TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2003-09 > 1062439757


From: "Teresa Ghee Elliott" <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] Wording
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 13:09:24 -0500
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20030901125354.00a2ccb0@pop.sprynet.com>


I guess for me, the living flag ought to control that. For my great
grandfather, his children were, for me, my children are. I doubt he
will have anymore children, and I pray I don't. <G>

Teresa Ghee Elliott
For examples of TMG sentences <http://www.tmgsentences.home-page.org>;
Interested in Rutherford County, TN cemeteries?
<http://www.rutherfordcemeteries.home-page.org>;


-----Original Message-----
From: Darrell A. Martin [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, September 01, 2003 12:08 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [TMG] Wording

At 11:57 AM 9/1/03 -0500, Teresa Ghee Elliott wrote:
>Isn't any event we are recording in the past? I could record where I
>will be on the 2010 census, but that is very likely to change. But if
I
>am recording where I was on the 1990 census, that is not going to
change
>and it has already happened. It really wouldn't matter who my reader
>is.
>
>Teresa Ghee Elliott

Hi, Teresa:

That any *event* we are recording is in the past is, of course, true.
But
not everything being reported by or in TMG is an event. Statements of
relationship, such as "these are the known children of John Smith" are
not
records of events, for example. Part of this is grammar, and perhaps
more
is the convention of genealogical publications. Either way, the present
tense is correct for the "children of" phrase -- although it is
certainly
not the only possible way that *might* be correct.

Darrell


Darrell Allen MARTIN
a native Vermonter currently in exile in Addison, Illinois
www.darrell-martin.net/genealogy/


==== TMG Mailing List ====
Visit the TMG Tips web site <http://www.tmgtips.com>; for items of
interest to TMG users and links to other TMG related sites.

This thread: