Talk:& cetera

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

& cetera

Isn’t this just a typographic difference? --Æ&Œ (talk) 00:53, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't know. I've seen it written this way before, but I always pronounce it and cetera in my head. It's not that obvious to me that & is to be read as "et" here, nor is it obvious that "et" means "and". Our entry & doesn't give any explanation either, and I don't know whether it should, as & is only "et" in this collocation. Leaning keep. —CodeCat 01:08, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Keep. It is exactly what it says on the tin, an alternative spelling which is, I think, as idiomatic as the lemmatised spelling (et cetera). It also almost certainly meets COALMINE, for what that's worth. - -sche (discuss) 01:29, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

O.K., well, for what it is worth, this locution also exists in French, where the Latin conjunction is perfectly conserved except in pronunciation, but is also considerably more obvious. Should a French section for this be created? --Æ&Œ (talk) 01:32, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

• Comment. I'm not convinced of the etymology given in the entry (Modification of {{etyl|la|en}} phrase {{term|et cetera||and others|lang=la}} based on the origin of the {{l|en|ampersand}}.). Specifically, that etymology seems to presume (1) that & cetera originated in English, (2) that the ampersand was already always pronounced like “and”, and (3) that the ampersand's origin in Latin “et” was strictly of etymological interest. And perhaps even (4) that & cetera is pronounced “and cetera”. But I'm certain that #1 is wrong (b.g.c. mostly turns up uses in printings of Latin texts — going back at least as far as the mid-sixteenth century), I suspect that #2 is wrong, #3 sounds like obvious pseudo-etymological B.S. (which doesn't necessarily mean that it's wrong — sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction — but the claim definitely requires a source, at least), and #4 may be true today, but if so I imagine it's just because this spelling has fallen into disuse and come to be mispronounced. —Ruakh_TALK 02:28, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Etymology deleted. --Æ&Œ (talk) 05:03, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

• Keep: Yes, it's just a typographic difference. No, that isn't a reason for deletion. It's just like words that use an "E" instead of an "Æ" or an "Œ" Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 01:22, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Kept. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:32, 11 March 2013 (UTC)