[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

When is a synonymisation not a synonymisation? (Was: Bakker's Brontosaurus and Late Cretaceous populations)

> Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 18:00:48 -0500
> From: Tim Williams <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>
>> Ah, thanks for that correction.  I can't find the reference for
>> [the synonymisation of _Cathetosaurus_ with _Camarasaurus_] -- do
>> you have it?
> It's just an abstract, to a presentation at the 1992 SVP meeting.
> It won't tell you anything the (very long) 1996 paper by the same
> authors won't tell you.

Well, this raises an important point -- what counts as a legitimate
synonymisation?  We wouldn't accept the erection of a new genus or
species in an abstract, so why accept the sinking of an existing one?
That doesn't sound right to me.

 _/|_    ___________________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor  <mike@miketaylor.org.uk>  http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "It's great that we clicked so meanly into the groove as we
         entered the run-in, just as we did last season.  But the run-in
         starts mid-August" -- Paul Tomkins.

Listen to free demos of soundtrack music for film, TV and radio