wislizen(i)us revisted

[Jacques Melot]

A 15:16, le 9/01/97, Barbara Ertter ecrivit :

>Okay, taxacomers, I'm satisfied that the proper form for a species epithet
>named after Friedrich (aka Frederick) Adolph Wislizenus is "wislizeni",
>with a single terminal "i".  But does anybody have ready access to when and
>how it was determined that this is how his name is correctly spelled?  In
>at least some earlier references (e.g., