I’ve come across the following.
Hodie Christus natus est.
This, according to a Google search, is translated as ‘Today Christ is born’.
I can see that natus can be an adjective and that ‘est’ is therefore in the present tense. Surely ‘natus’ could also be a participle and the sentence be translated as ‘Today Christ was born’ or simply ‘Christ was born today’. Am I missing something or is the reason, perhaps, theological?
I’d be grateful if someone could put my mind at rest as this has been bothering me for a while. I don’t like to move on without gleaning the last from this, possibly, valuable lead.
I think your answer can be explained by recourse to aspect. In this case, since the action is completed – perfective, in grammatical terms – it makes sense to use the perfect form of the verb rather than the present, whose aspect can either not emphasize the aspect at all or indicate something in the process of happening (imperfective aspect). Aspect is distinct from tense, but perfect verbs often have a perfective aspect.
This rundown from OSU has a good overview and some examples: https://classics.osu.edu/Undergraduate-Studies/Latin-Program/Grammar/Tense
I think the problem is quite illusory; it’s merely a matter of English having two ways of translating what in Latin is one and the same thing. What do you presume the difference would be? A nuance, I suppose, that doesn’t really change anything important, and which Latin grammar happens not to distinguish.
Thank you very much for such full and stimulating answers to my query. I’ve some great avenues of enquiry now.