Latest IOC Diary Updates (16 Viewers)

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Not to mention the other non-parulid warblers that are also not "warblers"

Changes can take a long time, but it's not impossible. Impossible is not a real word

 

[TomDerutter]

Not to mention taxonomic instability.
for example, Change hyphenated group-names within the genera Pseudotriccus, Euscarthmus, Myiornis, Lophotriccus, Oncostoma, Atalotriccus, and Hemitriccus wasn't even accepted yet, and already outdated by new info... (it's withdrawn for now)

 

[Joseph Anthony]

This is what I said to a member of my facebook group (in a French context of course): ''French (but can be applied for English) ornithological vocabulary is rich with a long linguistic history, but the names used are suitables for species living in our country, but are not necessarily adapted for species living in other regions around the world [...] ''A name should be restricted to the species for which that name was originally given, and for the related species belonging to the same family or subfamily, or genus, as well.''

Many birds share the same behavior or the same morphology, is this sufficient reason to give them the same name or morphonym?

Besides, how does it work for the Germans, the Spaniards, the Japanese or the Italians?

The same is true in all languages.
Look what happens with the family Tinamidae. There are 9 genera and 46 species. However, only two names for all species in the family, Tinamou and Nothura. But the funny thing about it is that in the Ibero-American countries I have been able to count more than 25 names, all refreshing and beautiful, ready to baptize at least each of the genres: chocora, gongolona, tao, macuco, yerre, poncha, inambu, sururina , soisola, cariyo, guaita, quiula and a long etcetera, almost to name each species individually.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

The same is true in all languages.
Look what happens with the family Tinamidae. There are 9 genera and 46 species. However, only two names for all species in the family, Tinamou and Nothura. But the funny thing about it is that in the Ibero-American countries I have been able to count more than 25 names, all refreshing and beautiful, ready to baptize at least each of the genres: chocora, gongolona, tao, macuco, yerre, poncha, inambu, sururina , soisola, cariyo, guaita, quiula and a long etcetera, almost to name each species individually.

This is why we should not be afraid to borrow exotic names to name exotic species even if it means abandoning authentic English or French (or other language) terms.

Besides, you can make new names from authentic English words, just like you did for ''Cupwing'' (Pnoepygidae).

Common nomenclature remains scientific communication anyway, so whatever the origin of the names introduced in the nomenclatures. it will not impoverish the ornithological vocabulary, on the contrary and whatever the language.

In the French nomenclature, many names are fairly old authentic French words, others are borrowed from foreign languages, or they come from scientific Latin (and there are many) or are derived from other common names. Others were purely and simply created from scratch because, until recently (70s, 80s), many species did not have a French name at all. E.g., the name ''Ouette'' (genera Chloephaga and Alopochen) didn't exist at all. It seems to me that it was created in the 70s by Pierre Devillers from the word ''Oie'' (genus Anser) with a diminutive suffix to designate small species similar to genus Branta (which is named ''Bernache''). French nomenclature follows scientific classification and is based on binomial system (a French generic following by French specific).

 

[Mysticete]

Not to mention taxonomic instability.
for example, Change hyphenated group-names within the genera Pseudotriccus, Euscarthmus, Myiornis, Lophotriccus, Oncostoma, Atalotriccus, and Hemitriccus wasn't even accepted yet, and already outdated by new info... (it's withdrawn for now)

More an argument that SACC/NACC's obsession with hyphens is insane...

 

[Andy Adcock]

This is why we should not be afraid to borrow exotic names to name exotic species even if it means abandoning authentic English or French (or other language) terms.

Besides, you can make new names from authentic English words, just like you did for ''Cupwing'' (Pnoepygidae).

Common nomenclature remains scientific communication anyway, so whatever the origin of the names introduced in the nomenclatures. it will not impoverish the ornithological vocabulary, on the contrary and whatever the language.

In the French nomenclature, many names are fairly old authentic French words, others are borrowed from foreign languages, or they come from scientific Latin (and there are many) or are derived from other common names. Others were purely and simply created from scratch because, until recently (70s, 80s), many species did not have a French name at all. E.g., the name ''Ouette'' (genera Chloephaga and Alopochen) didn't exist at all. It seems to me that it was created in the 70s by Pierre Devillers from the word ''Oie'' (genus Anser) with a diminutive suffix to designate small species similar to genus Branta (which is named ''Bernache''). French nomenclature follows scientific classification and is based on binomial system (a French generic following by French specific).

