is usually pronounced [ˈ/lu'tɛnənt/](Audio (help·info)).[1][2]. In 1791, English lexicographer John Walker lamented that the "regular sound" – /lju'tɛnənt/ – was not in general employ, giving the pronunciation current at the time as /lɛv'tɛnənt/ or /lɪv'tɛnənt/.[1] This is still the dominant pronunciation in English-speaking countries outside North America."
This is not true.  In Canada it is pronounced as in the UK. The text selection doesn't clearly say anything about Canada, so you may add anything you'd like regarding.  It also refers only to non-North American countries and only claims to apply most of the time.  66.205.158.7 (talk) 21:06, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronounciation

message: I was wondering what the usefulness of :Template:UK officer ranks was on this page.  Lieutenant is a rank that exists in a number of armed forces, and I think that if they all had a template like that on this page, the page would quickly be overrun. --timc | Talk 23:28, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There is also a :Template:US officer ranks, which has not, for some reason, been added to this article, but has to the others. Personally, I'd be in favour of removing both, but if US stays then so does UK in the interests of avoiding US-centrism! -- Necrothesp 01:19, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Template question: re officer ranks

message: I would have expected to see, but didn't: isn't a 3rd liut. an ensign, or the equivalent thereof?  Secondly, I was hoping for some discussion of the usage of address "Mister", in the American Navy...--Baylink 20:03, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two things: 3rd Lt and "Mister" 

message: liked this and the linked articles about ranks. Very informative.
regarding the etymology of the word lieutenant, I would like to make the following comment:
the translation of decomposed words is correct, i.e. "lieu" fr place, and "tenant" fr gerondif of "tenir" to hold.
the explained meaning "holding a position" however is incorrect.
The french say "in lieu ..." when discribing "in stead". In lieutenant, this is what it means. 
Explanation: Strictly speaking, the LT commands by grace of his superior - the captain, and he is the most junior commissioned officer. He does not hold a position, but carries out and supervises orders.
the rank capitain, the most senior of junior officers(in the french army), is a company commander: (etym.: capitain from: capo lat. hat/head tenere lat. holding ~ the one holding/wearing the cap. the head of the company). He is the one who wore a/the hat - to make him recognizable in battle. Should he fall, the next officer in line, would take the captains hat, and wear/holding it in his stead. QED
The Brit. army calls them Leftenant. The guy has been left in his master's stead, holding a position.
With refrence to the example of the lord lieutenant, he rules in the monarchs stead.
_________
This unsigned comment should be added to the article, it makes sense, the 'leftenenat' has been left with the tennancy of command in lieu of the Captain. Whoever you are mystery editor, if you can find some kind of source you can probably add it.(Fdsdh1 (talk) 21:53, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  explanation of lieutenant 

message: There is an underlying reason why u and v were once written alike (phonemically they were the vowel and semivowel personalities of the one same creature in classical Latin). The alphabetic equivalence congealed and remained fossilized long after there was phonetic and phonemic use for an alphabetic differentiation. Linguistically there is in fact a fuzzy sliding-scale connection that links /u/ to /v/ and back again with an area in the middle that is bilabial (/w/), from which shifts to labiodentals can take it off in diverging directions. This interconnected chain is analogous to the one that connects "hard g" to "soft g" through /χ/, /ʃ/, et al. Interestingly, both of these chains can be exemplified in one example word: They are what allowed the original Greek version of the name "Eugene" (meaning "well bred", that is, eu- + gen-) to diverge toward the /ju/ and the /dʒin/ of English Eugene but also toward the /jev/ and the /gen/ of Slavic Yevgeny et al.
Of course, the linguistic depths are a digression from the article's topic, so I won't try to discuss the above in the article. A link to relevant articles on linguistic topics would be appropriate, to be followed by the occasional reader who cares to digress into it. If I think of a succinct way to replace the "mistaken reading" phrase with an improved phrase with links that will do justice to the linguistics, I'll do that. — Lumbercutter 01:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Shift from u to v is a natural phenomenon that is more than just "mistaken reading"

message: The article has an entire section devoted to Army, Air Force, and Marine versions of the rank.  However, no equivilent article is mentioned for Navel officers.--Will 05:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Army but not Naval 

message: :: I am proposing removing the Wikiproject Law enforcement tag from this article.  This article doesnt seem to have anything to do with Law enforcement other than the fact that alot of Police agencies have a rank of Lieutenant. It seems this article would fit better in a military wikiproject or something like that. EMT1871 03:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tag removed, articles about ranks that cross over from their predominant military usage into a more minor police usage aren't in the project. SGGH 12:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikiproject law enforcement

message: In american army nominclature, the 3rd lt is still used as a designation,  particularly in the case of cadets in appointed roles. cite: the used of a cadet in the army national guard program as a member of SMP(simultaneous membership program) the cdet is designated in some units a third lt.
As for the mention of fictional usaged, this is incorrect.  Heinlien 3rd LT are told specifically they do have authority, and are given the rank of 3rd LT specifically to place them in the chain of command. The idea is that there are no "extras" or "deadheads" in combat. If the leader is a causualty, the charachters are told they will take charge.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.237.229.98 (talk) 17:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  3rd lt 21st century 

