Is there any difference in meaning between warrior and soldier? Are they totally synonymous?
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
Thursagen provides a good overview of the differences in connotations. The differences are however best considered literally (or etymologically rather), I feel.
i.e. Being a 'warrior' implies very generally that one fights in wars/battles (as the word itself suggests).
i.e. Being a 'soldier' implies being a payed member of an organised fighting force.
Overall then, you might consider a soldier to be a type of warrior, but not vice versa. The term 'warrior' is therefore often reserved for fighters in barbarian or unstructured armies, though it would not be incorrect to apply it to a member of the U.S. Army today, in fact.
A warrior is:
So you often hear of warrior classes in tribal culture. Many warriors also have behavioral codes. One popular example is the bushido of the Japanese samurai. Wikipedia notes
A warrior is more than just a fighter; it is someone who likely follows a code of conduct that determine their very values and ethics.
A soldier, on the other hand, is:
To be a soldier is to fight for a living -- it is an occupation. To be a warrior is to have that ingrained code of conduct that was vastly more present in the olden days. Today, one is not usually a warrior in the literal sense. It is far more common to refer to someone who fights as a soldier. The terms are definitely not synonymous because of the nuanced history behind each.
A warrior is (especially in former times) a brave or experienced soldier or fighter; a soldier is a person who serves in an army.
They both mean men of war, but there is a slight difference in meanings.
A soldier seems to imply someone who is in the army, and has been trained by some militia.
A warrior seems to imply a more barbaric figure, or at least, someone who fights, but isn't necessarily part of a state army, but are fighting for personal reasons.
The next difference implied is a soldier has discipline, and works together with other soldiers as a team to form an army. They march, move, and stop at the same time. Warriors don't do this, and although many warriors might fight in the same army, the term "warrior" implies that there is no discipline, and that they just move of their own accord.
Roots of the word aside, the term "warrior" is used by soldiers to refer to one of their fellows who, even by their standard, has superlative skill and attitude and go-get-it-iveness in combat. My battalion was called the Warrior battalion--in peacetime--and I never felt like we deserved it, had never earned it.
Poetically, a warrior is one who lives for the fight, and a soldier is driven by duty, and may have no love for fighting.
Of course, it's very important to note note that this is not a universal view. You may have to discover from context how the writer intends to define the words.
protected by tchrist Dec 23 '15 at 12:34
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?