[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Cómo se dice therapod y synapsid en español?
"Ceratopsianos" is a just corruption of the English "Ceratopsians"...
the correct name is "ceratópsidos" as far as I know.
On 16 Apr 2010, at 08:40, Jocelyn Falconnet wrote:
Are you sure ? I know few about Spanish, but as Ceratopsia =/=
Ceratopsidae... ceratopsianos =/= ceratópsidos. For those who rely
on Wiki: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceratopsia/ and http://
PS: and as I like ICZN rules and Ancient Greek, we should not
forget that those names based on *Ceratops* are just terrible. Just
like those based on *Gorgonops*, by the way. And please, I don't
care about the so-called prevailing usage: why should we be an
exception while all other zoologists follows strictly the ICZN rules ?
Luis Rey a écrit :
I find this discussion very funny... there is no such "mystery" .
Since I seem to be the the only Castilian speaking in this list
(surely I'm not!), I >already< corrected Dora (including part of
her "periquito" phrase that was wrong).
Yes the correct answer (and there are NO other ways of writing
the words. YES there >is< a "Spanish standard" in this case) is :
terópodo y sinápsido.
Which doesn't mean that we can't find some idiot-spelled things
like "ceratopsiano"(bogus translation of ceratopsian) when you
have the correct "ceratópsido" ... something that I have
unfortunately read in the Spanish translation of "Field Guide of
Dinosaurs". A shame!
On 16 Apr 2010, at 04:36, John Wilkins wrote:
On 16/04/2010, at 8:46 AM, Raptorial Talon wrote:
It's like David said:
Es como dijo David:
TERÓPODO y SINÁPSIDO.
I gathered that when I read his post.
I was going by a memory of phonetic pronunciation, hence my
recommending that one check a site where it would be correct.
I do have to wonder if speakers of other languages have arguments
about the correct (i.e. etymological) pronunciation of Latinate
as we English-speakers do. Obviously there's no real standard
languages . . . which I suppose is an argument against having them
within a language.
There is a nice article on this at Wiki, of course
It seems each language uses its own phonological practices with
I recall from studying Latin for ten minutes back in the 80s that
there had been a movement to reform Latin translation back in the
30s, removing soft "g"s and "c"s, and so on. I was taught this,
so that I annoy every biologist I speak to.
John Wilkins, Assistant Professor, Philosophy, Bond Uni
"Correlation doesn't imply causation, but it does waggle its
eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing 'look
over there'." <http://xkcd.com/552/>
Visit my website