Yet another thread on eponyms... But this one might actually be fun! (2 Viewers)

[Swindon Addick]

This is probably more relevant for one of the species with no obvious ID features, but I'd note that we've just lost one of the truly great English bird-names as the IOC has lumped Perplexing Scrubwren. So I'd quite like to have a Perplexing Warbler to make up for that.

Admittedly, I'd struggle to make a case for "perplexing" being a unique ID feature for a warbler.

 

[cajanuma]

So your argument is basically - "it should be called Cetti's Warbler because it is already called Cetti's Warbler"

Eponyms aside, that actually sums up my position quite well on English names. We all know what bird we're referring to when we say Cetti's Warbler. A few posts prior to this, I pointed out that the Italian name of Cetti's Warbler translates literally as River Nightingale. A completely nonsensical name, yet no one in Italy is confused by it. Same with an endless list of other nonsensical common names: "Solitary Sparrow" for Blue Rock-Thrush, "Sea Partridge" for Collared Pratincole, or "Stone Mason Woodpecker" for Wallcreeper. At most my non-birding friends will chuckle a bit when I point out that neither Wallcreeper or Nuthatch are woodpeckers in spite of having "picchio" in their name, but you won't find a single birder calling for a more "accurate" name. Same with a great many non-eponyms. American Tree Sparrow is a wildly inaccurate name for a bird that nests on the ground in tundra and winters in fields, but would you really want to change it? Or the great many English bird names that are loan words from other languages and mean nothing to most English speakers. Would you really change Balicassiao to something like Philippine Drongo?

 

[andrew147]

American Tree Sparrow is a wildly inaccurate name for a bird that nests on the ground in tundra and winters in fields, but would you really want to change it?

Absolutely I would. Winter Junco.

Would you really change Balicassiao to something like Philippine Drongo?

No, but I'd change Arcane Rando's Drongo to Philippine Drongo.

 

[cajanuma]

Absolutely I would. Winter Junco.

I'm guessing you mean sparrow and not junco? Either way, Canadians might beg to differ

My main point is that individual preferences are just that. One person's great name is another's abomination. Don't get me wrong, I find this thread quite fun, but for the practical purpose of communicating clearly, the fewer the name changes, the better.

Anyway, Pete Dunne's Essential Field Guide Companion was playing this game already twenty years ago, and some of the names were truly inspired!

 

[andrew147]

I'm guessing you mean sparrow and not junco? Either way, Canadians might beg to differ

My main point is that individual preferences are just that. One person's great name is another's abomination. Don't get me wrong, I find this thread quite fun, but for the practical purpose of communicating clearly, the fewer the name changes, the better.

Anyway, Pete Dunne's Essential Field Guide Companion was playing this game already twenty years ago, and some of the names were truly inspired!

No, I mean Junco. The name has been used before.

I agree that everyone is entitled to their preferences but I don't agree that fewer name changes is automatically for the better. I can't think of any other area of science where people are so married to the preservation of innaccuracy. We understand bird phylogeny really well in 2024, we could just sort out all these poor names once and for all - future birders and ornithologists would be very grateful.

My preference would be to restrict the root name sparrow to members of Passeridae. New World 'sparrows' could all be covered by junco, towhee and brush-finch.

 

[Maffong]

Eponyms aside, that actually sums up my position quite well on English names. We all know what bird we're referring to when we say Cetti's Warbler. A few posts prior to this, I pointed out that the Italian name of Cetti's Warbler translates literally as River Nightingale. A completely nonsensical name, yet no one in Italy is confused by it. Same with an endless list of other nonsensical common names: "Solitary Sparrow" for Blue Rock-Thrush, "Sea Partridge" for Collared Pratincole, or "Stone Mason Woodpecker" for Wallcreeper. At most my non-birding friends will chuckle a bit when I point out that neither Wallcreeper or Nuthatch are woodpeckers in spite of having "picchio" in their name, but you won't find a single birder calling for a more "accurate" name. Same with a great many non-eponyms. American Tree Sparrow is a wildly inaccurate name for a bird that nests on the ground in tundra and winters in fields, but would you really want to change it? Or the great many English bird names that are loan words from other languages and mean nothing to most English speakers. Would you really change Balicassiao to something like Philippine Drongo?

I can sympathize with your feelings. However, an inaccurate name always feels like an invitation to explain the error to anyone who's willing to listen to my rambles. Nevertheless, I'm completely okay with changing names to more fitting ones, at least if the name isn't engrained deeply in the collective mind. Changing Kentish Plover would likely be quite difficult, as I imagine it's well known beyond judt some hardcore birders.

