Why are common names of birds capitalized? (1 Viewer)

[PaulD]

One reason why I much prefer to see bird names capitalized is because it is so much easier to skim through an article and find a mention of say Little Owl when it is written as Little Owl rather than little owl.

Years ago there was a piece in the RSPB's magazine explaining and defending their policy of not using capital letters for common names. They claimed that any confusion it caused was only temporary, which rather begged the question of why continue with a practice that causes confusion.

Capitalizing common names makes for easier reading and less confusion, so I really don't care if it's grammatically wrong as most people use it and language evolves to reflect common useage.

 

[Larry Lade]

I believe that it does make sense when a person is addressing a global audience to make the bird's identification as meaningful as possible.

For instance, when a person refers to a bird as a wren we all assume that, if the species were seen in Europe, it would be a Troglodytes troglodytes. But in the states we would need to be more specific, as there are not only winter wrens here, but also "summer" wrens. There are the New Zealand wrens (the Acanthisittidae family). In other countries there is a plethora (several pages of them in my Clement's Checklist) of different wrens. To avoid confusion the person who is writing (speaking) the name of bird should help the reader (hearer) understand (as much as possible) the species he/she is referring to.

* The IOU (July 2010)/AOU/ABA has muddied the water somewhat with their recent rendering of the Winter Wren into the Winter Wren, Troglodytes troglodytes (Eurasian) [state-side we call it "Eurasian Wren"], "our" Winter Wren, Troglodytes hiemalis (aka. now as "(eastern) Winter Wren", but we still call it Winter Wren) and the "western Winter Wren" or Pacific Wren, Troglodytes pacificus.

** So, maybe this is not a good example of how to avoid confusion!

 

[jc122463]

Just to add to the confusion a bit more, is there a general rule for pluralizing species? (Or a general rule for using words like pluralizing?) For example, I would say a flock of Common Tern if that were the only species involved, but a flock of common terns if there were multiple species - sort of like fish vs. fishes. Another example (avoiding the issue of capitalization) might be a group of four Chestnut-bellied Sandgrouse but groups of Yellow-throated, Chestnut-bellied, and Black-faced Sandgrouses. Any thoughts?

Cheers,
Benji

 

[robinm]

It's a difficult one but personally I would never pluralise (sic ) grouse.

Perhaps the plural of grouse should be grice

 

[Larry Lade]

It seems to me that with common names for birds (speaking of two words for the species), the first is almost always descriptive (color, location, person's name, eared, crowned, throated, winged, necked, tailed, etc.) and the second is type of bird (woodpecker, hummingbird, flycatcher, crane, etc.).

* I believe that the hyphens are helpful to avoid confusion. For example, the case of owls. * Some of these are represented by additional species, as an example see Barn Owl below.

Owls:
Barn Owl (Minahassa Barn Owl, New Britian Barn Owl, Common Barn Owl and Hispaniolan Barn Owl)
Great Horned Owl
Snowy Owl
Spotted Owl
Barred Owl
Chaco Owl
Ural Owl
Great Gray Owl
Mottled Owl
Black-and-white Owl
Black-banded Owl
Rufous-banded Owl
Maned Owl
Crested Owl
Spectacled Owl
Long-eared Owl, (otus, abyssinicus and madagascariensis)
Short-eared Owl
Fearful Owl

Other types of owls (* some sources use hyphens and some do not):
Sooty-Owls
Masked-Owls
Grass-Owls
Bay-Owls
Scops-Owls
Screech-Owls
Horned-Owls
Eagle-Owls
Fish-Owls
Wood-Owls
Pygmy-Owls
Hawk-Owls

 

[fugl]

Just to add to the confusion a bit more, is there a general rule for pluralizing species?
Benji

Oh no, not that can of worm (worms?) again!

 

[redeyedvideo]

Why?

The apostrophe denotes the genitive, not the plural.

Cap, short for capital. Bits of a word missing is usually denoted by ' as in won't.

It's a difficult one but personally I would never pluralise (sic ) grouse.

Perhaps the plural of grouse should be grice

Isn't that how the oity-toity pronounce it? :king:

 

[fugl]

Cap, short for capital. Bits of a word missing is usually denoted by ' as in won't.

For contractions yes, but not when the missing bit is at the end of a word.

 

[SteveO43]

Except perhaps for comin' and goin'?

 

[halftwo]

I very much agree with what you are saying about scientific names, they have to be precise and follow rules because then the english names do not.

Last thing on hyphens for me since the thread is about capitals:

I personally interpret Yellow crowned night heron completely differently to Crowned yellow night heron.

I would never mistake a Black headed gull for a Headed black gull by sheer common sense and however pedantic you want to be about it I doubt I am alone.

Trystan,

If you read and understand what others have said you will see that hyphens and their placings are essential to interpret the name, as for complex adjectival phrases.

For example, a "coal-black cloud" is nothing like a "coal black-cloud" - the first makes perfect sense, the second little.

Or: "a picture-perfect scene", etc, etc.

These hyphens need to be there and in the correct places, just as in part-descriptive bird names. (Note: NOT "part descriptive bird names".)

Do you see?

Anyway - as to capitalization...I (almost uniquely) prefer to capitalize the first name only - for reasons already outlined - and, to my eyes at least, the other words don't need them.

