Jim? Re euphony and word rules: Nicely and concisely written, may I say, and who the hell knows anymore?. Most Americans don't even know that there used to be rules for how everyday things were spelled--including English majors (some of the most ignorant). AND these rules were taught in school but began to be dropped out in the 30s (in my experience). Lett's hear it for OLD GUY RANTERS! But that didn't go on nearly long enough to qualify as a rant in the meaning of the word as I learned it. Three short paragaphs? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim McKenney" <jimmckenney@jimmckenney.com> To: "'Pacific Bulb Society'" <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 12:19 PM Subject: [pbs] Spelling of personal names in botanical nomenclature;was RE: Haemanthus and Scadoxus Culture OLD GUY RANT ALERT Years ago on this list, a sharp eyed reader noticed that someone had used the "an" form of the indefinite article before a genus name which began with H. Sharp-eyed reader commented something on the order of "now I know how you pronounce the name: with a silent H. " This points to one probable source of the lack of clarity in the code with respect to the treatment of names. There are at least two schools of thought when it comes to the answer to the question "what does "name" mean in this context?". Does "name" in this context refer to the spoken form of the name or to the written form of the name? Chris Whitehouse correctly pointed out that the name Katharine is ultimately derived from Greek. But in the English language, what seems to be the same name has dropped two of the original four syllables, has given new sounds to the retained vowels, and has introduced a sound for the th which did not exist in Greek. Furthermore (and this aspect is particularly important for purposes of plant nomenclature) the spoken form of the name as spoken in English ends in a consonant sound (an "n" sound); the written form ends in a written but silent (in English) vowel. All of this would be irrelevant except for one thing. One of the peculiarities of the rules (at least as I read them) is that the rules seem to be relying on principles of euphony traditional in the study of the classical languages, but these rules are applied to the written word with no regard for the sounds the written characters represent. The word euphony implies sound: the sound comes first, the spelling follows. Spelling changes to reflect euphonic sensibilities. But in the world of scientific nomenclature, almost every one has lost touch with the SOUNDS of classical Latin and Greek. But that has not stopped them from attempting to apply rules of euphony specific to Latin and Greek (and based on those sounds) to the written form of scientific terms, including sometimes botanical names. The result can be comically anorthographic, is generally offensive to the trained ear and sometimes displays an ignorance of the sense of the very rules of euphony evoked to produce the spellings in question. Enough of this rant! But Chris did mention one other thing which tempts me to open another can of worms: Chris alluded to the fact that for purposes of plant nomenclature some names are declined and some are not. We could have a lot of fun with that one, too: any one else game? Jim McKenney jimmckenney@jimmckenney.com Montgomery County, Maryland, USA, 39.03871º North, 77.09829º West, USDA zone 7, where if we continue this topic I'll get Crépin and Max Wichrua involved. My Virtual Maryland Garden http://www.jimmckenney.com/ BLOG! http://mcwort.blogspot.com/ Webmaster Potomac Valley Chapter, NARGS Editor PVC Bulletin http://www.pvcnargs.org/ Webmaster Potomac Lily Society http://www.potomaclilysociety.org/ _______________________________________________ pbs mailing list pbs@lists.ibiblio.org http://pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/