How far back does the present go?

[KateSmith]

I read the BBC article and it says, "Mammoths went through six sets of teeth as they got older and they increased in size as the animals aged." Has it changed since you first quoted the article? If so you probably viewed the sins of an editor, not a science writer.

Here's a plausible scenario of the sort that happens to me all the time when my edited science columns are published: I write a brief article, within the stated word limits, about the mammoth skull find. In it, I mention that mammoths are members of the family Elephantidae, which has the characteristic of having 6 sets of teeth: "Elephantidae get through six sets of teeth as they get older and they increase in size as the animals age." I then mention that mammoths are an extinct member of this family, and Asian and African elephants are extant members. We can estimate the age of the mammoth, the extinct member of the family, by looking at the most recently erupted teeth and the amount of wear on them, and comparing these with living elephants. A new find by a Leakey comes across the wire taking six of my column inches. The editor cuts my second and third sentence and edits the first to say 'mammoths' instead of 'Elephantidae.' So, now I am discussing the dentition of extant mammoths. This is an all too common occurrence in science writing (or editing rather) outside of peer reviewed science journals.

In the paleontological sciences there is a standard style of technical writing used when discussing the growth, development or life cycles of extinct organisms. How the BBC posts it today is correct.

Loved the thread as my grandfather was a mammoth hunter, and the title of the thread indicated it was geological or paleontological .

I have a question of linguists, though. Is there a website or book that explains the correct procedure for transliterating names (people's, geographical) from Russian to English? Is there a correct way of doing it?

[lolwhites]

You're right Kate. They've changed it since I first looked, although if you do a google search on the phrase "mammoths get..."etc it gives you a link to the same story.

Not that it makes the original sentence incorrect in linguistic terms. It's just another example of "Present Simple" referring to past events. Even though it might've got past the editor, noone here actually claimed the sentence was incorrect, including native speaking EFL teachers? Does that tell us something?