Re: Re: September CPN + N.xiphioides + Latin descriptions

dave evans (T442119@RUTADMIN.RUTGERS.EDU)
Mon, 02 Oct 95 18:07 EDT

> From: "Carl Strohmenger (HSC)" <cstrohme@COM1.MED.USF.EDU>
> The scientific nomenclature is not Latin as such. It is based on some
> Latin language useage rules and declentions, but it is properly the
> _Scientific Name_ and not the Latin name.
> > Now, much later, it seems the whole world is favoring
> > English more and more as an universal language so the scientific
> > community should take heed of this change and perhaps alter the way
> > these descriptions are validated.
> On the contrary! - As more people use English for their normal universal
> language communications, there will be more and more COMMON names used
> for the same species.

Sorry I wasn't specific enough. Yes the names and naming of the
plants need to be, and should be as they are. I agree with you 100%.
I was writing about the descriptions that need to be published along
with the name of a species (or whatever it turns out to be) so it can
be considered valid. Yes the name should be unique. But the descrip-
tions? I don't see the need any more because of the fact English is
becoming the world's first or second language, depending on where you
live. The descriptions ought to be done in English, if you need to
read them it would be much easier to find someone who can translate
English than Latin no matter where you live. The world has changed
and we should update the rules.

Dave Evans