• 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.

Meaning of cis- and trans- (1 Viewer)

BayWren

Member
This question pertains to etymology perhaps only tangentially, and is more about current usage. But I wasn't sure what other forum would be most appropriate, so I'll try asking here. If there's a better place for this, just let me know.

I'm coming across the use of trans- and cis- as geographical prefixes, and I of course looked up the dictionary definitions of them. Seems simple enough. But I've also seen the terms trans-Andean and cis-Andean, and the usages there seem different from the dictionary use. For example, cis-Andean is used to mean "east of the Andes", but I would think that a definition consistent with the dictionary would be "on the same side of the Andes as the writer or speaker". Similarly, I am getting more acquainted with the epithet "cismontanus" and just trying to understand what that is really supposed to mean when used, say, as a subspecies moniker.

(Maybe it was true at some point that a biology writer would very likely only be on the east side of the Andes in South America...but not any more!)

So, are trans- and cis- applied consistently in the life sciences as meaning "west" or "east" of something respectively? Or is it arbitary?
 
cis- = before, trans- = behind.
In the case of the Andes, I'd assume that historically naturalists (or conquistadores?) came from the Atlantic side of South America, hence cis-Andean for them was this side.
 
Last edited:
So is the usage in regard to the Andes really the only occasion where cis- and trans- take on a more permanent or fixed sense? I recognize that it's not a terribly common prefix in any case. But I do rather like it.
 
Obviously cis and trans have other meanings in other contexts such as chemistry: cis is same side, trans on opposite sides of whatever structure is the divider.

That would effectively become the same outcome regarding Andes as Laurent gave, given that many of those who actually gave the names in the early days were sitting in Europe and had the specimen sent to them.

Niels
 
Which side is cis- and which is trans- depends on the point of view of the person/people who coined the word, rather than on that of the person who uses it. Usually, in any particular case, it will remain fixed once the word is in use.
Eg., Cisalpine Gaul was, from the point of view of Rome, the part of Gaul that lied before (hence, in this case, south of) the Alps; Transalpine Gaul was behind the mountains.
 
Not that different: cisalpine meaning on the same side as Rome, transalpine on the opposite side of the Alps.

Niels
 
cis- is from the Latin, meaning 'on this side', trans- meaning 'across, over or beyond'. Use in chemistry isn't vastly different from use as a geographic prefix, just different frames of reference :t: Cis- and trans- do have some limitations in chemistry where they are often replaced with a different nomenclature; Z(usammen) and E(ntgegen) from the German for 'together' and 'opposite'

cheers
martin
 
Hi everyone... I just asked the same in NEOONR a few days ago without noticing this thread here... here is the full email response list below... MAKE SURE YOU READ ANDRES CUERVO REPLY THAT BASICALLY NAILS IT DOWN... enjoy!

..........................................................................................

NEOORNERS,
it is traditional to use the term Cis-Andean for taxa distributed East of the Andes (Amazonian birds for example) and the term Trans-Andean for those distributed West of the Andes (Central American birds for example). Etymologically, CIS means "on this side of", while TRANS means "across, on the far side, beyond". So I am wondering WHY in biology (or at least ornithology as far as I know) we use those relative terms in such way... were they developed by scientist working on Cis-Andean areas establishing the EAST (of the Andes) as the reference point?
I have not been able to find any reference about it...
thanks for your input,
Diego.

..........................................................................................

My guess is that the use of these terms was probably co-opted from chemistry - where it refers to the molecular chirality (one of the few things I remember from organic chemistry!). I think they are convenient terms that are context dependent. I personally don’t have a problem with using them as long as the meaning is clear.

Jake

..........................................................................................

My guess, for what it’s worth, is simply that the terms were coined from the perspective of the European naturalists and collectors who were the first to be active in South America. Julius Caesar used the terms trans-alpine and cis-alpine to describe Europe outside the Roman Empire.

Cheers

Bill Porteous

..........................................................................................

For Haffer, cis-Andean was the Amazonian side. For Chapman, it was more often the "Pacific/Chocó/Central American" side. Presumably, the greater and more recent work of Haffer for lowland bird biogeography kind of fixed the current usage of cis-Andean for referring to the territory east of the range.

The usage is arbitrary, though, and likely stems from the *generalization* that the lowland avifauna on both sides of the Andes originated from Amazonia (Haffer's view point, perhaps)...

