In praise of... Latin binomials (1 Viewer)

[Richard Klim]

I think the whole science of binomial names has been devalued by the new name for Saunders's Gull.
Having English names that are translations of the scientific names is one thing but inventing a new genus and name by doing it the other way round seems daft.

But the genus/subgenus name Saundersilarus is surely just a transposition of the species's usual scientific name, Larus saundersi. I don't see that it is (necessarily) a translation of the English name. [Or have I misunderstood the point?]

Richard

 

[Daniel Philippe]

But the genus/subgenus name Saundersilarus is surely just a transposition of the species's usual scientific name, Larus saundersi. I don't see that it is (necessarily) a translation of the English name. [Or have I misunderstood the point?]

http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Auk/v043n02/p0228-p0228.pdf

 

[Richard Klim]

http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Auk/v043n02/p0228-p0228.pdf

Yes. Although the species had originally been named Chroicocephalus saundersi (Swinhoe, 1871), it had been reassigned to Larus saundersi (Saunders, 1878) by the time of Dwight's 1925/1926 proposals.

Ref. http://worldbirdinfo.net/Bird/tabid/55/bid/11987/Default.aspx

Richard

 

[Kratter]

The genera Wilsonia and Sayornis were not described for the species now included in them with the names Wilson's Warbler and Say's Phoebe, respectively.

The type species of the genus Sayornis is nigricans (genus described by Bonaparte in 1854 for nigricans by monotypy, even though saya had already been described.

The type species of Wilsonia is citrina (genus described by Bonaparte as well, in 1983; Ridgway designated the type species in 1881). By the way, Wilson's Warbler is Wilsonia pusilla and is probably not close to Wilsonia citrina according to Lovette et al., so look for it to move from Wilsonia.

Andy

 

[Gentoo]

The genera Wilsonia and Sayornis were not described for the species now included in them with the names Wilson's Warbler and Say's Phoebe, respectively.

The type species of the genus Sayornis is nigricans (genus described by Bonaparte in 1854 for nigricans by monotypy, even though saya had already been described.

The type species of Wilsonia is citrina (genus described by Bonaparte as well, in 1983; Ridgway designated the type species in 1881). By the way, Wilson's Warbler is Wilsonia pusilla and is probably not close to Wilsonia citrina according to Lovette et al., so look for it to move from Wilsonia.

Andy

Thanks for that info. I'm sure you may have meant 1893 rather than 1983

What about Serinus?

 

[colonelboris]

Well, I guess someone has to say it - they're not really latin binomials, as they incorporate several other languages, too.

 

[fugl]

Well, I guess someone has to say it - they're not really latin binomials, as they incorporate several other languages, too.

But, everything's supposed to be "latinized" is it not, regardless of the source language? If so, it seems to me that "latin binomial" is a perfectly reasonable way of indicating this (as indeed is "latin name"), "latinized" being something of a mouthful.

With regard to "Ba humbugi": the terminal "i" is appropriate for a made-up "latin" word like "ba", is it, can anyone tell me, or is it just there as a joke? If "Ba humbug" had been proposed (rather than B. humbugi) would it have been rejected by the nomenclatural powers-that-be as ungrammatical?

Just curious. As it happens, I'm totally ignorant of Latin grammar.

 

[Richard Klim]

With regard to "Ba humbugi": the terminal "i" is appropriate for a made-up "latin" word like "ba", is it, can anyone tell me, or is it just there as a joke? If "Ba humbug" had been proposed (rather than B. humbugi) would it have been rejected by the nomenclatural powers-that-be as ungrammatical?

Mark Isaak's website has lots more amusing scientific names - seems as if (almost) anything goes when naming a new species...

http://www.curioustaxonomy.net

I guess grammar is mainly an issue when using true Latin (or Greek-based) words, and when naming a new taxon within an existing genus (when the meaning and associated gender intended by the original author should presumably be respected where appropriate).

Richard

 

[Gentoo]

Well, I guess someone has to say it - they're not really latin binomials, as they incorporate several other languages, too.

I was going to say that but decided not to. The term Scientific name is preferred to Latin name.

 

[fugl]

Mark Isaak's website has lots more amusing scientific names - seems as if (almost) anything goes when naming a new species...

http://www.curioustaxonomy.net

I guess grammar is mainly an issue when using true Latin (or Greek-based) words, and when naming a new taxon within an existing genus (when the meaning and associated gender intended by the original author should presumably be respected where appropriate).

Richard

Many thanks for the URL--a very entertaining website. Also very informative. I was unaware that the naming conventions were so loose: as you say, just about anything seems to go as far as the non-Latin/Greek-based vocabulary is concerned. But, "latinized" or not, I think I'll continue to refer to the binomials as "Latin". Why not? It's traditional & everybody knows what's meant.