RE: phyllod...

From: Kit Halsted (kit@kithalsted.com)
Date: Mon Aug 14 2000 - 01:02:52 PDT


Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 04:02:52 -0400
From: Kit Halsted <kit@kithalsted.com>
To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <aabcdefg2493$foo@default>
Subject: RE: phyllod...

Okay, I finally did some research on this. A search for "phyllodium"
at <http://www.garden.org/qanda/nga/definition.asp> returns the
following result:

"phyllodium (fih'loh dee uhm): n. Same as phyllode"

A search for "phyllode" returns this result:

"Sorry, no matches for phyllode:"

Searches on other Botanical Latin sites return no match for either.
I'll stick with phyllode, as it's shorter & I'm inherently lazy.

-Kit

On 8/13/00, Miguel de Salas wrote:
>At 01:28 PM 11-08-2000 -0700, you wrote:
>>
>>Hi Kit,
>>
>>Phyllodia is the neutral,plural form of the latin word
>>phyllodIUM.
>>
>
>Yes but since the word phyllode is english (plural still phyllodia), why
>not use it?
>
>We are communicating in english after all, not latin...
>
>Miguel de Salas
>mailto:mm_de@postoffice.utas.edu.au
>
> School of Plant Science,
> University of Tasmania,
> GPO Box 252-55, Hobart,
> Tasmania, Australia, 7001.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:35:12 PST