[Taxacom] Cross posting on use of sic
fwelter at gwdg.de
Tue Dec 1 08:27:08 CST 2015
Principally I agree with Adam, sic inside the subgenus parentheses and
in square brackets.
However it would be useful not to leave space for misunderstandings.
Does "sic" mean that the subgenus was misspelled in the cited source? Or
does it mean that the spelling in the cited source was correct, but the
subgeneric classification was so unusual that it appears useful to
indicate that in the cited source the species was really and seriously
classified in this subgenus?
In the first case it might be useful to cite
Canthon (Glahyrocanthon [sic, = Glaphyrocanthon]) vulcanoae
Or even Canthon (Glaphyrocanthon) vulcanoae [subgenus misspelled by
Miller as Glahyrocanthon]
Am 01.12.2015 um 14:33 schrieb Adam Cotton:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "JF Mate" <aphodiinaemate at gmail.com>
> To: "Taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 6:40 PM
> Subject: [Taxacom] Cross posting on use of sic
>> I thought this was an interesting question:
>> "Hello all,
>> When quoting the use of a species name with a misspelled subgeneric
>> name, would you write the addition '(sic)' inside or outside the
>> brackets surroundng the misspelled subgenus?
>> Example: Canthon (Glahyrocanthon (sic)) vulcanoae or Canthon
>> (Glahyrocanthon) (sic) vulcanoae ?
>> Thanks in advance,
> Yes, an interesting question. In this case I would say put the 'sic'
> inside so that it is obvious exactly what it is referring to. I would
> also always put the 'sic' in square brackets, since that format
> indicates 'sic' is the author's addition:
> Canthon (Glahyrocanthon [sic]) vulcanoae
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
More information about the Taxacom