was / is

Question

Am I correct:If I say:"The Vietnam War was a seismic event whose repercussions reach down to this day."Then I should use 'was.'But if I say:"The Vietnam War is a seismic event in American history whose repercussions reach down to this day."Then is it correct to use 'is'?My way of thinking is that since the Vietnam War was, has been, and still is considered a seismic event in American history, I should use the present tense to indicate the unchanging state of the event's standing. Or should I still use 'was'? Or can both 'is' and 'was' be used in this case?Thank you.

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

"is" is inconsistent with "repercussions .. to this day". You'll need "was".

We can't talk about the repercussions of a present event, can we? We don't know yet what the repercussions will be.

Anyway, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it!

CJ

SuperESL · Answer

Hi,

What if I add 'considered' after 'is'? This should make 'is' the right choice, correct?

"The Vietnam War is considered a seismic event in American history whose repercussions reach down to this day."

Saying 'is considered' injects a sense of subjectivity (i.e. it is considered by people today), whereas without 'considered' the sentence becomes a factual declarative statement (i.e. the Vietnam War was, objectively speaking, a seismic event). Perhaps this is how one should think about the distinction.

Frankly I am still having some difficulties wrapping my mind around this. I mean, "be" means "to exist; to be present." The Vietnam War is - not 'was,' since it is always going to be - a part of the realm of American history. Presumably one can say:

"The Vietnam War is a part of American history."

Then why not:

"The Vietnam War is a seismic event in American history."?

Since the objective status of the Vietnam War as a seismic event in American history is always (at least in the foreseeable future) going to stand, why not use present tense?

Thank you.

CalifJim · Answer

SuperESLWhat if I add 'considered' after 'is'? This should make 'is' the right choice, correct?"The Vietnam War is considered a seismic event ...

That works. That way the consideration is in the present, not the war or the seismic event.

SuperESLI mean, "be" means "to exist; to be present."

That's just one meaning. Sometimes it has no meaning; it can be just a function word to connect ideas, and that's how it's usually used.

SuperESL"The Vietnam War is a part of American history."Then why not:"The Vietnam War is a seismic event in American history."?

My argument concerning "repercussions" seems to be lost on you, so let's approach this a little differently.

To say that a thing is a part of another thing is to make a timeless statement. A steering wheel is part of a car. You don't say it was part of a car or it will be part of a car because time has nothing to do with it.

To say that a thing is an event is to place it in time. Events in history are not timeless. They occurred at specific times. So you can't say things like "The concert yesterday is very good" or "Our last Thanksgiving dinner is a disaster". Wars belong to the same category. The reason we don't say "The War of 1812 is an earth-shaking event" is that the War of 1812 is not happening now.

You can say "The sunrise this morning is beautiful" as you're watching the sun rise, but later in the day you can't say "The sunrise this morning is beautiful".

CJ

SuperESL · Answer

Hello,

I agree that it is grammatically flat out wrong to say:

"The sunrise this morning is beautiful" or "The concert yesterday is very good."

But I do not readily see the error in:

"Of all the things that have happened today, the sunrise this morning is the most memorable."

Or

"Of all the performances that have been presented at the Lincoln Center this season, yesterday's concert is the most outstanding."

Or - this may be more disputable, but still I would venture:

"Of the seven things that Stalin did upon taking power, agricultural collectivization is the most inhumane."

My apologies if I am talking past you. I guess the point I am trying to make is that it seems to me - but please correct me if I am wrong - that as long as you clearly demarcate a zone of time or a range of things that exist in time as your frame of reference, you can talk about them in relation to each other using the present tense as if you have lifted them out of history, and treat their internal connections with each other as abstract and timeless notions.

In short, my take is that events happened or took place in the past, but they exist - not existed - in time.

I am fully prepared to accept that I am completely wrong.

Thank you.

CalifJim · Answer

SuperESLOf all the things that have happened today, the sunrise this morning is the most memorable.

You've made 'is' correct by abstracting 'things that have happened' into an inert list. You're mentally looking at your (timeless) list and selecting an item from it. It's almost as if you are no longer speaking about the sunrise this morning, but about "the sunrise this morning", if you catch my drift.

SuperESLOr - this may be more disputable, but still I would venture:"Of the seven things that Stalin did upon taking power, agricultural collectivization is the most inhumane."

The fact that you find this one 'more disputable' shows, as I also suspect, that these examples occur along a whole gamut of possibilities ranging from 'definitely acceptable' to 'definitely unacceptable'. There are many shades of gray between, and each speaker, maybe arbitrarily, draws a line somewhere within the grays. In this case, I would prefer "... was the most inhumane". To me the skeletal version is "What he did is/was inhumane", and I choose 'was'.

SuperESLMy apologies if I am talking past you. I guess the point I am trying to make is that it seems to me - but please correct me if I am wrong - that as long as you clearly demarcate a zone of time or a range of things that exist in time as your frame of reference, you can talk about them in relation to each other using the present tense as if you have lifted them out of history, and treat their internal connections with each other as abstract and timeless notions.In short, my take is that things happened or took place in the past, but they exist - not existed - in time.I am fully prepared to accept that I am completely wrong.

I understand your point. Nevertheless, I think the choice is delicately dependent on the exact words of each sentence you might want to evaluate along these lines, as well as on the specific reader. When I read "The Viet Nam War is a seismic event in history", I sense that something is amiss. I can try to twist my brain into your demarcations of zones of times and into your lifting events out of history, but my brain just resists on this one. I can read it as you intend it, and hold it there for a second, but then, as it does with a Necker cube, my brain snaps it back to the interpretation I'm more comfortable with.

CJ

SuperESL · Answer

Thank you so much, CJ. It is important to me - a learner of English - to know the idiomatic conventions that most native speakers follow as well as the strict rules of grammar that dictate what must and what must not be done. You've taught me something about both today. For this I am very grateful. Thank you. <img class='emoticon' style='Width:19px;Height:19px;' data-delaysrc='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/10.gif' src='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/10.gif' alt='Emotion: embarrassed'/>

was / is

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions