I agree with Nick and Gerald, with the added note that there is no structural ambiguity in this sentence.  The fact that "peacekeepers" has been modified only by "United Nations" entails all peacekeepers in that domain.

Til


Til Turner
Languages and Literature
Northern Virginia Community College


________________________________
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of GERALD W WALTON [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 4:41 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Universal or particular category?


In the following sentence, would you interpret the term "peacekeepers" as meaning "all peacekeepers" or "some peacekeepers"?

My guess is that the person who wrote the sentence meant all.

But I think it could be interpreted either way. Take “Eighteen year olds should be allowed to vote.” Readers know there are qualifications—person should have registered, should not have committed a felony. One assumes, I think, that all of the peacekeepers have met certain qualifications and that all are therefore empowered.

I don’t think of any linguistic rule that applies.
Gerald


United Nations peacekeepers should have the power to engage in     offensive operations.

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/