common names vs technical names

[Kenelm Philip]

	A few comments on this perennial topic:

1. Gardeners use _lots_ of scientific names, without knowing it in many
cases, I would guess. In addition to Chrysanthemum. there's Aster, Anemone,
Arnica, Corydalis, Gentian, Geranium, Juniper, Lupine, and Rhododendron--
and doubtless many more from the more southern flora. Conclusion: anyone
can learn scientific names with proper motivation (and thinking that you're
learning common names seems to help).

2. After talking with Jeff Glassberg, and some NABA members, I am convinced
that a certain (large) proportion of the butterfly watchers _will not_
learn the scientific names. Glassberg feels that scientific names repel
most of the non-scientists that he hopes to enroll in NABA. Birdwatchers
have long since gone down this path--butterfly watchers are already treading
it. Castigating NABA people for not using scientific names is a waste of
time...

3. People who want to learn more about the organisms they study, either
by reading the literature, or by talking to people in foreign countries,
will pick up the scientific names very rapidly, without any urging from
us 'old fogies'. People who have no desire to check the literature (ex-
cept for 'American Butterflies'), or to deal with anything beyond their
local populations, will be quite happy using common names. All current
field guides use common names (even if not always the same name as another
guide). On the other hand, technical papers will use scientific names,
and those armed with synonomic catalogues can track these names back
through all the changes with some confidence that they are reading
about the same species. (I am unaware of synonomic catalogues for
common names.  :-)  )

4. Expecting nomenclature will be stable is a forlorn hope. Taxonomy
progresses, and names will change. If common names are linked tightly
to currently accepted species, then they will change as well. Also,
any attempt to unify common names for all English-speaking countries
will perforce change _many_ common names. Even the birdwatchers haven't
accomplished that task yet: Loons vs. Divers, Murres vs. Guillemots, for
example. I never had any problem with a Common Loon being the same
species as a Great Northern Diver, or with a Mourning Cloak being a
Camberwell Beauty--I think the language would be poorer if one of those
pairs were lost. And whatever happens, no one will ever unify common names
for all the _non_-English-speaking countries.  :-)

5. Pronunciation is a red herring. Europeans (in general) pronounce Latin
differently from (most) Americans--yet I have never had trouble under-
standing what species a European was talking about (and vice versa). If
you do have occasion to use a scientific name, just come out and say it
as best you can--and the odds are you will be understood. If someone is
rude enough to make snide comments on your pronunciation--they are dis-
playing bad manners, if nothing else. If they really can't understand
you, just write the name out.

							Ken Philip
fnkwp at uaf.edu