• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

God save me from changes!!!! (1 Viewer)

NaturePete said:
Yes, in fact it's Greenshank, Redshank and Yellowlegs, making Yellowlegs the odd one out, so it should be changed to Yellowshank ;)

The etymology of the word "Squaw" is very interesting, and is considered offensive not least of all because many incorrectly believe it to be derived from a native American word for vagina rather than young woman, a myth spread in America by people including Oprah Winfrey. However while this is completely wrong, it is considered offensive in the same sense as words such Negress and Jewess, that is words that are quite condesending and emphasise divisions between races and, even further, between females of different races, and have been used in ways that range from vaguely patronising to insulting over the years. Often people are only interested in the origins of words as validity for whether or not to use them or not and for their ability to offend, without considering the history of usage. I personally wouldn't use words such as Squaw or Negress because they say "I use a special word for your women, therefore I consider your women to be inherently different to my women to justify a different noun", which is an offensive attitude, even if the word isn't inherently so.

Also, names such as Oldsquaw mean bugger all over here in Europe ;)

As for Niger Seeds this seems more like people getting a bee in their bonnet over nothing (the countries of Niger and Nigeria seem quite happy in their spellings), and seems the same sort of logic that can sack a public official for using the word "niggardly", which has absolutely no connection with any offensive term at all (according to Wikipedia, derived from the Old Norse verb nigla, meaning "to fuss about small matters").
Thank you very much for that explanation. I had a feeling there may have been more of a reason for the AUO changing it to Long-Tailed Duck. I will remember not to use Oldsquaw especially when talking to a European.
 
Coming back to what I said in an earlier post (about causing confusion for potential birders/birdwatchers), can you imagine what a very enthusiastic but novice birdwatcher who has just bought his first fieldguide would make of all this semantic c**p?

Colin
 
Bird names are also used in scientific journals and papers etc. It's very sensible to have standardised names. It's not semantic crap to people who have to work with these sorts of things.

Although i've edited papers and used standard terminology when doing so (OBC taxonomy for Oriental birds for instance) I don't use the same terminology on here or in the field. And you don't have too either of course.

Why this bothers people so much mystifies me
 
Tim Allwood said:
A Bird names are also used in scientific journals and papers etc. B It's very sensible to have standardised names. C It's not semantic crap to people who have to work with these sorts of things.

Although i've edited papers and used standard terminology when doing so (OBC taxonomy for Oriental birds for instance) I don't use the same terminology on here or in the field. And you don't have too either of course.

Why this bothers people so much mystifies me

A Sheer arrogance

B Thats the whole point of this thread - we don't

C People who "work with these sort of things" are in the minority - my concern is for the people who just want to enjoy the hobby.

You obviously don't lower yourself to talk to ordinairy birdwatchers/birders or you would understand why this "bothers people".

Colin
 
Xenospiza said:
Come on, is just knowing two English names to much to ask? My goodness...

For a lot of people yes it is, and when they consult field guides which a) have conflicting nomenclature, and b) don't explain why the names are different, it can and does cause a lot of confusion.

I am a scientist and an academic, you and Tim might also be, but very, very few "hobbyist" birdwatchers are.

I think that you are ensconced in an ivory tower far away from reality and the perceptions and abilities of ordinary people

Colin
 
when they consult field guides which a) have conflicting nomenclature, and b) don't explain why the names are different, it can and does cause a lot of confusion.
Good point here. I think this in large degree is what I was trying to say.
 
And while we're talking about offensive, I've been told the word "oriental" is offensive to some, as it indicates position relative to Europe (the former colonial masters). Asian is the preferred term. That said, AFAIC, some people are being just a bit too sensitive.

And back on topic, I'll offer a compromise. How about we change the name of Lapland Longspur to Arctic Bunting. It keeps the bunting "consistency" preferred by some, but takes away the Eurocentric name which seems out of place in N. America.
 
Jeff hopkins said:
And while we're talking about offensive, I've been told the word "oriental" is offensive to some, as it indicates position relative to Europe (the former colonial masters). Asian is the preferred term. That said, AFAIC, some people are being just a bit too sensitive.

And back on topic, I'll offer a compromise. How about we change the name of Lapland Longspur to Arctic Bunting. It keeps the bunting "consistency" preferred by some, but takes away the Eurocentric name which seems out of place in N. America.

Compromise vetoed! :D

The title 'longspur' must stay - that was my and Gentoo's (and probably others' I'm forgetting it was so many pages ago) point. The birds that belong to the genus Calcarius are unique among Emberizine buntings and sparrows. All other Calcarius birds are 'longspurs' - there's no reason that just because Laplands fancy Europe as well as North America that they should loose their rightful name!
 
Alex, you make me die!! Rightful name? How about whomsoever can prove the original name i.e. which came 1st, calls it on Lapland Bunting or 'longspur'?

President of what exactly?

Just a shorty for Tim. I also work with these things and believe me it feels like semantic crap to me at times!! However, I wouldn't go so far as calling you on this and have enjoyed your contributions here and elsewhere. Good lad Tim.
 
Black Wheatear said:
Alex, you make me die!! Rightful name? How about whomsoever can prove the original name i.e. which came 1st, calls it on Lapland Bunting or 'longspur'?

President of what exactly?

