[Taxacom] Objective synonyms?
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Sat May 29 00:22:17 CDT 2010
PS: I think it would be very wrong to call different combinations "objective synonyms", even though they are "homotypic", unless the genera are objective synonyms. Clearly, the different combinations of a species are VERY subjective ...
From: Curtis Clark <lists at curtisclark.org>
To: TAXACOM <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Sat, 29 May, 2010 3:14:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Objective synonyms?
On 5/28/2010 7:28 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> Can you give an example (or provide a link to the article)? The way
> you explain it makes it unclear to me exactly what the issue is. One
> thing is for sure, that there aren't any universally
> agreed definitions (in ICZN at least) for what counts as a synonym.
> For example, previous combinations are just that, and may or may not
> be considered synonyms as such ... synonymy in a strict sense is a
> relation between types (conspecific, or not), not names
The specific assertion is that neither /Uncia uncia/ and /Panthera
uncia/ are synonyms, nor are /Canis familiaris/ and /Canis lupus
Curtis Clark http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark/
Director, I&IT Web Development +1 909 979 6371
University Web Coordinator, Cal Poly Pomona
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
Or (2) a Google search specified as: site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom your search terms here
More information about the Taxacom