[Taxacom] Neoromicia nanus or Neoromicia nana?

Francisco Welter-Schultes fwelter at gwdg.de
Tue Jan 14 06:26:39 CST 2014


> On 1/13/14 11:11 AM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
>> This is perhaps a good example of why the Code requires simplification?
>> Endless debate over Latin grammar doesn't really help biological
>> understanding!
>>
> I figured you wouldn't be able to restrain yourself. This is precisely
> why I commented that we can use registration to solve the problem. Once
> a name is registered as a noun or adjective, the debate ENDS.

I am not in favour of a rule that the First Person to Place an Entry into
an electronic data resource has the right to take such a decision and to
stop a debate in this form. There must be escape rules what to do if the
entry is incorrect, and there again the debate would continue.

>
> Robert's arguments, BTW, are sound, but the ICZN does indeed work
> differently from botany; if a name can be either a noun or an adjective
> (which is what is claimed for nanus), then it is noun by default under
> Art. 31.2.2.

I also regard this point as valid, however I do not consider this as a
useful rule. It seems the rule is not used in the community, at least not
strictly, and at least not by the malacological community. It should be
replaced by a better rule in the next edition. I fully agree with Stephen.

Francisco

Francisco Welter-Schultes
Zoologisches Institut, Berliner Str. 28, D-37073 Goettingen
Phone +49 551 395536
http://www.animalbase.org





More information about the Taxacom mailing list