Taxacom: Taxacom Digest, Vol 212, Issue 3

Tue Dec 19 12:19:37 CST 2023

Thanks, Doug, I guess I hadn't fully thought through things! I appreciate these further points, and will take them into account.

Hopefully inter-library-loans will soon supply the work, so at least I'll know whatever the author did assert. In any case, it just looked "wrong" when treated as adjectival, so at least my 'spidey-sense' was on the right path. ?

Thanks,
Dave

________________________________
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 11:39:19 -0800
From: Douglas Yanega <dyanega at gmail.com>
To: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
Subject: Re: Taxacom: Seeking a short work
Message-ID: <b7591e09-e13f-43e9-989c-2d7c2eb24cdd at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

On 12/18/23 11:13 AM, Nicolson, David via Taxacom wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I am hoping someone has access to this very short work, and could send or direct me to a scan or images of it:
>
> Habeeb, H. (1973) Notes on water-mites. V. Leaflets of Acadian Biology, 54, 1-2.
>
> I'm trying to see if there is information on the etymology of a species named therein:
> Ledermuelleria Najeeba Habeeb, 1973 [apparently given with that capitalization]
>
> I am thinking that this species, found in the USA (Cayuga, presumably NY), is named for a collector/colleague of the author, and should not be treated as adjectival, although it has been so treated in at least a couple of recent works [as Eustigmaeus najeebus (Habeeb, 1973)]. Hopefully the work gives the etymology (although I am doubtful).

At the risk of provoking nasty responses...

The general default under the ICZN is to treat any non-Latin (and
non-latinized-Greek) epithet as a noun, and both Article 31.2.2 and
(especially) 31.2.3 are pretty clear on this point:

"31.2.2. Where the author of a species-group name did not indicate
whether he or she regarded it as a noun or as an adjective, and where it
may be regarded as either and the evidence of usage is not decisive, it
is to be treated as a noun in apposition to the name of its genus (the
original spelling is to be retained, with gender ending unchanged; see
Article 34.2.1).

31.2.3. If a species-group name (or, in the case of a compound
species-group name, its final component word) is not a Latin or
latinized word [Arts. 11.2, 26], it is to be treated as indeclinable for
the purposes of this Article, and need not agree in gender with the
generic name with which it is combined (the original spelling is to be
retained, with ending unchanged; see Article 34.2.1)."

The point is that even if the author of the name "najeeba" said it was
adjectival, it is not, because that particular name falls under 31.2.3,
and that Code Article does not recognize the coining author as having
control over the assignment, which would be possible if it fell under
31.2.2.

The reason I expect some nasty responses is that some people feel that
any name ending in an "-a" or "-us" or "-um" has been "latinized". This
is by no means established under the Code. All of these endings appear
on *numerous* Latin and latinized nouns, so these can't be considered
strictly adjectival suffixes. Importantly, "-a", "-us", and "-um" can
all also appear in transliterated Greek, and are not definitively
adjectival there, either. A species name "newyorkus"?would not be
treated as adjectival, but "noveboracus" (which is demonstrably
latinized) would be.

There is a chance that under the next edition of the Code, the
Commission will provide an Official List of Adjectival Names and
Suffixes, and that will remove any ambiguity or argument on this point.

Peace,

--
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)
              https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffaculty.ucr.edu%2F~heraty%2Fyanega.html&data=05%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C78d62461438d4513390408dc00bf1214%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638386067845774126%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=HhLgvNRQEAUgFfNoEV2EP4uPNceF53BfEWEIaSUHA0Y%3D&reserved=0<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffaculty.ucr.edu%2F~heraty%2Fyanega.html&data=05%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C78d62461438d4513390408dc00bf1214%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638386067845930366%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dsnkbn9np9jes8s%2FL7Aw0JWx6ICy%2FaZyUsOb4eHDHIc%3D&reserved=0>
   "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
         is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82