Talk:afterlife

RFV discussion: April–October 2012
Rfv-sense: "later life". Presumably meaning old age. Really? Sounds unlikely to me. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:03, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * It's real. Cited. I also stuck an archaic gloss on it, because I don't think it's used this way any more. Equinox ◑ 20:45, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Incidentally, I don't buy afterlife being a proper noun, as we claim. There can be afterlives (plural) and it isn't capitalised, and it just doesn't feel proper, like (say) Paris. Equinox ◑ 20:58, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Uncited. By the way, this sense is usually written as or . —Ruakh TALK 21:07, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The usage in the cites doesn't mean old age, it just means "later in life", or the part of life that came "after". It's really SOP, but with an odd way of using "after". Chuck Entz (talk) 00:49, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Re: "The usage in the cites doesn't mean old age": Keep in mind that Mglovesfun made his presumption before Equinox added the cites. Re: "It's really SOP": The term "SOP" doesn't apply to single-word forms. Sometimes we debate whether a given form is really a single word (is "yesterday's" a word, or is it the word "yesterday" plus a clitic "-'s"?), or whether a single-word form is really correct (is "hisown" a word, or is it just an error for "his own"?), but once we've accepted that a given form is a single word, and not an error, "SOP" simply doesn't apply. —Ruakh TALK 16:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * This appears in Moby-Dick, but as after life, not afterlife. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:29, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 20:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)