[Taxacom] Homonymous synonyms / cosmic order

[Stephen Thorpe]

the types are only different if you construe the?later type fixation as valid
?
if you construe the later name as a chresonym of the earlier name, then the?later type designation is invalid, and all problems disappear ...
?
Stephen

From: Paul van Rijckevorsel <dipteryx at freeler.nl>
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu 
Sent: Thursday, 7 June 2012 9:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Homonymous synonyms / cosmic order

It looks clear to me that chresonymy concerns itself with use
of the same name (connected with the same type). This is not 
the case here (different types, and therefore different names) 
and unless the term chresonym is redefined (big mess!) it 
cannot be used here.

Paul
? ----- Original Message ----- 
? From: Stephen Thorpe 
? To: Paul van Rijckevorsel ; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu 
? Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 9:51 AM
? Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Homonymous synonyms / cosmic order


? Paul,
? It is a BIG MESS if you don't jump my way, i.e. calling the second instances chresonyms. If you think that the generic names are homonyms and subjective synonyms, then the specific names are, as you rightly point out, NOT primary homonyms (since they were originally combined with DIFFERENT, though homonymous, genera), but they would be secondary homonyms (and synonyms) ...

? Cheers,
? Stephen




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
? From: Paul van Rijckevorsel <dipteryx at freeler.nl>
? To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu 
? Sent: Thursday, 7 June 2012 7:40 PM
? Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Homonymous synonyms / cosmic order


? From: <Tony.Rees at csiro.au>
? Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 7:44 AM

? > Hi Stephen,
? >
? > If you have evidence to support the "chresonym theory" then fine, produce
? > it and let others judge - otherwise we are back with Eschmeyer's Catalog
? > (who is, after all, the recognised expert on fish taxonomy and
? > nomenclature at this time), who does cite and one presumes, has seen
? > Boeseman's supplementary note, and who treats this pair of names as
? > synonymous homonyms (or whatever the reverse is), not chresonyms.

? ***
? It is, of course, very dangerous for a botanist to venture into
? zoological nomenclature but here goes (assuming that the
? types are different):
? It is clearest for homonyms. Obviously, the generic names
? Gymnochanda and Gymnochanda are homonyms. Equally
? clearly, the specific names filamentosa and filamentosa
? may be homonyms, but only if they are combined with the
? same generic name, which so far appears not to be the case?
? Under no circumstance are Gymnochanda filamentosa
? and Gymnochanda filamentosa homonyms (in the sense
? of the zoological Code).
? It is less clear for synonyms, but there appears to be agreement
? that the generic names Gymnochanda and Gymnochanda are 
? subjective synonyms. And surely the species names (binomina) 
? Gymnochanda filamentosa and Gymnochanda filamentosa are 
? subjective synonyms, as well. However, as I read the
? zoological Code (but in this case it is a big headache), the
? specific names filamentosa and filamentosa are not synonyms?

? So, Gymnochanda filamentosa and Gymnochanda filamentosa
? may be homonymous synonyms, but they are definitely not
? synonymous homonyms.

? Paul



? _______________________________________________

? Taxacom Mailing List
? Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
? http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

? The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

? (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org

? (2) a Google search specified as:? site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom? your search terms here


_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org

(2) a Google search specified as:? site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom? your search terms here