Furthermore, obvious misnomers such as Mother Carey's Chicken feel like these names stem from folklore, from a time well before taxonomy a scientific accurateness were a thing. Eponyms remind me of the colonial times, as I believe most eponyms stem from these times.

And they require in depth knowledge of the people. For example, I'm very surprised how little we're talking about the people behind the names. Besides Steller, Zino and perhaps Monteiro people here don't seem to care or know much about Cetti, Bourne or Bonelli... At least no one has mentioned much about their accomplishments.

 

[awiner]

No, I mean Junco. The name has been used before.

I agree that everyone is entitled to their preferences but I don't agree that fewer name changes is automatically for the better. I can't think of any other area of science where people are so married to the preservation of innaccuracy. We understand bird phylogeny really well in 2024, we could just sort out all these poor names once and for all - future birders and ornithologists would be very grateful.

My preference would be to restrict the root name sparrow to members of Passeridae. New World 'sparrows' could all be covered by junco, towhee and brush-finch.

I realized I'd never looked up the etymology of Junco, so no time like the present. I could've perhaps guessed that it shared a root with Juncus (a genus of reeds), not that I would have known why. I surely wouldn't have guessed that a Reed Bunting was once known as a Junco, with which it shares a black head and white outer tail feathers. (And apparently, even earlier, Junco was once applied to wagtails and Eurasian Reed Warbler)

“Junco”? – Birding New Jersey

 

[Kirk Roth]

The French people are very resistant to changes and it can take them a while to accept a name that has changed. I hope it will be limited to English names and I sincerely hope that Gosselin and his gang will not touch the French eponyms because otherwise it will end up in MMA. If there is a French-speaking member of the AOS here, please do not touch the French eponyms. I have revised the entire French nomenclature of birds by correcting all the nonsense and "b*llsh*t" of CINFO, it is not to change all the eponyms.

There are francophones members in AOS 🤷 and there is always a little French-Canadian (Quebec) "warlet"

I understand where French is spoken in North America. To rephrase:

If the NACC changes an English bird name, thus far international authorities such as IOC and Clements have followed along.

I'm guessing all those references you're making are to international authorities on French names who I don't know of yet. If the NACC changes French bird names (e.g. via a split/lump or with the longspur example that Laurent mentions or anything else) have those authorities followed also?

 

[Kirk Roth]

I don't think Cetti's Warbler is a bad name because Cetti was a bad person. I think Cetti's Warbler is a bad name because I don't know anything about Cetti - there's nothing to attach this name to the warbler - that's why it's a bad name. And Cettia cetti is the height of nomenclatural laziness.

...but you can't really mean this at face value, right? There certainly is an attachment of the name to the warbler, and its as accessible as the taxonomic description of the bird, which all birds have. One might say that not acknowledging the connection is... nomenclatural laziness?

If you're trying to say that a name should be biologically descriptive (only), I suppose others have addressed that to a great degree here. But I can't resist that if Laurent's mnemonic device is widely accepted, then under this criteria "Cetti's Warbler" bad, but "Cetti Warbler" good?

 

[Mysticete]

No, I mean Junco. The name has been used before.

I agree that everyone is entitled to their preferences but I don't agree that fewer name changes is automatically for the better. I can't think of any other area of science where people are so married to the preservation of innaccuracy. We understand bird phylogeny really well in 2024, we could just sort out all these poor names once and for all - future birders and ornithologists would be very grateful.

My preference would be to restrict the root name sparrow to members of Passeridae. New World 'sparrows' could all be covered by junco, towhee and brush-finch.

I mean common names exist simply for communication. At some point one has to ask is a new common name A)Going to be accepted, and B) going to cause a greater amount of confusion than it does clarity. If you have a couple of species where name changes would improve clarity, like say the Pittasoma situation, where they are the only "antpittas" that are not actually antpittas, go for it. When your attempt at clarity would result in hundreds of name changes to correct an issue that wasn't problematic for most folks, is it worth the hassle?

 

[wheatearlp]

I don't think Cetti's Warbler is a bad name because Cetti was a bad person. I think Cetti's Warbler is a bad name because I don't know anything about Cetti - there's nothing to attach this name to the warbler - that's why it's a bad name. And Cettia cetti is the height of nomenclatural laziness.

Why do you need to know anything about Cetti? Why would such knowledge make a difference to your 'acceptance' of the name?

