[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
(crossposted to the PhyloCode Mailing List)
Re: Homonyms between taxonomic codes, and how PhyloCode should deal with them.
--- Nick Pharris <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Quoting "T. Michael Keesey" <email@example.com>:
> > One possibility I'll throw out there is to suggest adding prefixes to the
> > younger names: perhaps "Phyto-" if covered by the ICBN, "Zoo-" if covered
> > by the ICZN, and "Monero-" if covered by the BC. Thus the animal _Gastonia_
> > could be converted as Zoogastonia, etc. Perhaps this is unnecessary, but it
> > seems to me it would help speed up and smoothen out the conversion process.
> I'd prefer compounding the name with -zoon or -phyton: e.g. "Gastoniozoon".
I understand why that would be more proper etymologically, but I think it would
create confusion, since tacking on a suffix sometimes requires modifying the
root. For example, you changed an "a" to an "o". What if there's something else
The only way for this to work simply (which is, after all, the idea here, and
feel free to argue against that idea) would be to require keeping the root the
same. But, since many names end in consonants, this would prove unwieldy, e.g.
"Ficuszoon" or worse.
The reason I proposed prefixes ending in vowels is because they can be tacked
on to anything. (Well, okay, adding "Zoo-" to a clade starting with "O" could
be awkward ... hmmm ... I dunno, maybe it doesn't work.)
=====> T. Michael Keesey <http://dino.lm.com/contact>
=====> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=====> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now.