[Taxacom] ICZN - gender of genus-group name ending in -ops
Stephen Thorpe
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Wed May 18 21:46:09 CDT 2016
2016
I agree with Paul. ICZN commissioner Doug Yanega appears to have confused "spelling" with "name". The same name can have variant spellings, but I was quite correct in saying that gender determines spelling. This once again illustrates how difficult it is for everyone to interpret the same Code in the same way, even commissioners!
Stephen
--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 18/5/16, Paul van Rijckevorsel <dipteryx at freeler.nl> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] ICZN - gender of genus-group name ending in -ops
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Received: Wednesday, 18 May, 2016, 10:25 PM
Yes, the word "spelling" is not
ambiguous: it is clearly
defined in the Glossary.
[ And pulcher, pulchrum, pulchra are three
different
spellings of the same species-group
name ]
What is a headache is "correct original spelling"; there
needs not be much "original" in this spelling. It would
help readability considerable to eliminate "original" from
"correct original spelling" leaving just "correct
spelling".
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Pape" <tpape at snm.ku.dk>
To: <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 12:42 AM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] ICZN - gender of genus-group name
ending in -ops
> There is no "prevailing usage provision" in the Code
for situations when a
> subsequent spelling of a species epithet identical with
the original
> spelling but incorrect because of the lack of a
mandatory change is in
> prevailing usage.
> This means that prevailing usage in such cases has no
effect.
>
> ---------------------
> The long version:
>
> The Code defines "spelling" broadly as:
>>> spelling, n.
>>> The choice and arrangement of the letters that
form a word.
>
> The correct original spelling of a name is the spelling
used when it is
> established, unless it is demonstrably incorrect.
> A subsequent spelling of a name, if different from the
original spelling,
> can only be one of three: (1) an emendation, (2) an
incorrect subsequent
> spelling, or (3) a mandatory change.
> Changing a species epithet to agree in gender
with the generic name with
> which it is at any time combined is a mandatory
change.
>
> The Code rules on how to deal with prevailing usages of
(1) and (2):
>
> 33.2.3.1. when an unjustified emendation is in
prevailing usage and is
> attributed to the original author and date it is deemed
to be a justified
> emendation.
> 33.3.1. when an incorrect subsequent spelling is in
prevailing usage and
> is attributed to the publication of the original
spelling, the subsequent
> spelling and attribution are to be preserved and the
spelling is deemed to
> be a correct original spelling.
>
> The Code does NOT provide a ruling for situations, when
a subsequent
> spelling is a justified emendation in prevailing usage,
as no ruling is
> needed.
> The Code does NOT provide a ruling for situations, when
a subsequent
> spelling based on a mandatory change is in prevailing
usage, as no ruling
> is needed.
> The Code does NOT provide a ruling for situations, when
a subsequent
> spelling identical with the original spelling but
incorrect because of the
> lack of a mandatory change is in prevailing usage,
which means that
> prevailing usage in such cases has no effect.
>
> /Thomas Pape
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
On Behalf Of
> Stephen Thorpe
> Sent: 16. maj 2016 23:31
> To: Stephen Thorpe; mthayer at fieldmuseum.org;
taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu;
> Doug Yanega
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] ICZN - gender of genus-group
name ending in -ops
>
>>Therefore they are spelled identically, as far as
the Code is
>>concerned, and accordingly "prevailing usage" either
applies to all the
>>alternatives, or none.<
>
> But does the Code actually make that clear?
Consistently so? THAT is the
> question. It is all very well you saying that it is so,
but that carries
> no official weight. The glossary definition of "variant
spellings" only
> refers to homonymy, not to "prevailing usage of
spelling".
>
> Stephen
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Tue, 17/5/16, Doug Yanega <dyanega at ucr.edu>
wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] ICZN - gender of genus-group
name ending in -ops
> To: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>,
> mthayer at fieldmuseum.org,
taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Received: Tuesday, 17 May, 2016, 9:23 AM
>
>
> On 5/16/16
> 2:00 PM, Stephen Thorpe
> wrote:
>
>
>
> The Code glossary does
include:
>
> variant spellings
> Different spellings of specific
or subspecific names that are deemed
> to be identical for the purposes of the Principle
of Homonymy [Art. 58].
>
> What is still unclear is whether "prevailing
usage" provisions in the
> Code make a clear distinction between spelling
and gender.
>
> Suppose a new species was described as Aus pulcher.
The epithets pulcher
> and pulchra differ only in gender.
>
> Therefore they are spelled
identically, as far as the Code is
> concerned, and accordingly
"prevailing usage"
> either applies to all
> the alternatives, or none.
Changing an epithet to match a
> gender is not changing its
spelling, otherwise the forms could not
> be identical, could they?
>
>
> So, what is the original
spelling for the nominal species? What is
> the correct original spelling? That depends on
the gender of Aus.
>
>
> The correct original spelling
is, effectively, simultaneously
> pulcher, pulchrum, or pulchra,
rather than any one of these - until
> it is placed in combination
with a genus name. Very much like
> Schrodinger's Cat.
>
>
>
> They're identical, by
definition, so it doesn't matter what gender
> the genus is as far as the Code
is concerned; generic assignment is
> a temporary thing, and the Code
is written so as to acknowledge
> this.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> --
> Doug Yanega Dept. of
Entomology Entomology
> Research Museum
> Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314
skype:
> dyanega
> phone: (951) 827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine,
not
> UCR's)
> http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
> "There are some enterprises in which a
careful disorderliness
> is the true
method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Channeling Intellectual Exuberance for 29 years in
2016.
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Channeling Intellectual Exuberance for 29 years in
2016.
>
>
> -----
> Geen virus gevonden in dit bericht.
> Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com
> Versie: 2015.0.6201 / Virusdatabase: 4568/12235 - datum
van uitgifte:
> 05/15/16
>
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
Channeling Intellectual Exuberance for 29 years in 2016.
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list