Skip to main content

Past or present tense when talking about firsts that happened in the past?


When talking about firsts that happened in the past, is it okay to use the present tense?


For instance, if we want to talk about George Washington being the first president of the United States, could we say: "George Washington is the first president of the United States."?


Technically he still is the first president and will be the first for the rest of time. But, he is no longer the president so should the statement be made in the past tense?



Answer



No, George Washington was the first president of the United States. The simple past (was) is used to describe an action that started and finished at a specific time in the past. The simple present (is) is used to describe a general truth ("He is tall") or a specific condition ("He is coming") that currently applies. We can certainly say that George Washington is dead, or that George Washington is a hero to many, because we are then describing a current condition. Neither would we say "John Adams is the second president of the United States," even though there will never again be a second president. Of course we do say Obama is the 44th president, but in two years, this will be He was the 44th president, even though there will never be another 44th president. In other words, the fact that something is or was the first or the second or the 44th does not matter at all.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more