What's the meaning of the phrase?

The king had their warriors killed.

12 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    He killed someone's army because he won a battle/war.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 months ago

    Most people will understand that the king ordered the deaths of warriors who belonged to someone else.

    A 'woke' person may conclude that it would be sexist to assume the 'king' was a man, and that 'their' refers to that king; that the king ordered the deaths of 'their' (or, as most people would say, 'his') warriors.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    He had someone elses, not his, warriors killed

    Source(s): British
    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 months ago

    It means that the king had his enemies warriors killed.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 2 months ago

    I have no idea, because I have no clue who "they" are (their refers to some they).  Presumably the king ordered his own men to kill the warriors that had been serving  some other group or government.  This also means that those warriors would have had to have been prisoners, because warriors faced in combat are supposed be killed, it is the entire point of the combat, and the only unusual thing would be if the kind ordered those warriors to be NOT killed. 

    I would guess that the king ordered the death of captured warriors.  But I need a lot more context to truly understand.  If the sentence was supposed to mean that the king ordered the death of his own warriors, then it should have used "had his warriors killed".  The king is not a plural.

    • ?2 months agoReport

      Thank you

    • Login to reply the answers
  • sepia
    Lv 7
    2 months ago

    The king had their warriors killed.

    Since 'their' is used, his warriors might have killed someone else's warriers.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Laurie
    Lv 7
    2 months ago

    It is unclear, out of context, to whom “their” refers.

    • ?2 months agoReport

      Their refer to enemy

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 months ago

    Never heard that one so I'm guessing... it means that he made a reckless military decision... i.e. a reckless decision?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 months ago

    The sentence is not clear as we do not who "their" is.

    If the king had ordered is own warriors killed, the sentence should say "that king had HIS warriors killed."

    "Their" refers to someone other then himself.  So he ordered someone else's warriors killed.  Such as captured enemy warriors.

    It is also possible that "their" references to something such as "the kingdom's" warriors.  In that case, if it is the king's own kingdom, it would be his own warriors that were slain.

    Or it could refer to someone else's "kingdom", and so once again it is not the his warriors that are killed.

    Without additional information or context, we can not tell who "their" refers to, so we do not know who is getting killed.  The sentence is unclear.

    • ?2 months agoReport

      Their refer to the enemy

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 months ago

    The empire is becoming more vulnerable if a king loses reinforcements.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.