This is English language list, 'Cupwing' although new to most, are English words and I believe, though I could be wrong, that it has been used historically?

I've said previously, if you want to cut out the arguments over names, simply drop the 'English' from the title of the list.

 

[Acanthis]

Not to mention taxonomic instability.
for example, Change hyphenated group-names within the genera Pseudotriccus, Euscarthmus, Myiornis, Lophotriccus, Oncostoma, Atalotriccus, and Hemitriccus wasn't even accepted yet, and already outdated by new info... (it's withdrawn for now)

I've just been enjoying these in John Boyd's TiF reorganisation of Triccinae, and comparing it with the well-shuffled illustrations in ICBW.
Other than the bentbills I don't think at any point I used the English names, instead becoming familiar with them through the generic names.
Most of the English names are profoundly forgettable.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

This is English language list, 'Cupwing' although new to most, are English words and I believe, though I could be wrong, that it has been used historically?

Can anyone tell if Cupwing is a recent creation?

I've said previously, if you want to cut out the arguments over names, simply drop the 'English' from the title of the list.

this is why I specify English, French or other languages because it is very likely that this kind of debate exists in many countries

 

[Andy Adcock]

Can anyone tell if Cupwing is a recent creation?

As I said, I think, it has been used historically, JAE will tell you.

 

[Acanthis]

Can anyone tell if Cupwing is a recent creation?

this is why I specify English, French or other languages because it is very likely that this kind of debate exists in many countries

Ahem!

More Babbler shuffling!

Just a wee 'heads-up' regarding a new paper dealing with the Babblers. Included are the recommendation for the creation of a new family - Pnoepygidae, and the moving of Myzornis & Parophasma in with the Sylvias etc. See http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121632350/abstract The TiF...

www.birdforum.net

Post #10 😁

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

As I said, I think, it has been used historically, JAE will tell you.

Birders are so used to using names that appear in guides that most forget that newly introduced names have a long history

 

[Andy Adcock]

Ahem!

More Babbler shuffling!

Just a wee 'heads-up' regarding a new paper dealing with the Babblers. Included are the recommendation for the creation of a new family - Pnoepygidae, and the moving of Myzornis & Parophasma in with the Sylvias etc. See http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121632350/abstract The TiF...

www.birdforum.net

Post #10 😁

I remember having a moan about 'Cupwing' and I'm sure it was JAE who told me it had previously been in use?

 

[Acanthis]

I remember having a moan about 'Cupwing' and I'm sure it was JAE who told me it had previously been in use?

No idea mate. Back then I was just having a bit of fun.
if they weren't to be wren-babblers anymore it seemed like a no brainer.
If "cupwing" was used pre-2009 maybe I picked up on it subconsciously.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

If "cupwing" was used pre-2009 maybe I picked up on it subconsciously.

Do you want a cupwing of tea ?

 

[Andy Adcock]

Do you want a cupwing of tea ?

With or without Sugarbirds?

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

With or without Sugarbirds?

Without, I prefer Honeyeater, to put it on bread

 

[Andy Adcock]

Without, I prefer Honeyeater, to put it on bread

Pitta bread?

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Pitta bread?

Baguette 🥖 of course

 

[Paul Clapham]

In the Opus we have chosen to use the predominant version of a bird name from the area where it occurs if there is a difference in American/British spelling.

Niels

This is what Howard and Moore did for their fourth edition: e.g. Grey Teal vs. Gray Tinamou. I believe there were only a few species where that rule didn't work... what did you do with Great Grey Owl?

 

[njlarsen]

This is what Howard and Moore did for their fourth edition: e.g. Grey Teal vs. Gray Tinamou. I believe there were only a few species where that rule didn't work... what did you do with Great Grey Owl?

Great Grey Owl. I forgot to mention the redirects so that you are taken to the species even if you are using the other (and sometimes one of the other) spellings/names.

Niels