MILITARY ENGLISH: WRITING CONVENTIONS IN THE ARMED FORCES OF THE

PHILIPPINES

A Requirement Presented to
The College of Education Graduate School
Polytechnic University of the Philippines
Sta. Mesa, Manila

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the subject

RSH 632: Methods of Research

MASTER OF ARTS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING

Professor
Dr. Ma. Junithesmer D. Rosales

By

Jeasel D.G. Moloboco

2024

Page 1 of 5
 Abstract
This paper aims to impart knowledge on how writing in a military setting differs from the
standard writing that we know. There are aspects of military English that are different from general
English, which encompasses capitalizations, verb tenses, functions of specific words, punctuation
marks, and gender-fair language that are adopted in the writings of personnel in the Armed Forces
of the Philippines (AFP). Examples were provided with discretion and limitations, as restrictions
on references need to be observed. The focus of the discussion was only limited to the writing of
military correspondence, which involves, but is not limited to, memos, letters, orders, and
directives. With the descriptions provided in this paper, it is concluded that military English is thus
different in some aspects from general English, but it is not to isolate the said variation of language
but to give non-military civilians or linguists an insight into its beauty despite its peculiarities, which
can be an interest in study.

Introduction
Writing in English for various purposes is perhaps the main activity of all institutions all
around the world (Likaj, 2015). Almost all social activities, such as student education, selling and
buying of products, reports of official meetings, business meetings, military orders, etc., depend
entirely on writing. Nowadays, it is difficult to imagine the world without academic essays, scientific
writings, e-mails for business purposes, military memos, and legal contracts.
As mentioned above, writing is fundamental to every professional, even in the Armed
Forces of the Philippines (AFP). With the dominance of English as the international language,
writing in English is of great importance to people who work in the AFP, may it be commissioned
officers, enlisted personnel, or civilian personnel. Communicating through writing is significant
and vital for each member who is assigned to operate in a multinational military setting. Writing in
military English is considered a difficult skill for individuals who come from civilian corporations or
institutions. Regarding any personnel of any branch of service (Army, Air Force, or Navy), writing
skills are always used as a tool to communicate with their national and international counterparts.
These professionals cannot operate and carry out their jobs properly without acquiring this skill.
The traditional rules of writing used in General English differ to some extent from the way
writing is taught in the military. For example, in writing communication letters, there are writing
conventions that are being followed, which include, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar,
and paragraphing, which the writer should use regardless of whether they are a military or civilian
personnel.
For example, the titles of high-ranking government officials, even if they are not followed
by a name or used in a direct address or when a specific individual is referred to directly, should
be capitalized.
Wrong: …invite the president, the executive secretary, and the
honorable secretary
Correct: …invite the President, the Executive Secretary, and the
Honorable Secretary
Likewise, prefixes or suffixes added to the titles or compound titles must not be capitalized.
Wrong: President-Elect, Ex-Governor
Correct: President-elect, ex-Governor
On verb tenses, as much as possible, simple tenses are used.

Page 2 of 5
 Wrong: During the meeting, the VCSAFP also supported the four (4) action items
that have been adopted by the body to be further discussed on the next meeting.
Correct: During the meeting, the VCSAFP also supported the four (4) action items
that were adopted by the body, which will be further discussed on the next meeting.
Using “that” and “which” also has its distinct functions. If the sentence does not need the
clause that the word in question is connecting, use which. If it does, use that. Further, which is
used for non-restrictive relative clauses. This clause contains extra information that could be left
out of the sentence without affecting the meaning or structure. While that is used for restrictive
relative clauses, this clause contains essential information about the noun that comes before it,
and without the clause, the meaning will change.
Example:
Restrictive: The troops were wearing their new combat boots that were
recently delivered.
Non-restrictive: JSOG bought a new equipment, which it will be using in its
upcoming operations.
In writing names, periods are not used in middle initials and suffixes. In the military setting,
punctuation is omitted when addressing civilians and military personnel.
Example:
COL JUAN F DELA CRUZ JR PA
Mr Apolinario A Mabini
Ms Melchora A Aquino PhD
Further, for consistency and uniformity, the use of “Madam” in the salutation of
correspondence for women of rank or position is strongly suggested. The word “Madam” is used
as a form of respectful or polite address to a woman of rank or position, while the title “Madame”
is more informal and is used to address any woman.
Lengthy sentences and paragraphs should also be avoided, as often, proposed letters
addressed to entities outside the AFP contain extensive sentences and paragraphs. This creates
confusion for the reader about the meaning of the sentence. In the case of paragraphs, the
traditional rule is: one theme or topic per paragraph. As suggested, a single sentence should not
contain more than 21 words, and a single paragraph should not exceed four (4) sentences.
There are also terms that are no longer used in military correspondence such as: “RBIT”,
“ITC”, “ITCON, “Per”, “Anent”, “As per”, etc.
Additionally, a directive was published that provides guidelines for the use of gender-fair
language in all official communications, documents, policies, designations, publications, and
manuals in the AFP. This prescribes the promotion of gender sensitivity in the AFP using gender-
fair or non-sexist language.
To eliminate sexual stereotyping in the different designations of the AFP, “Chairperson” is
used instead of “Chairman” and “Enlisted Man/Enlisted Woman” should be replaced by “Enlisted
Personnel”. The generic use of he, his, or him should also be eliminated unless the antecedent is
obviously male.
Example: 1) Using plural nouns:
Traditional: The soldier uses his map to guide him.
Suggested: The soldiers use their map to guide them.
2) Deleting he, his and him altogether. Reword if necessary.
Traditional: The engineer-officer uses his blueprint to guide him.

Page 3 of 5
 Suggested: The engineer-officer uses a blueprint as a guide.
3) Substituting articles (a, an, the) for his; using who instead of he.
Traditional: An officer should know his men well.
Suggested: An officer should know the men well.
4) Using one, we or you.
Traditional: As one grows older, he becomes more reflective.
Suggested: As one grows older, one becomes more reflective.
5) Using the passive voice.
Traditional: The Commander must submit his proposal today.
Suggested: The proposal must be submitted by the Commander
Today
The military as a specific domain of human activity covers certain concepts that are
particular to its field; thus, we can say that the military uses or requires the writing standards that
are most useful or effective in specific military contexts. Military organizations and personnel, to
function properly, have developed a specialized language that distinguishes the military from
other fields of human activity and makes it impossible for them to perform their tasks. All
specialized languages used by groups tend to narrow the potential meaning of words and their
potential interpretations and ambiguities, which are characteristic of general language.
Because of the specific role of the military in the modern world and its worldwide presence
in peacekeeping operations, the need for official military writing conventions has become crucial
to avoid possible misunderstandings and catastrophes by reducing the likelihood of error or
misjudgment in a national or international environment in which personnel from different groups
or nations perform joint tasks. This writing convention of the military has resulted in a constant
widening of the military vocabulary that is shared by a specific and increasing group for which it
constructs a social reality, and that is often understandable without misinterpretations only to its
members. Thus, the military writing standards serve to clarify, especially in the case of
multinational operations, and eliminate ambiguity and misunderstanding that might otherwise
occur among personnel from different nations.
Military English has become exceptionally productive in the past few years. Members of
the AFP, whether officers, enlisted personnel, or civilian human resources, have all contributed
to this constant enrichment.
Specialized military language can provide some evidence about the group that uses it and
about how they see themselves as exclusive members of a group. It emphasizes the expertise of
those who use it, and in this case, it contains a specific notion of hierarchy typical of the military.
The ability to use and understand this specialized language determines the membership in a
military community and, within it, the membership in particular branches and services.

Conclusion
Military English from various individuals’ perspectives may present uniqueness that differs
in general English and from political speeches, business conversations, sports commentaries, or
everyday chit chats. But it shows a venture into the colorful, occasionally sarcastic, but overtly
masculine and brutal world of the military with the modest intention to define, classify, and analyze
its peculiarities and thus to help ordinary civilians or language specialists win the battle of learning
and mastering the different variations of the English language.

Page 4 of 5
 References

Armed Forces of the Philippines Military Correspondence Book 2017 Edition.

Boeru, M., Cizer, L. D., & Lungu, D. (2017). Acquiring Proficiency in Using Naval English
Terminology: Strategizing the Process of Teaching and Learning ESP Vocabulary For The
Naval Academy Military Students. Mircea cel Batran” Naval Academy Scientific Bulletin,
20, 353-359.

Dariusz, Bogusz. (2017). Teaching English military terminology in military classes. Safety &
Defense. 3. 31-36. 10.37105/sd.21.

Georgieva, V. (2015). MILITARY ENGLISH: FROM THEORY TO PRACTICE. Rakovski National

Defence College Publishing House.

Hashimova, N., & Sattorov, T. (2021). Usage of English military terminologies as a neutral and
colloquial vocabulary. CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL
SCIENCES, 2(11), 162-167.

Kiš, M. (2014). Euphemisms and military terminology. Hieronymus, 1, 123-137.

Likaj, M. (2015). Teaching Writing through Communicative Approach in Military English. Journal
of Education and Practice, 6(20), 102-107.
Lythgoe, T. (2022). Professional Writing: The Command and General Staff College Writing Guide.
Fort Leavenworth: US Army Command and General Staff College.

Orna-Montesinos, C. (2013). English as an International Language in the military: A study of

attitudes. LSP Journal, 4 (1), 87-105.

Saber, A. (2018). Lexicogenic matrices and institutional roles of US military jargon. Lexis. Journal
in English Lexicology, (11).

Page 5 of 5