Taxacom: [KU SUSPECT SPAM] Re: Formation of family name in zoology, based on genus ending -ops

[Laurent Raty]

On 2/6/23 09:05, Denis Brothers via Taxacom wrote:
> Everyone seems to have forgotten that 29.1 allows the suffix to be added to the ENTIRE genus name. (The reference to Article 29.6 actually is irrelevant since it is only in Recommendation 29A that use of the entire name as the stem (a formulation that is problematic in itself) is suggested as a way to avoid confusion between names.)
>
> So, it seems that both spellings are Code compliant and correct - priority should therefore be decisive.

I have never understood this, and would be extremely grateful for a 
clarification, if anyone can provide one.

  * The entire name of the type genus can be used AS its stem in any
    family-group name proposed after 1999, as a consequence of Art.
    29.4; this use it to be accepted as correct.
  * If a family-group name using the entire name of the type genus name
    AS its stem happens to be in prevailing use, the name so-formed is
    protected by Art. 29.5.

I am not sure what additional result Art. 29.1 is trying to achieve. 
However, in spite of Art. 29.1 suggesting that such a name formation 
would be acceptable, a family-group name that would be formed from the 
type genus INSTEAD OF its stem would not fulfill the requirements of 
Art. 11.7.1.1 ("be a noun in the nominative plural formed from the stem 
of an available generic name" -- no other option allowed), which would 
make it acceptably spelled, but unavailable...

??

Laurent -