I'm sure this question must have a simple clarification, but I am largely unfamiliar with the branches of formal logic and not sure where to look for it.
We know that "All bachelors are unmarried men" is among the classic examples of an analytical truth. I note that in one question at this site that it is even given as a "tenseless" proposition in contrast to those requiring temporal operators.
At the same time, this very example is historically not the case. Since "marriage" was once quite strictly defined as a sacrament between a man and a woman, we now have any number of "married bachelors."
As far as I recall, this was not the kind of issue raised in, say, Quine's "Two Dogmas of Empiricism," nor would it seem to me be readily fixed by adding temporal conditions to an entire proposition.
The problem in this case is that "bachelor" remains fixed while "marriage" changes. The subject and predicate cannot, in a sense, change "tenses" at the same rate. Nor could any subject and predicate. Breaking them apart and adding different temporal operators in an attempt to different terms would only seem to lead to an infinite regress.
This seems perhaps closer to Hegel's "historical" approach, in which the law of contradiction must be jettisoned if we accept the reality of motion. Or simply an ultimate capitulation to induction and probability.It also sounds like the kind of thing late Wittgenstein might assert, though I have only a passing familiarity with his work.
I guess my question is: does formal logic have a simple fix for this? Is there something obvious I am missing? Or does this historical stance simply assert a "material" (for lack of a better word) limit to "logic" no matter how it is expressed? Again, sorry but formal demonstrations will probably be beyond my present grasp.
