[CPN] Revision of proposed changes in Art. 21
David Marjanovic
david.marjanovic at gmx.at
Mon Mar 25 13:39:32 EDT 2013
I'm fine with everything except the new Note 21A.1 (with its example).
It says "the ending of the uninomen should not be changed" -- changed
from where? It's not an uncommon situation, in vertebrate zoology at
least, that a species is commonly referred to at least two different
genera in the current literature and therefore shows different gender
agreement simultaneously for years or decades.
It looks like an obvious solution to go back to the publication that
established the name -- but in many cases the original is long forgotten
and very hard to guess. For instance, *Passer domesticus*, the house
sparrow, has been used as a specifier in plenty of phylogenetic
definitions, and that has been its name since 1760. But Linnaeus, two
years earlier, called it *Fringilla domestica* (lumping all finches into
a single genus, I suppose). Despite having leafed through facsimile
editions of Systema Naturae (10th ed.) a few times, I only know this
because Jacques Gauthier and various coauthors made the effort of
digging up the original forms of the names of all species they were
using as specifiers in a few papers in 2001 -- and at least some of
those are hidden in an edited book that not many systematists in the
world have ever read. (It's an expensive symposium volume, printed on
very heavy paper despite the paperback, about the origin of birds and
the then recent discoveries of feathered and otherwise interesting
nonavian theropods.) So, telling people to go back to the original would
mean a lot of work for very little return.
I suggest to leave all agreement optional. Don't regard the ending as
part of the name -- the rank-based codes don't either. Let chaos reign,
or leave it to the journals, but don't forbid agreement.
Personally, I'm in an unusual situation: not only do I natively speak a
language where adjectives agree in gender/number/case with the nouns
they refer to, but I can read scientific papers in at least 4 more such
languages, and I had 6 years of Latin in school. In short, it comes
naturally to me. I don't fall on my sword when other people get the
gender agreement of binominals wrong, but I really don't want to have to
get such agreement wrong myself.
More information about the CPN
mailing list