I note that the simple present tense’s main use is to express timeless truths (things which are true in the past, present and future). As such, one such use of the simple present tense is for the definitions listed in dictionaries, since the definitions are deemed unlikely to change and hence timeless in this sense. However, I have come across dictionaries whose definitions make use of the present perfect tense (e.g. definition of the word reason – a cause or an explanation for something that has happened or that somebody has done). I find that such a definition, which uses the present perfect tense, is not ideal considering that the present perfect tense cannot be used to express timeless truths, and may the mistaken impression that the word reason can only be used “for something which has happened or that somebody has done” ( i.e. past events with a connection to the present), but not for something which is happening (present)/ will happen (future); or that somebody is doing (present)/ will do (future).

Therefore, my view is that for such cases, the dictionary in question would do well to amend the definition to say for instance reason – a cause or an explanation for something that happens or that somebody does.

Do you think that the dictionary’s decision to use present perfect tense is reasonable? and if so, why?

Additionally, would you agree that my proposal to use the simple present tense (e.g. reason – a cause or an explanation for something that happens or that somebody does) is fair?

Thank you.