Just a shorty for Tim. I also work with these things and believe me it feels like semantic crap to me at times!! However, I wouldn't go so far as calling you on this and have enjoyed your contributions here and elsewhere. Good lad Tim.
To answer your question, president of anything you wish. He actually makes sense! It was just a joke.
 
Last edited:
Gentoo said:
He actually makes sense!

Whose language is it anyhow? Give you a clue - ever thought why the two words 'English' and 'England' have certain similarities ...see, problem solved, it is our language, our names rule okay. If our American friends wish to use our language, we allow you to do so, but don't then go messing with it! Sort out your grammar oddities too ...and your spelling!
 
Jos Stratford said:
Whose language is it anyhow? Give you a clue - ever thought why the two words 'English' and 'England' have certain similarities ...see, problem solved, it is our language, our names rule okay. If our American friends wish to use our language, we allow you to do so, but don't then go messing with it! Sort out your grammar oddities too ...and your spelling!

Once true - the tongue of the Aingles. No longer true as it is now a "lingua franca". Even in taxonomic lists there is now the tendency to alter some of the spelling to most current usage in geographical zones. For example, where the Aingles use words having the desinance -our in compound words in English Common Names of birds, now when these birds occur in the so-called New World they are being changed with the elision of the "u". Cf. colour/color. I suppose this may rankle the feathers of some, but it is a fact of life, and it should be a cause of pridefulness for the English that their idiom has been deemed so important as to assume the status of lingua franca.
 
cuckooroller said:
Once true - the tongue of the Aingles. No longer true as it is now a "lingua franca".

So our language is popular, still ours - borrow and respect


cuckooroller said:
there is now the tendency to alter some of the spelling to most current usage in geographical zones.

Akin to reading the tabloid gutter press rather than a quality broadsheet


cuckooroller said:
when these birds occur in the so-called New World they are being changed with the elision of the "u". Cf. colour/color.

Amazing, they can build a nuclear reactor, can send someone to the moon, but still have yet to master elementary spelling
 
Jos Stratford said:
Whose language is it anyhow? Give you a clue - ever thought why the two words 'English' and 'England' have certain similarities ...see, problem solved, it is our language, our names rule okay. If our American friends wish to use our language, we allow you to do so, but don't then go messing with it! Sort out your grammar oddities too ...and your spelling!

I like this - very good, and very true. I am probably going to upset a lot of our transatlantic friends by saying that I personally feel that that North Americans have "screwed up" the English language something rotten. I do not understand what is being said on American television or in American films and would not wish this sort of linguistic slop to carry over into quasi-scientific pursuits like birding.

I am a member of the POTN forum and, quite honestly, cannot understand many of the posts submitted there.

But, don't take it too seriously: who loves ya baby?

Colin
:brains:
 
Compromise vetoed!

The title 'longspur' must stay - that was my and Gentoo's (and probably others' I'm forgetting it was so many pages ago) point. The birds that belong to the genus Calcarius are unique among Emberizine buntings and sparrows. All other Calcarius birds are 'longspurs' - there's no reason that just because Laplands fancy Europe as well as North America that they should loose their rightful name!
__________________
--Alex

Absolutely fine, you carry on calling them Longspurs, I'm all in favour of that. Just so long as nobody suggests we have to start calling them that too because that's what you call them. Surely anyone with the mental faculty to identify them in the field can also identify them in the literature from the opposite side of the Atlantic without too much difficulty. Let everyone keep the common names they're familiar with. Birding is meant to be a hobby and thus a source of enjoyment not aggravation.
Vive le difference!
 
Black Wheatear said:
Rightful name? How about whomsoever can prove the original name i.e. which came 1st, calls it on Lapland Bunting or 'longspur'?

I don't see how just because it's the original name that it is correct. It doesn't seem to matter though because this thread seems to have drifted away from name changes to this:


Jos Stratford said:
Amazing, they can build a nuclear reactor, can send someone to the moon, but still have yet to master elementary spelling
 
Hey, this shouldn't be a 'they' and 'us' thing, however emotive a subject it is. . . but . .

To clarify (and probably promote diviseness along the way?!):-

Fact 1: US common bird names have contained a 'European, Common or Northern' type component for longer than British equivalents.

Fact 2: US birders 'seem' to be more accepting of name changes and the 'need' for them (sample size- about 2!!)

Fact 3. No European birders are for changing the US names to British ones (eg Longspur to Bunting, surely??) AS mentioned, most who get to the stage of seeing or discussing the birds on both side of the pond will be able to cope with the different names, especially as we have the latin binomial for preciseness.

Q1- are some of the recent name changes we are discussing directly a result of US intervention?

Q2- why are we getting so wound up on this?
 
overworkedirish said:
The title 'longspur' must stay - that was my and Gentoo's (and probably others' I'm forgetting it was so many pages ago) point. The birds that belong to the genus Calcarius are unique among Emberizine buntings and sparrows. All other Calcarius birds are 'longspurs' - there's no reason that just because Laplands fancy Europe as well as North America that they should loose their rightful name!

And so to continue, with this argument. . . ;)

All genera are 'unique' within their family, that's kind of why they get to have their own genus name. . . Obvious really.

Take Storm-Petrels. 3 Genera in the US, 4 in Europe. All are Storm-Petrel. Problem?

EDIT: Or geese, several genera. Still 'Goose'. . . blah blah blah . . .starting to bore myself even now . . . .
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 17 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top