How Language Shapes Military Life and History—And the Stories We Tell

Or: Why “Camp Follower” or “Dependent” Isn’t a Job Title You’ll Find on LinkedIn

Words matter

When people think of military history, they often picture battles, uniforms, vehicles, ranks, technology, or strategy. But what if one of the most potent forces shaping military history isn't found on the battlefront?

What if it's language?

Words — more than commands shouted at dawn or lines hidden in forgotten field manuals. They're sneaked in during kitchen chats, spilled over coffee breaks, hail and farewell events, off-the-record meetings, or tossed around at Bunko nights. You can even find them lurking in official policies or making an embarrassing appearance on social media—like that friend who can't help but share the most cringeworthy TMI or memes.

Yet these words matter. They shape how war is understood, how service members see themselves, and how military life and duty are represented. They determine which voices are amplified and which are ignored. In both subtle cues and explicit statements, language builds the legacy of service—and influences how history is written, remembered, and passed on.

What Is the “Linguistic Turn”?

The linguistic turn refers to a pivotal shift in historical and scholarly inquiry that emphasizes the centrality of language in shaping human experience. Rather than focusing solely on events, actions, or material conditions, this approach highlights how language—through speaking, writing, reading, and listening—actively constructs the social world. It challenges the notion that language simply reflects reality; instead, it argues that language plays a constitutive role in how people perceive, organize, and give meaning to their lives.

Scholars influenced by the linguistic turn often ask:

• How do words shape our understanding of identity, power, and belonging?

• How do institutions use language to define roles, reinforce hierarchies, or draw boundaries?

• How do individuals use everyday language to make sense of their lived experiences?

In historical research, particularly within military history, the linguistic turn invites scholars to examine how narratives, official rhetoric, informal discourse, and silences reveal cultural assumptions and systemic biases. By applying both the cultural turn and the linguistic turn, we can uncover how dominant narratives in American military history have excluded certain voices and perspectives—and how reinterpreting language can offer a more inclusive and nuanced understanding of the past.

The Language of War: More Than Orders and Commands

Service members come from diverse backgrounds and have served in various branches and cultures throughout history. As militaries evolved over the centuries, the methods of communication among service members and with civilians have undergone significant changes. Military language is more than just a discipline or doctrine. Language reflects beliefs about rank, gender, ethnicity, social status, family, and who belongs to the military community.

The military uses formal language, including acronyms, strategies, structures, and rules. However, informal language—such as slang, nicknames, jokes, and storytelling—often reveals the real, lived experience. Together, these forms of communication reflect and reinforce military culture, ultimately shaping how history is written and remembered.

Behind the Front Lines: The Voices of Military Spouses

Now imagine turning that same linguistic turn on the non-uniformed members of military life—Military Spouses.

They've been an integral part of military culture and history for generations, even if their roles are hardly mentioned in base histories or local military histories.

Military spouses brought their languages, cultures, traditions, and customs into military communities. Through constant relocations, ceremonies, wartime, separations, and everyday endurance, military spouses have created a subculture with its own vocabulary and unspoken rules that often go undocumented. If you have read or been "gifted" a military spouse handbook, you know what I mean.

Terms like “camp follower,” “dependent,” “military wife,” or “home front” didn’t just fall from the sky — and they weren’t always part of the official military vocabulary. These words came into use over time, and they’ve done more than just describe people; they’ve defined expectations, shaped identities, and assigned roles — often quietly, often unfairly. They're gendered, usually overlooked, and almost never credited. But make no mistake: these labels evolved alongside changing ideas about marriage, mobility, and who gets counted as part of the military ‘WE’ . They draw the lines — between insiders and outsiders, supporters and bystanders, those woven into the institution and those stuck watching from the margins.

Words That Include—and Exclude

Studying how military spouses are discussed in policies, documents, books, personal communications, historical works, speeches, or social media reveals how language reflects and reinforces ideas about their importance, as well as how it can downplay their significance.

Some questions Scholars and historians are asking more frequently include:

• How have military institutions described spouses in official language?

• How have service members spoken about (or for) their partners?

• What words have spouses chosen for themselves?

• When have their stories been told—and when have they been left out?

You can see this in how spouse handbooks have evolved. Even social Media posts from deployment or PCS seasons, spanning from 2008 to the present day, have become a kind of historical archive depot, rich in meaning, emotion, and cultural context.

What Language Reveals

Applying the linguistic turn to military spouse history uncovers several important insights:

Language is power: Terms like "camp follower," "dependent," "dependa," or even "Dependapotamus" influence how spouses are perceived—often viewed as secondary or a drain, passive, despite their active contributions.

Identity is constructed: Labels such as "military wife" carry cultural scripts that may exclude professional spouses, men, and LGBTQ+ partners.

Daily communications matter: From handwritten letters to group chats, casual language captures emotional truths and lived realities of military life.

Changing words reflect changing values: Shifting from "camp follower" to "military community" signals broader changes in how gender and family are understood. I recall someone calling me a "camp follower" in 2002; I had no idea who they were talking to, because I was sure it wasn't me – and, " What was a Camp follower?"

Voice can be resistance: Military spouses' books, humor, protests, and blogs are not just venting—they're rewriting and taking control of their narrative.

Final thought: Why It Matters

Words don't just document military life—they shape it. They influence who is seen, who is remembered, and how communities understand themselves. By studying language—formal and informal—we gain insight into the human dimensions of military experience. We begin to recover the voices long left out of official histories: not just generals and soldiers, but spouses, families, and civilians.

And maybe—maybe—we start telling a fuller, funnier, and more authentic story about what it means to serve, lead, support, partner, and speak up—something we're increasingly witnessing in the 21st century.

This is precisely what Homefront Archives: Behind the Uniform aims to do. Every blog post, every story, and every challenged term becomes part of the evolving historical record the blog seeks to curate. My goal is to encompass more than just language; it serves as an act of historical documentation and advocacy in American military historiography. My writing and research employ the tools of cultural and linguistic history to reveal hidden dynamics, confer scholarly legitimacy to domestic and emotional labor, and reposition military spouses as significant figures worthy of inclusion in traditional military history.

Through the lens of the Linguistic Turn, my blog and its content collectively construct a woven narrative of historical memory—one in which support roles are not secondary, but foundational to our understanding of military life and its history.

~Mel

#MilitarySpouseHistory #HomefrontArchives #BehindTheUniforms