BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="l_raty" data-source="post: 3559545" data-attributes="member: 24811">...Let's just hope no one will now take this down to the letter and attempt to 'terminate' the similar 'wrong Latin termination' of the many other names that have one. (Thus repeating what was already done in the early/mid 20th C by Peters and others, but was entirely reverted since.)(I found the reference to 'Brehm, A.E. 1882. Historia Natural. Tomo III. Montaner y Simon, Barcelona.' somewhat thought provoking, though.This is a Spanish-language adaptation of <a href="https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brehms_Tierleben" target="_blank">Brehm's T(h)ierleben</a>. In the German original text, Brehm used the spelling Gyps rüppellii, which differs from both OS. But this work went through a significant number of editions, and was adapted in several other languages. In foreign adaptations, the umlaut of rüppellii was retained in English and Russian; but it was dropped, producing a spelling matching one of the OS, in Italian (1869, [<a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=sLhDAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA593" target="_blank">here</a>] and [<a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=sLhDAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA987" target="_blank">here</a>]; the index [<a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=sLhDAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA997" target="_blank">here</a>] had the name written 'Rueppellii', however), French (187*?, [<a href="http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k2065522/f507.image" target="_blank">here</a>]) and Spanish (1873 [<a href="https://books.google.be/books?id=IEbfbu4rX-MC&pg=PA266" target="_blank">here</a>] and 1882 [<a href="https://books.google.be/books?redir_esc=y&id=WABLAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA403" target="_blank">here</a>] -- full access to the latter only from the US, I'm afraid -- oddly, the first of these two can not be identified as a work by Brehm from its content, the title page saying 'escrito por una sociedad de naturalistas y publicado bajo la direccion del Doctor D. Juan Vilanova y Pierra'; the second, on the other hand, is presented as 'traducida y arreglada de la ultima edicion alemana de la obra del celebre Dr. A. E. Brehm' and does not cite Vilanova y Pierra). In all these cases, the non-German editors, not Brehm himself, were presumably those responsible for using the umlaut-less spelling; thus, in my view, none represents a first reviser act by the original author. I presume this might be disputed, though.Besides these foreign variations, in the 4th German edition of 1911 [<a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/15247941" target="_blank">here</a>] and [<a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/15248337" target="_blank">here</a>], the second -i was dropped, resulting in a spelling matching the other OS; but Brehm had been dead for decades when this was done.)</blockquote>

Verification