[Re:] -i or -ii? (ICZN)

Doug Yanega dyanega at MONO.ICB.UFMG.BR
Wed Sep 30 12:38:32 CDT 1998

Hendrik Segers wrote:

>Thomas Schlemmermeyer's case is a common one in zoological
>nomenclature. The orthography of the name as originally proposed
>should be retained. If "tschudii" is formed from Mr. Tschud, than it
>is assumed that the name was first Latinized. Any subsequent change
>(from -i to -ii or vice versa) constitutes an incorrect subsequent
>spelling (Art. 33(d)).

Common and persistent. Unfortunately, there are still new "incorrect
subsequent spellings" being published, even by prominent taxonomists - for
example, the vast 7-volume monographic work on Cerambycidae of North
America by Linsley & Chemsak included four such erroneous spellings, two of
them published in 1995, all names originally designated as -ii endings and
"emended" (without comment or justification) to -i endings in the
monograph. Errors published in a major revisionary work like this can
proliferate for decades as users of the work unfamiliar with the rules of
nomenclature continue to uncritically accept and use the names as given. I
restored the original spellings in my field guide, but there are now and
always will be many more people using the monograph as their reference
work, so the erroneous spellings will keep appearing in the literature for
a long, long time. I'm sure that this can't be a unique example, though it
is pretty surprising given the scope and importance of the work involved.


Doug Yanega    Depto. de Biologia Geral, Instituto de Ciencias Biologicas,
Univ. Fed. de Minas Gerais, Cx.P. 486, 30.161-970 Belo Horizonte, MG   BRAZIL
phone: 31-499-2579, fax: 31-499-2567  (from U.S., prefix 011-55)
  "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
        is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82

More information about the Taxacom mailing list