See the various paper by Haffer published in 1967, particularly this one (and a quote):

Haffer, J. (1967). Speciation in Colombian forest birds west of the Andes. American Museum Novitates; no. 2294. p. 1:
<<The tropical lowlands west of the Andes in Colombia and in Central America are designated in this paper as "trans-Andean" or "Pacific," and those east of the Andes as "cis-Andean" or "Amazonian." Geographically and historically (with respect to the evolution of the lowland bird faunas) this usage seems preferable to that of Chapman (1917, 1926) who sometimes referred to "cis-Andean" and "trans-Andean" in the opposite sense>>

Andres Cuervo

..........................................................................................

For what it's worth, my personal opinion about these terms has always been that it's unnecessary jargon. It doesn't really make sense given their definitions in organic chemistry, and it's liable to confuse readers (it continues to confuse me). It seems like it could just as well mean "distributed on only one side of the Andes" vs. "both sides." East of Andes/West of Andes seem a lot clearer to me. If you're wondering from a historical perspective, the answer by Andres is great, and clears things up for me too--thanks! But if you're wondering about it because you're thinking about using it, I vote don't do it.

Eliot Miller

..........................................................................................

Hi Diego, and all,

actually, Bill nailed it down when it comes to etymology. The origin of the terminology has its cause in the perspective of Europeans, predominating during the earlier periods of science, on the world. Cis-Andean = on this/"OUR" side of the Andes, trans-Andean = other side of the Andes. Look at how Portugal and Spain in the early 16th century (ruthlessly) "divided" Latin America between them. The Brazilian frontier roughly follows a circle with its centre in the Old World. Re cis-/trans-Andean, I cannot cite any reference I am afraid - but see below.

Another forum has discussed this as well, and has tentatively come to the same conclusion: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=274763.

Andres is probably right in that Haffer (European!) made the terminology known more widely. However, Haffer didn't invent it - there are plenty of species with epithets "cisandinus", "cisandina", "cisandinum" that are older than Haffer's first works. E.g., Synallaxis cisandina (Cranioleuca curtata cisandina) (Taczanowski, 1882) (Or should it be the other way round? Well, you know what I mean.) Older usages, I think, always use cis-Andean = east of the Andes, trans-Andean = west of the Andes. At some point, it begins to mix up. I suppose Chilean scientists, for example, didn't want to be looked at as being "on the other side". Or terms just began to be confused. At any rate, wherever you are, the things around you are "on your side"!

A different question is whether it seems recommendable to keep using those prefixes ... the historical reason for its origin fortunately is outdated ... but we shouldn't forget Latin terminology was once used as lingua franca (ha!) in science. Whether we want common English to replace it, is worth a discussion of its own.

Fun thread ...

Best wishes
Stefan Kreft

..........................................................................................
 
Here in France, Italians are often referred to as our cousins transalpins (the other side of the Alps from here), but the French name for Italian Sparrow is Moineau cisalpin. Apologies if this has been covered before.....
 
Here in France, Italians are often referred to as our cousins transalpins (the other side of the Alps from here), but the French name for Italian Sparrow is Moineau cisalpin. Apologies if this has been covered before.....

There are also cis-Caucasus and trans-Caucasus... The terms 'cis-' and 'trans-' are also used geographically in European botany, I believe, and nowadays appear as modifiers describing people who are intermediate in gender, to varying degrees.
MJB
 
I suppose Chilean scientists, for example, didn't want to be looked at as being "on the other side".
Interestingly, in Chile, the "historical" use of the terms indeed seems to have been the other way around; eg. Encina 1960 [pdf]:
1° CHILE HACIA 1810.​
Al finalizar la Colonia, el territorio chileno constaba de dos secciones, separadas por la Cordillera de los Andes: Chile occidental, o cisandino, que se extendía desde el desierto de Atacama, por le norte; el Océano Pacífico, por le poniente, y la Cordillera de los Andes, por le oriente, y Chile oriental, o transandino, que deslindaba con el Virreinato de Buenos Aires, por el norte, siguiendo una línea imaginaria trazada por orden del Rey por el geógrafo Cano y Olmedilla, y con el Atlántico, por el este, y remataba por el sur en el casquete polar correspondiente.
Note that this is absolutely unrelated to science. ;) The point of reference in this type of case was presumably typically the place from which the area was ruled/governed.
Of course most of the Chile transandino as described above is now (cisandean?) Argentina.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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