message: I have been working over the last week on a re-working of this article in one of my workboxes.  Inevitably this has meant that the text has been inserted wholesale, so here is a list of the more significant changes:
* Introduction of a proper structure
* Re-arrangement of the text within the new structure for ease of reading
* Culling of some non-encyclopedic and unverified information - in particular the list of foreign equivalents for "Third Lieutenant", not one of which was referenced and which added nothing useful to the encyclopedia.
* Introduction of text on the naval rank, which was conspicuous by its absence, as well as some text on Air Force, Marine and Police Service Lieutenants.
* Adding images of rank badges, which serve to demonstrate quite how little standardisation there is even within NATO of insignia.
I hope this meets with approval, but I must stress that there is still work to do here.  I'm thinking of:
* References for much of the text on Army ranks.
* Expansion of the historical sections on the origins of the rank.
* Further information on use of the the rank within other organisations.
Long live Wikipedia! Shem (talk) 19:27, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reworking of this article - 11 October 08 

message: When reading the page "Lieutenant" one is presented with the danish example of a first lieutenant: "Premierløjtnant" and that is very true. However when one decides to browse further down, it is stated that the danish name for a Second Lieutenant is "Flyverløjtnant" and its indicated by a pip with an arrow - this is actually just a name for a danish military employee who has taken the education to become a pilot or navigator and does not count as an officer-rank.
The true rank for second lieutenant is simply "Løjtnant" and is indicated by a single pip. As a reference i present here the press release from the military as evidence.
Stk. 6. Graderne flyverløjtnant af 1. grad og flyverløjtnant anvendes til personel, der har gennemgået en uddannelse til pilot eller navigatør. De pågældende bibeholder en af disse grader, indtil officersgrunduddannelsen måtte være gennemgået eller indtil eventuel hjemsendelse. 
http://www.logir.fo/foldb/bek/1994/0000325.htm
To sum it up "Flyverløjtnant" is just like a doctor recieves a rank based on how much experience they have, and is not in reality a rank.
I'm new to Wikipedia editing and talks, but my idea would be to remove flyverløjtnant and include løjtnant instead.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jokah (talk • contribs) 16:50, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Jokah, you are absolutely right - I made a simple error in copying in the image and title.  Thanks for correcting it. Shem (talk) 14:25, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example rank is misleading/and or wrong! Danish ranks 

message: It seems to me that the phrase "British and Commonwealth English" is clearly referring to the English language as spoken in a variety of different forms throughout the different nations.  This impression is reinforced by the phrase "in English-speaking countries outside the USA" used within the section.  I see no reason to change the wording to a form I see as rather less elegant, referring as it does to nations rather than dialectical groupings.  I would perhaps be just as happy with "British and Commonwealth Pronunciations" and "American Pronuciation", however. Shem (talk) 18:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I was so taken with the "British and Commonwealth Pronunciations" and "American Pronuciation" idea that I've adopted it.  Shem (talk) 18:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Commonwealth English

message: Esp. on showing the insignia etc, there probably is a Western European military history text which will explain the move of some armies towards Prussian style uniforms, insignia etc in the 19th century. Having two stars/pips/marks/... to indicate a lieutenant probably did not originate from UK.  (Actually a lot of WP articles seem to neglect the fact that a lot of things in the British Army are in fact not uniquely British but are either following general European trends or are deliberately copied from armies in continental Europe.) The move from a general word "lt" to the now fossilized meaning of second-to-lowest officer is not well explained as it is for the General article, say. 118.90.20.3 (talk) 03:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of background info 

message: The picture provided here of a US Navy LT's collar device is incorrect, in the picture provided where it appears above an example shoulder board. While it does appear as two silver bars, in the Navy these bars are joined across the top and bottom, and not towards the center as in the Army and Air Force. I believe this may go for a Capt. in the Marine Corps. I do not know how to change the picture, but it would be good if someone could - the LT used this in a brief of ranks the other day, making note of the discrepancy, and it would good if someone made such a resource available. Blackhawk003 (talk) 04:45, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Navy Collar Device 

message: Who makes a Audio-file with the word "Lieutenant" spoken? --Itu (talk) 08:26, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, exists: . Maybe put it in the text. --Itu (talk) 08:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It is (or rather a very similar file) in the text (under "pronunciation") and has been for a long, long time.  Shem (talk) 20:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, sorry. I only looked at the beginning, were i used to find such thing. :/ --Itu (talk) 08:49, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audio please 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:58, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:UK-Army-OF1A-shoulder.svg Nominated for Deletion

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:UK-Army-OF1B-shoulder.svg Nominated for Deletion

message: I've heard the term lieutenant to be used for right hand men of kings or other warrior chieftains, without there being a clear establishment of military hierarchy. Does this fit into this article? KarstenO (talk) 20:55, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unofficial and uncontemporary use 

message: James Cook was promoted to First Lieutenant (from Ship's Master) and given command of the Endeavour. Clearly, he was not second-in-command. His "First Officer" was Second Lieutenant Zachary Hicks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.64.48.38 (talk) 13:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hierarchy 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Unterleutnant which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 19:06, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress