Timeline for Why people use past tense when talking about something always true
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 24, 2016 at 18:51 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Nov 24, 2016 at 19:21 | |||||
| Aug 1, 2014 at 12:24 | history | edited | Binney | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
slightly different wording to ending
|
| Aug 1, 2014 at 12:22 | comment | added | Binney | @Dan - Agreed and edited :) And user, the sentence has the same meaning and grammaticality regardless of the order of "William the Conqueror" and "the first Norman king of England"; both are in the past. (If one was in the past and one in the present, how could they be the same?) | |
| Aug 1, 2014 at 1:46 | comment | added | user1589188 | I agree "was" is used because of the past event, but on the other hand that is simply neglecting the always true fact. Is there a rule here, e.g. the tense follows the subject? If thats true, how about a swapped version: "The first Norman king of England IS William the Conqueror"? | |
| Jul 31, 2014 at 11:09 | comment | added | Dan Bron | Minor (but pertinent) correction: immediately after she is inaugurated, and for at least the following four years (presuming no interruption in her office), we will say "Hillary Clinton is the first female president". Then, unless she is re-elected, we will switch to using "was". | |
| Jul 31, 2014 at 10:14 | history | answered | Binney | CC BY-SA 3.0 |