ICZN on gilletti

[Ron Gatrelle]

Kenelm Philip wrote: There is no _rule_ that 'i' is preferable to 'ii' for
patromyms.
That statement occurs in the list of _recommendations_ at the end (page
107). Needless to say, these recommendations are not binding. For instance,
one of them reads, "A zoologist should not propose a name that, when spoken,
suggests a bizarre, comical, or otherwise objectionable meaning." (Page
105) One has only to recall _Castnia inca dincadu_ Miller 1972 to realize
that humor has its place in nomenclature... And there are many other such
tidbits out there.

Ron G. comment: You are correct. It was a recommendation in the '64 code and
not a rule. The recommendations section in the 1999 code (effective 1
January 2000) is very brief. The recommendations are dispersed throughout
the code itself. I have not taken the time to find the individual
recommendation on this in text the new version.

Kenlem wrote: Nor could I find where the Code says that 'ii' and 'i' are to
be considered identical. Instead, on page 57 there is the statement that
"the termination -i or -ii in a patronymic genitive..." is not a sufficient
difference in spelling to prevent two species-group names "of the same
origin and meaning and cited in the same nominal genus or collective
group" to be considered homonyms.  That would lead to suppression of the
junior homonym--but nothing is said about changing the spelling from 'ii'
to 'i' in later references to the species.

Ron's comment: Article 58 pages 55 - 57 of the 1964 code is titled: Variable
spelling. It deals with the i and ii as it occurs in two different species
as relative to their being homonyms. We are talking here about the use of i
or ii as applied to a single species _ gilletti_. Article 58 on page 60 of
the 1999 code, is titled: Variant spellings of species-group names deemed to
be _identical_. So the i and ii are referred to as identical spellings in
this edition. However, like the 1964 edition, this section is also
irrelevant to the discussion here as it deals with multiple species and the
issue of homonymy. The bottom line is that E. gilletti and E. gillettii can
not be homonyms. They are simply two available ways of Latinizing the name
Gillett. So depending on how one reads the recommendations, either could be
considered correct. However, the code forbids the use of gillettei. It is
thus mandatory that there can be no such thing as Gillette's checkerspot.

My last name is Gatrelle. That is a very rare name. The other's you find
through a search engine are my all my cousins. If you find some Gatrell's
they are not our clan. If anyone ever names something after me I hope no one
ever calls it Gatrell's ant. And if we can drop or add a last letter why not
a first?  So I will now call this Killett's spottedchecker.



 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl