As Helmut Nisters says, an author is free to name a species in almost any
manner that is consistent with the rules of nomenclature. These rules have
mostly to do with Latin grammar, so a very broad range of names is
possible. The rest of this message will deal only with matters of taste,
not rules.
Names for species should be varied and interesting, because one of the most
important purposes of names is to aid memory. In addition, most names
should be appropriate, that is, they should indicate an important
characteristic of the species (form, color, locality, stratigraphic age,
etc.). With thousands of molluscan species to name and remember, there is
plenty of room for names that celebrate the collector, a favorite
professor, a wife, or even a cat. It does seem more appropriate to honor a
collector (who may feel that this is a fair trade for donating a rare
specimen to a museum) or a conchologist (whose name is sure to be well
known to the people who deal with the species) than to honor someone who
has no connection to the species or even to conchology. In this light, a
mollusk named for a cat is an anomaly.
The common name for a species in the local language often makes quite a
good Linnean name.
Insulting names have been given, though editors are supposed to weed these
out in manuscript. For instance, the vertebrate name Cophater may (or may
not) be a punning insult (Cope-hater) to E. D. Cope, whose 19th-century
rivalry with O. C. Marsh is well known in the annals of paleontology. More
often, insults are unintentional. A trace fossil similar to Glockeria was
named Subglockeria, for instance, and sub- ("under") is not a very nice
prefix for a person's name (Glocker). But no insult was intended.
People who give their own name to species are scorned or laughed at, like a
soldier who wears medals that he didn't earn.
Sometimes a researcher will concoct a new name that sounds well in one
language, but is obscene in another. This too is usually unintentional, and
reviewers and editors try to avoid this situation. There are so many
languages that almost anything is probably offensive in one or another.
Names should be euphonious (sound well). Names that are very difficult to
pronounce in Latin or Greek are usually not advisable. A classic example of
this is Parapecten ntlakapamuxanus, which is easy to pronounce in the
languages of the Pacific Northwest of North America, but difficult for most
people elsewhere in the world. One suspects that the author enjoyed playing
this little joke on the entire community of zoologists.
Names should also be short.
Most people enjoy the occasional taxonomic joke. Jokes are memorable and
add variety to nomenclature. However, just as a humorist on the stage
benefits from having a "straight man" who seems to lack a sense of humor,
taxonomic jokes are most amusing when set in a serious background. Also,
jokes must surprise in order to be funny, so each joke must be different.
Puns are common. Finally, one must consider the difference between humor
based on current events (which may not be funny next year) and humor that
lasts well. Today's joke can be merely tiresome next year, loathsome in
five years, and impossibly obscure in a century. I have to admit, a genus
named for a bad cat is pretty funny! But a whole series of mollusk names
honoring dead cats would be merely bizarre in a hundred years.
So, to sum up, new names should be short, sweet, apt, and catchy, with just
enough exceptions to make it interesting.
Andrew K. Rindsberg
Geological Survey of Alabama
|
