-
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.
Are bird names supposed to be written in capital letters? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Joe.S
- Start date
dantheman
Bah humbug
redeyedvideo
It's like water off a duck's back!
I feel more confusion arises if you don't use capitals e.g. little gull could be any small gull, Little Gull describes the species. I get a touch annoyed when reading RSPB magazines with their insistence in using lower case.
Their editors & blog writers get confused too, I've seen Pomarine Skua typed with both small p and large P, and Montagu's Harrier spelt in lower case which is just plain wrong. :-@
Their editors & blog writers get confused too, I've seen Pomarine Skua typed with both small p and large P, and Montagu's Harrier spelt in lower case which is just plain wrong. :-@
Bob Philpott
Well-known member
Right from an early age I was told that grammatically lower case is correct. Apart from when there is a proper name etc (Canada goose). But I have given up the argument a long time ago and just go with the majority and use Capitals.
Last edited:
Helenelizabeth2
What?!?
The Guardian Style Guide, who is my guru in these matters says lower case. https://mobile.twitter.com/guardianstyle/status/65740870946795520
Now that I know that, I've got 8 years of post-editing to do.
Now that I know that, I've got 8 years of post-editing to do.
redeyedvideo
It's like water off a duck's back!
The Guardian Style Guide, who is my guru in these matters says lower case. https://mobile.twitter.com/guardianstyle/status/65740870946795520
Now that I know that, I've got 8 years of post-editing to do.
Hello stranger, welcome back x
Helenelizabeth2
What?!?
Of course, when I supported lower case, I wasn't promoting the non-use of capitals for titles like user names. I'm sure the GSG would be appalled
.(Hi, you. Hope life's going well?)
Nutcracker
Stop Brexit!
To the question as asked: it doesn't matter hugely.
1. Almost no-one writes them fully in capitals (i.e., with caps lock on): CANADA GOOSE
2. The great majority put the first letter in capitals: Canada Goose
3. A few, including, sadly, wikipedia now, take an utterly stupid attitude that you need to research the etymology of the name before deciding whether to use capitals or not: white-fronted goose, Canada goose - thus creating two classes of birds, Capital birds and lower-case birds, which need to be indexed separately in lists (and probably have separate evolutionary origin).
4. If they were sensible and wanted to use lower case, they'd be consistent about it: canada goose, white-fronted goose.
Personally, I stick with #2 most of the time, including birdforum posts, but #4 if I'm just doing a mobile phone text.
1. Almost no-one writes them fully in capitals (i.e., with caps lock on): CANADA GOOSE
2. The great majority put the first letter in capitals: Canada Goose
3. A few, including, sadly, wikipedia now, take an utterly stupid attitude that you need to research the etymology of the name before deciding whether to use capitals or not: white-fronted goose, Canada goose - thus creating two classes of birds, Capital birds and lower-case birds, which need to be indexed separately in lists (and probably have separate evolutionary origin).
4. If they were sensible and wanted to use lower case, they'd be consistent about it: canada goose, white-fronted goose.
Personally, I stick with #2 most of the time, including birdforum posts, but #4 if I'm just doing a mobile phone text.
Last edited:
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Of all biological classes, Aves/birds have by far the greatest popular recreational following, with a very large amateur birding community typically averse to using nasty, unpronouncable scientific names. Consequently, over many years, there have been continued efforts to establish 'formalised' English names for avian species as a more user-friendly alternative to scientific names (commonly using leading capitals to denote this 'quasi-official' status). This has been far less prevalent in other classes, where English names (where they exist at all) tend to be regarded as less formal (vernacular) names.
I think the best approach is to restrict the use of capitalised common names to specialist birding literature and communications. It's unreasonable to expect bird names to be given such exceptionally elevated status in non-specialist literature, where lower case is better used for conformity with standard practice.
I think the best approach is to restrict the use of capitalised common names to specialist birding literature and communications. It's unreasonable to expect bird names to be given such exceptionally elevated status in non-specialist literature, where lower case is better used for conformity with standard practice.
Nutcracker
Stop Brexit!
BSBI capitalise the standard list of plant names: http://www.bsbi.org.uk/LIST2007.xlsx
OK, provided they're consistent with no favouritism! (i.e., white-fronted goose, canada goose, lady amherst's pheasant).
Richard Klim
-------------------------
But is there a standard world list of plant names, or is this just a local (British) initiative?
I prefer to retain leading capitals for proper names within bird names, perhaps contra the Grauniad - which I generally follow as a style guide, although I try to make fewer spelling mistakes...
Nutcracker
Stop Brexit!
UK / European Union
Can you demonstrate that they form two monophyletic groups? If yes, then fine :t:
By "amateur birding community" I take it you mean competitive listers among whom keeping ticks straight is a high priority? A "little tern" isn't necessarily "countable" after all while a "Little Tern" most certainly is. Bird watchers/lovers in general I should think would have no more interest in capitalization and standardized names than such other large and passionate hobbyist groups as anglers or gardeners. The question then becomes why a comparatively small number of twitchers should have gotten their way to the extent that they have. ??
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Well, I'm not sure it's fair to blame it on competitive listers. Much/most English-language general birdwatching literature studiously avoids using scientific names, instead relying on English names as supposedly equally-definitive identifiers (despite the continued failure of attempts to standardise, with no imminent prospect of consensus between the four major world checklists). With few exceptions (eg, RSPB), leading capitals have been adopted for common names, presumably to emphasise their de facto use as proxies for scientific names.
Last edited:
Well, yes, but why just birds if not largely because of the "twitching" interest?
Farnboro John
Well-known member
You forgot to mention the tradition of very large numbers of British birdwatchers of all ages and abilities participating as amateurs in contributing to ornithological science at many levels, viz Big Garden Birdwatch, WeBS, various BTO surveys, ringing, rarity reporting, local patching etc.... people mostly use checklists provided by the parent organisations: guess how they express bird names? Indeed, take a look at the official British List:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ibi.12069/full
Twitchers follow official nomenclature.
Plus we don't think naff four letter codes do justice to the birds.
And I will fight anyone who thinks a species name isn't a proper noun, any more or less than Spitfire or Concorde or Mustang or Phantom.
John
I had never looked at the BOU list before so thanks for the link. Good to see the local names retaining precedence over the abominable IOC versions.
