Anyone care to comment on the new splits and lumps, I’m afraid I can’t (be bothered) skim through the spreadsheets on my phone
Anyone care to comment on the new splits and lumps, I’m afraid I can’t (be bothered) skim through the spreadsheets on my phone
And changes to English names:
...
Carbonated Sierra-finch -> Carbon Sierra-finch
...
Out of curiosity, does 'carbon' make sense to a native English speaker?Presumably because the bird isn't fizzy after all?
Species added:
Amazilia alfaroana
Poicephalus fuscicollis
Species deleted:
Phyllastrephus leucolepis
Scientific names v9.1 vs current version:
Corcorax melanoramphos / Corcorax melanorhamphos
Icterus bullockii / Icterus bullockiorum
Myiothlypis mesoleucus / Myiothlypis mesoleuca
Pteroglossus beauharnaesii / Pteroglossus beauharnaisii
Ramphastos citrolaemus / Ramphastos citreolaemus
Out of curiosity, does 'carbon' make sense to a native English speaker?
(I have always interpreted 'carbonated' as meaning 'charcoaled', i.e., coloured as if blackened with charcoal. I'm not sure what I would understand from 'carbon sierra-finch' without knowing where it came from.)
Out of curiosity, does 'carbon' make sense to a native English speaker?
(I have always interpreted 'carbonated' as meaning 'charcoaled', i.e., coloured as if blackened with charcoal. I'm not sure what I would understand from 'carbon sierra-finch' without knowing where it came from.)
I sort of like it as well...This was the subject of an SACC proposal in 2008. The name is distinctive and I'm glad they left it alone, and I don't see why the word can't have more than one meaning.
Another issue about which I've found myself wondering a couple of times...Przewalski's Nuthatch -> Przevalski's Nuthatch
In English, 'carbonated' means with carbon dioxide added; see e.g. Carbonated water and Carbonation at wikipedia. So it is ridiculous nonsense as a bird name, as hinted in my post above :t:
I've never taken it to mean that. I've always assumed it was used in the context of blackened with soot ('carbonated'). I think it is a great name and the change to 'carbon' makes no greater sense.
cheers, alan
Wrongly, though - see the etymology given in the SACC proposal above, and also think of the colour of calcium carbonate (chalk). The word you're thinking of there is carbonised :t:
Another issue about which I've found myself wondering a couple of times...
'Przewalski' is the Polish spelling of the name that (if I understand the Polish Wikipedia correctly) his great-grand-father adopted; as such, I guess it may make some sense to use it. 'Przevalski', on the other hand, so far as I know, is not a spelling that he or any of his relatives ever used; neither does it seem to be a regular transliteration of the Russian spelling 'Пржева́льский' (which is what he used; Cyrillic ж is not normally transliterated into a simple z, because this would obliterate the distinction between the two letters ж and з). In English, the use of this spelling seems largely confined to bird names.
What is the source of this spelling?
Пржевальскій Н. 1876. Монголія и страна Тангутовъ: трехлѣтнее путешествіе въ восточной нагорной Азіи. Томъ II. Изданіе Императорскаго Русскаго Географическаго Овщкства, St.-Petersburg. [title page (w/ name in genitive)] [end of preface (w/ name in nominative)] [p. 127: Caccabis magna]Another twist on that: the IOC checklist has "Przevalski's Partridge" but its scientific name is Alectoris magna (Przewalski, 1876). Whereas H&M Fourth Edition has "Przevalski's Partridge" but its scientific name is Alectoris magna (Przevalski, 1876).
For pages related to the man, use "Przhevalsky".It's true that when you Google for "Przevalski" you mostly get bird-related pages. But when you Google for "Przewalski" you get almost uniformly horse-related pages -- of the first 100 pages I got, 99 of them were about the horse.
So there's a historical process at work there, and it's far from obvious how it came about.