1

If I have a list of n items and I want to refer to the item that is just before the end of the list, do I say "first to last" or "second to last"?

For example:

  1. First item
  2. Second item

...

  1. 99th item
  2. 100th (and last) item

How do I properly refer to item 99. In my thinking, item 99 is not the last, it is the first to last. But other are telling me that the proper way to refer to item 99 is as the "second to last item".

Which is correct?

Janus Bahs Jacquet
  • 32,382
laughsloudly
  • 111

2 Answers2

5

"First to last" is incorrect.

"Second to last" is synonymous with "penultimate", and would be the correct way to refer to the 99th item in your list.

To understand the logic, think of it this way: in a race, if I come in second, I have come in second to the winner. In this way, way, the "second to last item" could be described as the item that "came in second to the item that came in last".

"First to last" does not make sense in this context. If anything, it would refer to the set that includes all items from the first item to the last item.

Nick2253
  • 4,506
1

The idiom "second to" is common in other contexts, which might make "second to last" easier to understand.

The word "second" is a synonym for runner-up. You can be "second best", "second smartest", "second to none" and so on. In the first case, it means better than everyone except the one person that is better than you.

Now "second to last" might make more sense. It means later than everyone except the one person who is later than you.

By the way, you can see how "first best" completely changes the meaning of the phrase. In addition to making it redundant.

Martin Krzywinski
  • 1,485