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

Re: Heterodontosaurid with protofeathers



Entire original message repeated because it was in HTML and thus arrived truncated.

----- Original Message -----
From: Christophe Hendrickx
To: david.marjanovic@gmx.at ; dinosaur@usc.edu
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 2:44 PM
Subject: RE: Heterodontosaurid with protofeathers

Just a small bracket on the thread on Tianyulong that I'm following carefully...

David Marjanovic wrote:

> I agree, it's just ignorance. Respect is completely orthogonal to it.
> *Lazarussuchus* could have been deliberate, but that would surprise me > (I
> mean, who knows the etymology of Lazarus...); it's much more likely a
> consequence of the fact that Latin isn't taught much in France.


Well, I'm pretty sure that Latin is taught much more in France than in other German countries such as Austria!

I had six years of Latin in school. I've talked to Germans who had more Latin than English in school...


> Philippe Taquet gave us *Lurdusaurus* and *Cristatusaurus* and, > incidentally, insists
> that *Suchomimus* is a junior synonym of the latter;


Taquet is right by saying that Suchomimus tenerensis is a junior synonym of Cristatusaurus lapparenti 'cause they both come from the same unit (GAD 5) and the same locality and they does not seem to be different anatomically. Cristatusaurus was the first to be named and it has therefore priority over Suchomimus tenerensis (or should I say Baryonyx tenerensis) if we do not consider it as a "nomen dubium" (and Taquet does not of course!).

> both should end in -osaurus rather than -usaurus.

I don't know why 'cause in the case of Cristatusaurus, ''cristatus'' means "crested" in Latin (see http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cristatus) and we all know that "sauros" (ÏÎáÏÎÏ) is the greek root of "lizard". So, it seems to be logical to me...

See, that's what I'm talking about.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Latin_second_declension

The stem of cristatus isn't cristatu-. It's cristato-, and that's something very elementary that I was taught in the first or second month of Latin at school. The reason that the nominative isn't cristatos is a sound shift in the 3rd century BC that turned every -os with short o* into -us; -os is attested in older inscriptions.

* Very different words that ended in -os with long o kept that o. An example is sacerdos ("priest"), the stem of which is sacerdot- (for example, the nominative plural is sacerdotes). Oh, and the reason this one isn't sacerdots is that underlying -ts always surfaced as -s in Latin; another example is nox ("night"), plural noctes... French nui_t_ (the t stopped being pronounced a few hundred years ago).