Uniform Insignia Forum

Greetings, colleagues))

This is an International Encyclopedia, and we have plenty of languages here.

But, as soon as English is the leading language for international communications, it seems quite natural that all ranks have to be interpreted into this language. So, finally we have elaborated an approach when all illustrations with non-English ranks are being followed with 3 captions:

1) The rank in original language
2) A Latin transliteration
3) An English interpretation with the modern military ranking system.

We have chosen the modern US Army/Navy ranking system as basic to show the modern equivalents to non-English ranks.

And, of course, there is some nuances while such an interpretation, and one of them is connected with Lieutenants ranks.

There were plenty of discussions how to implement Lieutenant's category correctly. "2nd Lieutenant + just a Lieutenant", "Lieutenant + 1st Lieutenant", "Sublieutenant + Lieutenant" etc. But we need only one correct approach, so our suggestion is to use numerical titles of Lieutenants - they are understandable and clear. Moreover, there is very number of armies which have more than 2 lieutenants.

Therefore, we supposed that following interpretation will be correct:

Third Lieutenant - Second Lieutenant - First Lieutenant

The Uniforminsignia Team would like to hear your opinion on such an approach.

I like the First, Second, Third labels. Many countries use a position of "third lieutenant."

Or

Lieutenant I
Lieutenant II
Lieutenant III

The FDF uses prefixes for their lieutenants.
in ascending order: aliluutnantti/vänrikki, luutnantti, yliluutnantti.
In english: sublieutenant, lieutenant, overlieutenant.
Officially they're 2nd Lieutenant, Lieutenant and Sr. Lieutenant.
The term 1st lieutenant would carry the nuance of "full Ltn." The term would be applicable to luutnantti, but yliluutnantti would in simple terms be "full Ltn plus"

If we want standardization, then the rank normally recognised as "lieutenant" should just be that, and any lower grades be numbered (2nd, 3rd, etc.) and superior grades with "senior" as a prefix (numbered if more than one such grade, e.g. 1st Senior Ltn or Senior Ltn I).

We are talking not about the direct translation, but about the correct interpretation with the modern US Army equivalent.

For example, in Russian/Ukrainian armies there are three lieutenant grades: "mladshiy leytenant", "leytenant" and "starshiy leytenant". If to make a direct translation, that would be "junior lieutenant", "lieutenant" and "senior lieutenant". But, to make a proper US Army equivalent, we always interpret them as 3rd, 2nd and 1st LTs respectively.

You can object that there is no 3rd Lieutenant in US Army. Yes, they have no such a rank in modern army, but during the Civil War both Dixies and Yankees used (though unofficially) the rank of Third Lieutenant to indicate the lowest commissioned officer's grade. Some of dixie's junior offices had even the rank of "brevet second lieutenant", implying their real rank of the Third Lieutenant. So, having such a precedent with the US Army 3rd Lieutenant's grade, we can quite officially use this rank as a proper equivalent for non-English ranks (Remark: when I say non-English, I mean armies of countries where English is not an official language).