: Using a grammatically incorrect tense for stylistic effect Immanuel Kant has been born in Europe. I heard you can't use the Present Perfect for dead people, so can I use it to indirectly

Vote Up Vote Down

(as if he were Immortal, or that he still lives today through his ideas)?

The approach of subverting Grammar to make your point will not go smoothly with everyone who will read your article. How about proving through your writing that Kant's ideas are immortal or that he 'still lives on' through them? You don't need to subvert Grammar for that. In my opinion, this writing approach will open a window for creativity. You can use metaphors and all sorts of tools a writer has to explain and explore her idea.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

can I use it to indirectly state how influential Kant was (as if he
were Immortal, or that he still lives today through his ideas)?

This is how I interpreted it. So, yes. Maybe.

However, it was awkward and I had to pause to decide what it meant.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

That grammatically incorrect phrase connotes something other than you intend. Unless you want to once and future king him, just stick with was. People are born once and then live their lives, your construction seems to trap him at birth.

Why choose Europe? His birthplace is well documented and giving him an entire continent as his birthplace just seems a trifle bizarre.

When I read your sample, I think he has been born, shall be born and shall always be born in Germany.

If you wish to imply that a philosophical giant has far reaching influence beyond the span of his years, that does not do it.

Keep trying. For this reader, it seems a bit contorted which will damage immersion.

We disobey the rules of grammar with respect and try to do it rarely. They do exist for a reason, as grammatically correct text is easier to comprehend.

(0)