Language desk
< March 15	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 17 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

March 16

Better "late" than never?

When and why did "late" become a synonym for "dead"? (Q: Why is John late for the meeting? A: He has a good excuse; he's dead). My apologies for being only semi-serious, but I've always wondered about this. 2606:A000:1126:28D:9CD1:2A09:62D0:11F5 (talk) 05:59, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the OED Online can give us an idea of when, at least. The first citation for this sense being used is dated "a1422" which means "before 1422". (It reads: "Elizabeth, ye Wyfe of ye seid late Erle".) --69.159.8.46 (talk) 08:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting question. As to why, it is used in the sense of "of late", meaning "recent". A recent person is dead. Jmar67 (talk) 08:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've always assumed it meant recently dead. Having checked a couple of online dictionaries, none of them explicitly make that distinction (although the examples they give generally fit that use). Iapetus (talk) 10:18, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology Online does.[1] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:23, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have alsways assumed this "late" means something like "occurring in the latter part of a period of time", in this case "some person during the last part of his/her/its time". So just as "the late thirties" are the last part of the thirties, the late Sir Thomas is the "last part of Sir Thomas" as it were. I've been overridden by history. 2003:F5:6F07:8800:3509:3F08:25F4:81F8 (talk) 17:00, 16 March 2020 (UTC) Marco PB[reply]

Logically, anyone who dies does so in the last part of his/her time. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:59, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Does not mean the last part of his life but rather "the (recently) deceased Sir Thomas". Whereby "recent" can cover a lengthy period of time. We would probably not refer to "the late George Washington", however. Jmar67 (talk) 18:44, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In the series of books, The No. 1 Ladies' Detective Agency by Alexander McCall Smith, set in Botswana, the characters use "late" as the general euphemism for "dead". Whether this is a common usage in Botswana, I don't know. --rossb (talk) 18:44, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Late" does have a euphemistic air, much like "dear departed". Jmar67 (talk) 18:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember where I heard it, but a good definition I once came across was that a dead person could be described as 'late' if it could be reasonably presumed that they were still alive.Turner Street (talk) 13:48, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably you mean "reasonably presumed" by those who don't already know the person has died? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:12, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's the whole point. We'd never refer to the late Henry VIII, since everybody knows he died 500 years ago. But we'll soon, and for a time, be hearing about the late Kenny Rogers. Even after awareness of his death becomes assumed to be complete, there'll still be references to him as the late, as a form of respect/deference. Exactly when such references finally peter out would be a good study for a sociology major. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:13, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some newspaper style guidelines advise to use "late" for a person who has died within the last year. For IRL use, "late" is good to let people know that the person in question is dead, if they might not know that--but only if the speaker was not intimate with the deceased. It would be absolutely awkward to refer to a husband, grandmother, or best friend as "the late," and the speaker would find other ways of making listeners aware that the person is no longer with us. Temerarius (talk) 23:04, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Singular of Bituriges

Apparently the Bituriges were a Celtic tribe in ancient history. However, the article only ever mentions "Bituriges" in the plural. What is the singular form? JIP | Talk 17:39, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The obvious hypothesis is "Biturix", but it may not be attested in ancient texts (my medium-sized Latin dictionary lists Bituriges as a plural word). Biturix is the name of a genus of moths... AnonMoos (talk) 17:52, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lucan's Pharsalia does indeed use "Biturix" (book 1, line 423). Adam Bishop (talk) 23:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May (or may not) be relevant, but our Asterix article says that 'The "-ix" ending... alludes to the "-rix" suffix (meaning "king") present in the names of many real Gaulish chieftains such as Vercingetorix, Orgetorix, and Dumnorix'. Alansplodge (talk) 20:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Latin had a word "rex" singular, "reges" plural (meaning "king") which Romans could easily understand as being closely parallel to the continental Celtic element which appears as "-rix" in (singular) names of individuals, and "-riges" in (plural) names of tribes. That's why I said Biturix was the obvious guess... AnonMoos (talk) 00:00, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]