[Taxacom] Species-level homonyms - between/within codes

dipteryx at freeler.nl dipteryx at freeler.nl
Wed Nov 10 05:01:35 CST 2010

Van: Tony.Rees at csiro.au [mailto:Tony.Rees at csiro.au]
Verzonden: wo 10-11-2010 9:42

Dear Paul,

> You wrote:
> ---
> As to "[homonyms] can equally exist between Codes as well",
> I do not see how Art 52.7 could be more explicit:
>    "52.7. Homonymy with names of taxa which are not animals. 
>    The name of an animal taxon identical with the name of a 
>    taxon which has never been treated as animal is not a 
>    homonym for the purposes of zoological nomenclature "
> ---

> I believe this is perfectly consistent with my previously 
> expressed view - it merely indicates that cross-code homonyms 
> do not require any corrective action under the ICZN Code, 
> which we know already. My interest crosses multiple codes,
> which is why the cross-code homonymy issue becomes relevant, 
> even if it is not so "for the purposes of zoological 
> nomenclature"...

> Regards - Tony

Dear Tony,

Obviously you are entitled to be interested in text-strings
"[across] multiple codes", and you have great freedom in what you
call whatever phenomenon you observe, even such terms like the "synchronous dancing of pink-polka-dotted spelling elephants" or whatever (in this case "homography" sounds like a good idea). 

However, it then rests with you to make it clear in what frame 
of reference you are expressing yourself, and to be clear if 
these are Tony-Rees-defined terms, or if these have a wider 
application, and if so what application. Certainly it is very 
confusing to use terms that look as if they are nomenclatural
terms but actually are entirely different from what they would
mean in a nomenclatural context (or are different in different 
ways in different nomenclatural contexts). The present effort 
has a very database-ese look to it. If you are going to create
a world of your own, why not invent entirely new terms to go 
with it?


More information about the Taxacom mailing list