The name of a bird is the name of the bird. You see/hear the distinguishing features/sounds and you know it's a Cetti's Warbler.
The same would go for any other species, with or without an eponym, with or without a descriptive name of some sort. I don't see the problem.

 

[Paul Clapham]

The French people are very resistant to changes and it can take them a while to accept a name that has changed. I hope it will be limited to English names and I sincerely hope that Gosselin and his gang will not touch the French eponyms because otherwise it will end up in MMA. If there is a French-speaking member of the AOS here, please do not touch the French eponyms. I have revised the entire French nomenclature of birds by correcting all the nonsense and "b*llsh*t" of CINFO, it is not to change all the eponyms.

There are francophones members in AOS 🤷 and there is always a little French-Canadian (Quebec) "warlet"

In the AOS Supplement 65, Rhynchophanes mccownii is changed from "Plectrophane de McCown" to "Plectrophane à ventre gris". There are no other significant changes that I can see.

 

[johnallcock]

Cetti’s Warbler (Cettia cetti)
Fr. Francesco Cetti (1726-1778), Italian mathematician and zoologist.

Alternative names: Silky Warbler, Nightingale Warbler, Russet-backed Warbler, Understorey Warbler, Explosive Warbler, Exclamatory Warbler

A little brown job at first glance, it’s a handsome species at closer inspection that’s easy to detect through its explosive song but usually remains hidden in dense vegetation.

This is one of the few things where I do really care about English names and think this is obviously stupid. Why is everything in English a "warbler"? Syliva, phylloscopus, iduna ... all a warbler. This is one thing that Czech does really well, because we have different "noun names" for different warblers - and it's done pretty logically, so you see a bird, don't know the species, but can guess this part of the name most of the time. So much better than saying "this can be Sykes', Upchers, Booted, Olivaceous ... I say "sedmihlásek".

Unless this is fixed, I don't think there is much point in creating new names for warblers in English.

Shame to see that this thread has started to develop in the same way as previous threads about eponyms.

Anyway, to get back to the discussion Maffong started, I'd like to suggest that a renamed Cetti's Warbler becomes a Bush Warbler, in line with the other species in the family. Personally I think I'd pick Explosive Bush Warbler for Cettia cetti.

I note that opisska's has said something similar about warbler names. I think it would be useful to follow this with other warbler genera, so Acrocephalus dumetorum is a [something] Reed Warbler, Locustella luscinioides is a [something] Grasshopper Warbler and the Phylloscopus are [something] Leaf Warblers. Unfortunately we don't have anything similar in use for Iduna/Hippolais or Sylvia/Curruca. This would really help make the names more useful for those unfamiliar with the species.

By the way, among the names you've suggested earlier in the thread I think Alpine Leaf Warbler and Mountain Leaf Warbler are not possible, given that they already apply to other species!

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

If the NACC changes French bird names (e.g. via a split/lump or with the longspur example that Laurent mentions or anything else) have those authorities followed also?

In principle, yes by the multilingual authorities (IOC,BOW, Avibase...). But, when I speak of refractory French people, they are French people from France and not French people in the sense of all francophones. E.g. many "France" birders refuse to change "Bruant" to "Plectrophane" for the Calcariidae on the pretext that Plectrophane is pedantic. Really? That's a really crappy argument when you know that the French nomenclature includes several hundred names from pedantic scientific Latin. That said, Plectrophane is used on Facebook ornithology groups (because we have insisted on the fact that these two families are different in many ways), it is mainly committees like the CAF that are reluctant tssss

 

[andrew147]

Why do you need to know anything about Cetti? Why would such knowledge make a difference to your 'acceptance' of the name?

The name of a bird is the name of the bird. You see/hear the distinguishing features/sounds and you know it's a Cetti's Warbler.
The same would go for any other species, with or without an eponym, with or without a descriptive name of some sort. I don't see the problem.

I was talking about meaningfulness.

IMO common names should convey meaning to anyone with at least partial fluency in the relevant language. The word Cetti's doesn't mean anything to most speakers of English. Indeed, of honorifics, I would say only Darwin and Aududon (and maybe a few others) have transcended enough into the public sphere to be meaningfully used in common names.

I'm happy to disagree but it's certainly not the same as names given to 'any other species'. Qualifiers like Black-footed, Red-necked, Noisy, Multi-coloured are all immediately explicable to the majority of English speakers.

