Tell me more ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 2 down vote favorite

What is an adjective for something that is not first but either second, third, fourth, etc? We don't need to know what position it is at; the only thing that matters is that it's not the first one.

EDIT: After reading the comments/answers, I realized I didn't provide much context. Let's say I have a few words preceded by a prefix. The first prefix however is different than the others, so we say there are different prefixes for the first word and the XXX (later) words. What can we use for XXX?

share|improve this question
"LATER" ? I know "latter" means the second of TWO but there might be more than two in my case – dominicbri7 Jul 7 '11 at 15:10
3  
@Hi dominicbri7 and welcome to EL&U. No need to add thanks or your signature to your post - your user card is signature enough, and signatures are actually discouraged and edited out here on Stack Exchange sites since our questions and answers will hopefully be around for many future visitors :) – aedia λ Jul 7 '11 at 15:21
1  
would it be Losers ?? More seriously, it's a good question. What about simply "non-winners"? – Joe Blow Jul 7 '11 at 15:46
@Joe: that only applies when it's about a contest of some kind. First, second, third can also apply to a simple ordering (or elements in a list, for example). – Joachim Sauer Jul 7 '11 at 16:03
1  
@joach Quite right, JS. It's an interesting question, there needs to be an English word, something like, "Non-premier" .... – Joe Blow Jul 7 '11 at 17:42
show 2 more comments

3 Answers

up vote 4 down vote accepted

It very much depends on context.

In many/most contexts, anything that's "not first" is just subsequent, or later.

In OP's context, the best word might be other. It's hard to say.

share|improve this answer
I supplied more context in the OP. But indeed I think it would be later. – dominicbri7 Jul 7 '11 at 15:52
@dominicbri7: I've changed my answer, but I still don't really exactly understand your context. – FumbleFingers Jul 7 '11 at 15:58
That's because it is hard to explain, but later/other/subsequent all work I guess. – dominicbri7 Jul 7 '11 at 16:08
1  
@dominicbri7: I think subsequent is best suited to contexts where the complete actual sequence is significant, and later fits better if only the fact of one particular word coming first is relevant. If even the fact of one word coming first isn't important in and of itself, other is probably best. – FumbleFingers Jul 7 '11 at 16:13
up vote 8 down vote

Depending on context, you might consider subsequent.

His first book was good, but the subsequent ones were bad.

His first wife was old, but the subsequent ones were young.

share|improve this answer
up vote 0 down vote

The term perhaps most commonly used is "also ran." That denotes someone who is not a winner, whether they rank second, third, fourth, whatever.

In horse racing, first "wins," second "places," and third "shows."

share|improve this answer
1  
The term "also ran" usually means a horse who was not a win/place/show, so in that sense it means "fourth place or later", not "second or later". In general use it tends to mean "so far behind (or so mediocre, etc.) as to be insignificant", so it's perhaps not the best word for the OP's question. – psmears Jul 7 '11 at 16:36

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.