View Single Post
Old 12.01.2006, 04:50 PM   #5
!@#$%!
invito al cielo
 
!@#$%!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: mars attacks
Posts: 42,457
!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmku
This is going on a tangent, but you know one of my pet peeves? How the media changes words.

Troop is supposed to mean a group of soldiers.

For the longest time, when newscasters and even news magazines and such would use the word troops, I'd be confused. "3,000 troops." Wow, I'd think that's a lot of soldiers--3,000 groups of what, 50, 100, or more soldiers? Then I realized they meant 3,000 soldiers.

Troop is a collective noun. It means a group of soldiers. You have a troop of soldiers, or troops of soldiers, but it's technically wrong to call soldiers troops.

Please help me correct this irriitating mistake by using soldier when you mean one soldier, and troop when you mean a group of them. I'd really appreciate it.

ha ha, you are right. they are probably playing into the hands of this bullshit:

 


see??? each fool is "an army", hence, ha ha, a troop
!@#$%! is offline   |QUOTE AND REPLY|