The sentence is suggesting that *United Nations* peacekeepers have the power to engage; no other peacekeepers are mentioned, so the "all" would have to apply only to all UN peacekeepers. In that case, UN peacekeepers are only "some" of all peacekeepers. "NFL players are the wrong focal point for football safety" (espn.com). Should we assume this means all football players are the wrong focal point for football safety? (I don't think so) All NFL players? (This is what the sentence seems to suggest) -John On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:41 PM, GERALD W WALTON <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > 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/ > -- John Chorazy English III Honors, AP Lit Advisor, *Panther Press* Pequannock Township High School 973.616.6000 Noli Timere 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/