 

[andrew147]

I mean common names exist simply for communication. At some point one has to ask is a new common name A)Going to be accepted, and B) going to cause a greater amount of confusion than it does clarity. If you have a couple of species where name changes would improve clarity, like say the Pittasoma situation, where they are the only "antpittas" that are not actually antpittas, go for it. When your attempt at clarity would result in hundreds of name changes to correct an issue that wasn't problematic for most folks, is it worth the hassle?

Many birds already have multiple English names and this is not massively problematic.

I would say that far more confusion is caused by having so many root names shared by unrelated birds - and by having entire swathes of similar species saddled with honorifics.

I think it is worth the hassle but also happy to disagree.

 

[andrew147]

...but you can't really mean this at face value, right? There certainly is an attachment of the name to the warbler, and its as accessible as the taxonomic description of the bird, which all birds have. One might say that not acknowledging the connection is... nomenclatural laziness?

If you're trying to say that a name should be biologically descriptive (only), I suppose others have addressed that to a great degree here. But I can't resist that if Laurent's mnemonic device is widely accepted, then under this criteria "Cetti's Warbler" bad, but "Cetti Warbler" good?

Okay, I'll re-phrase - I mean that there is no natural or implicit attachment. Cetti's as a word conveys no meaning to most speakers of English. It's only meaningful if you already know that it is attached to a particular bird - most people don't know this and those that do likely took a while.

I'm not saying all names have to biologically descriptive - geographical names are generally fine. I do think that the bird known as Cetti's Warbler is more interesting in and of itself than via a tenuous attachment to an obscure, long dead human - and I would prefer it's common name to reflect this.

Cetti Warbler as a transliterative name is okay I suppose but not a patch on Explosive or Exclamatory Warbler.

 

[Maffong]

December 18th:
I'm happy to see a little friendly discussion going on. I can sympathize with those who don't want to change eponyms if they genuinely like them. At the same time I don’t think that stability should be the only reason to stick to the status quo.
Let's look at a few more warblers, both Currucas. Has there ever been an old english name for Sylvidae except Warbler? Perhaps Sylvia might be an option?

Menetries’s Warbler (Curruca mystacea)
Édouard Ménétries (1802 –1861), French entomologist, zoologist, and herpetologist.

Alternative names: Tamarisk Warbler, Bearded Warbler, Pastel-throated Warbler, Vinous-throated Warbler

Another one of five eponymous Curruca warblers. It’s called Tamarisk Warbler in Germany, but I’d prefer Vinous- or Pastel-throated Warbler.

Rüppell’s Warbler (Curruca ruppeli)
Wilhelm Peter Eduard Simon Rüppell (1794-1884), German zoologist, explorer in north-east Africa and the Middle East.

Alternative names: Masked Warbler, Black-bibbed Warbler, White-moustached Warbler, Anatolian Warbler, Maquis Warbler

Although the black is not confined to the bib, I like Black-bibbed Warbler the most. Also note how not even the old-time ornithologists managed to spell the name right in the scientific name. Would annoy the hell out of me, if I was Rüppell...

 

[Swindon Addick]

Shame to see that this thread has started to develop in the same way as previous threads about eponyms.

Given that threads normally get derailed the first time eponyms are mentioned and head off into basically the same argument that's broken out on a dozen other threads, we did pretty well surviving almost 3 weeks on this one. It would be nice not to have to wade through lots of discussion of whether French names should be changed when there seems to be no evidence that anyone is actively trying to change them, but realistically someone was going to blow the thread up at some point. Some things are inescapable.

Back to the topic, I do like the idea of trying to establish consistent names for different families rather than just "warbler", but I assume that would mean that names would have to change in future if there was a sufficiently major taxonomic reshuffle that the names no longer lined up consistently.

 

[Viktor Björkert]

Menetries’s Warbler (Curruca mystacea)
Édouard Ménétries (1802 –1861), French entomologist, zoologist, and herpetologist.

Alternative names: Tamarisk Warbler, Bearded Warbler, Pastel-throated Warbler, Vinous-throated Warbler

Another one of five eponymous Curruca warblers. It’s called Tamarisk Warbler in Germany, but I’d prefer Vinous- or Pastel-throated Warbler.

How about Rosy Warbler for Ménétries's? I believe that is the Danish name for the species. Rosy Warbler would also be a great name for Moltoni's Warbler in my opinion.

Alternatively, the Swedish name for Ménétries's would be translated as Eastern Velvetcap, so could Velvet-capped Warbler be an option? Although I think this name is better suited for Sardinian Warbler (the "original" Velvetcap in Swedish).