Members help members on grammar, vocab, pronunciation...

Moderators: Vega, Krisi, EC

Post Reply
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2012 12:23 am
Status: English Learner


Post by carolgrey » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:55 am

If an army "requisitioned" a land from a private owner, does it USUALLY mean:

1) the army formally asked for the land, or
2) the army already forcefully took the land?

Dictionaries seem to have both meanings.

User avatar
Protector of the Boards
Protector of the Boards
Posts: 878
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 6:56 am
Status: English Teacher
Location: England

Re: Requisition?

Post by Joe » Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:46 pm

Usually, it would mean that the army took the land (forcefully if the owner resisted) after going through the formal process of issuing a "requisition order" or similar. So there is both formality and (potential) force involved, which is perhaps why dictionaries "seems to have both meanings".

A similar word is "commandeer" where there no formality involved. Here is an example:

- The police car would not start, so the police commandeered my car so that they could chase the thief.

In time of war, I suspect that the army would have commandeered the land from your unfortunate owner since there would have been no time for formality.

Post Reply