former Beatle

[Arnold Zwicky]

all over the media: the news that "former Beatle" Ringo Starr celebrates his 70th birthday today.  it's clear what is meant; the reference is to his having been a Beatle before they split up, oh so long ago now.  so he was a Beatle and he isn't now, but that's not because of a change in him (as with "former President"), but because of a change in the Beatles.

in tensed clauses, the verb "be" in the past is neutral as between the ways in which it could come about that
 SUBJ be INDEF-PRED-NOM ("Ringo was (once) a Blupp")
was true at time T in the past but is no longer true now.  so is
  once INDEF-PRED-NOM ("Once a Blupp, Ringo ...")

however, for me
  ex-PRED-NOM ("ex-Blupp")
and
  former PRED-NOM ("former Blupp")
have only the understanding that the status of the referent of the whole nominal has changed, and not that the status of the referent of the predicate nominal has changed.  alas, i have no easy way to pack the other understanding into a nominal.  other people seem to allow both understandings for "ex-Blupp" and "former Blupp", with the appropriate one picked out using real-life knowledge, the way "once a Blupp" works for me.

of course, i understand these people perfectly well; it's just that i wouldn't say it their way.

arnold

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org