H

 

[joespy]

It's a difficult one but personally I would never pluralise (sic ) grouse.

Perhaps the plural of grouse should be grice

Following on from that then the plural of House would be ...Hice.....:-O

Joe
PS.....note the use of capitals on Proper nouns ......

 

[MJB]

IOC on worldbirdnames have very clear explanations of why they use, or don't use hyphens, and of when capitals do, or do not apply after hyphens. Another case of, 'If all else fails, read the instructions'?
MJB

 

[Cleme]

Cap, short for capital. Bits of a word missing is usually denoted by 'as in won't.

I was being lazy and should've written 'capitals' in full. There's enough confusion over apostrophe use as it is (and we all make mistakes, of course).

Personally if I was writing, 'caps' or 'No, probs', in an email I wouldn't think it needed an apostrophe to signify the missing bit but fashions do change. When I started work I was encouraged to write 'phone rather than phone (as in "call someone" but that was back in 1980 and I doubt anyone bothers with that 'pos these days. Damn. Lazy again - and should it be pos or 'pos'? Does anyone care anyway?

Anyway, I'm still thrilled with seeing my first Dartford warbler on Saturday and if you want to refer to it a Dartford Warbler that won't bother me one little bit!

 

[David FG]

I was being lazy and should've written 'capitals' in full. There's enough confusion over apostrophe use as it is (and we all make mistakes, of course).

Personally if I was writing, 'caps' or 'No, probs', in an email I wouldn't think it needed an apostrophe to signify the missing bit but fashions do change. When I started work I was encouraged to write 'phone rather than phone (as in "call someone" but that was back in 1980 and I doubt anyone bothers with that 'pos these days. Damn. Lazy again - and should it be pos or 'pos'? Does anyone care anyway?

Anyway, I'm still thrilled with seeing my first Dartford warbler on Saturday and if you want to refer to it a Dartford Warbler that won't bother me one little bit!

Stick to your guns, you were right. The OED (who might be expected to know a thing or two about such matters) gives 'caps' with no apostrophe, as here, which is a quotation from the online version:

caps, n.

Printers' abbreviation of capitals, capital letters.

1849 Thackeray Pendennis (1850) I. xxxiii. 322 We'll have that in large caps., Bungay, my boy.

1856 ‘G. Eliot’ in Westm. Rev. 10 450 That particular view of Christianity which‥condenses itself into a sentence of small caps.

1960 K. Hopkins Dead against Princ. ii. 15 ‘Original designs TATTOOED’—large caps, Manciple.

 

[MJB]

Stick to your guns, you were right. The OED (who might be expected to know a thing or two about such matters) gives 'caps' with no apostrophe, as here, which is a quotation from the online version:

caps, n.

Printers' abbreviation of capitals, capital letters.

1849 Thackeray Pendennis (1850) I. xxxiii. 322 We'll have that in large caps., Bungay, my boy.

1856 ‘G. Eliot’ in Westm. Rev. 10 450 That particular view of Christianity which‥condenses itself into a sentence of small caps.

1960 K. Hopkins Dead against Princ. ii. 15 ‘Original designs TATTOOED’—large caps, Manciple.

I think the OED should recruit you:-O:-O
MJB

 

[chris butterworth]

Following on from that then the plural of House would be ...Hice....

Isn't it??????? I was listening to some inbreds in London the other month, and they were going on about "Hice prices" There again they were also saying things like " How could one live with a brine Jaaaaaaaag?"

Chris

 

[Snapdragyn]

Anyway, I'm still thrilled with seeing my first Dartford warbler on Saturday....

Nice - & what species of warbler did you see while you were in Dartford?

 

[Cleme]

Nice - & what species of warbler did you see while you were in Dartford?

Thanks. Well, thank goodness I've never been to Dartford. Dartmouth, yes...

 

[Acrocephalus]

To Capitalize, or Not to Capitalize

Julie Hammonds, associate editor of Arizona's wildlife magazine wrote in his blog words4wildlife:

“Some people who write articles for Arizona Wildlife Views, particularly ornithologists, capitalize the common names of species, and are shocked (shocked!) when I correct those names to lowercase”. He thinks also that capitalization look old-fashioned.

I am not a native speaker, but I like the capitalization, it makes things much easier to understand.

But why only birds are concerned with this and not other animals and flora? Are birders have something to do with this?

 

[Richard Klim]

I am not a native speaker, but I like the capitalization, it makes things much easier to understand.

But why only birds are concerned with this and not other animals and flora? Are birders have something to do with this?

Given the much greater amateur following compared with other orders, and a manageable total number of species (c10K), it's both feasible and desirable to define (with varying degrees of success!) standardised English common names for all the bird species of the world. In practice, many authors of ornithological literature in English therefore tend to treat the common names of birds with almost as much care and formality as the scientific names, and I suspect that capitalisation has been widely adopted to indicate that such names represent unique and authoritative (?!) identifiers, rather than casual vernacular descriptors.

I doubt that the same degree of standardisation or completeness has been achieved for most other orders, where common names (if any) are often rather informal and the scientific name is therefore much more important when referring to a particular species.

PS. Nevertheless, I think it's reasonable and sensible that general (non-ornithological/birding) publications should use non-capitalised common names for biological species.