2

I read this at Mental floss:

That's right—in February 1919, just a few months after World War 1 ended, a story appeared in the UK's Manchester Guardian called “World War No. 2.” The Oxford English Dictionary describes it as a "reference to an imagined future war arising out of the social upheaval consequent upon the First World War.” The actual second world war wouldn’t start until 1939.

I think that the writer is mistaken because he says "Oxford English Dictionary describes". I think there should've been "described" instead here. Because the term is not merely a reference. The war has taken place. Additionally the dictionary doesn't include this definition either but it is plausible it might've been there between 1919 and 1939. Am I right?

  • 4
    It's convention to use the present tense when referring to the content of literary works—regardless of their age or the current state of the author. For instance, it's perfectly normal to hear the following: "In the book Romeo and Juliet, there are two characters who …" Also, "In her book X, Y says that  …" (even if the author died a hundred years ago). However, what might be ambiguous in the quoted passage is the version of the OED that's being referred to. Is it the current OED or the OED of 1919? – Jason Bassford Supports Monica Oct 14 at 14:16
6

From the OED entry of WWII:

In quot. 1919 with reference to an imagined future war arising out of the social upheaval consequent upon the First World War (1914–18).

So the OED still, to this day describes one possible meaning of WWII in the way the author wrote. The author isn't wrong.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.