a leader "received a coup d'état" / "was given a coup d'état"

< Previous | Next >

Xavier da Silva

Senior Member
Hello everyone,

When a president or any other person that governs a country is removed from office by means of a coup d'état, is it natural/correct to say that "he or she received a coup d'état" or "was given a coup d'état" in the examples I made below?

a. Dilma Rousseff received a coup d'état in Brazil.
b. Dilma Rousseff was given a coup d'état in Brazil. I mean, senators and deputies (and the pro-coup media) gave her a coup d'état.

Thank you in advance!
 
  • joanvillafane

    Senior Member
    U.S. English
    No, neither of those is correct.
    She was removed/ousted by a coup d'état.

    < Off-topic question removed.
    Please focus on the language question.
    Cagey, moderator >
     
    Last edited by a moderator:

    Sheikh_14

    Senior Member
    English- United Kingdom, Urdu, Punjabi
    Had it been a military takeover, the sentences you would use are as follows:

    They organised a coup de'tat against Dilma Or to her disfavour.

    She had been inflicted with a coup d'état. A coup d'état had been inflicted upon her. They administered a coup de'tat against Madame Roussef.
     

    dojibear

    Senior Member
    English - Northeast US
    In AE (though there is no standard expression) I would probably use words like these:

    She was the victim of a coup d'etat.
    She was the target of a coup d'etat.
    She was the target of a succesful coup d'etat.

    They carried out a succesful coup d'etat.
    They carried out a succesful coup d'etat against the former governor, Madame Roussef.
     

    PaulQ

    Banned
    UK
    English - England
    is it natural/correct to say that "he or she received a coup d'état" or "was given a coup d'état" in the examples I made below?
    If you substitute "revolution" or "uprising" for "coup d'état", I hope you will see that neither of your sentences work.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top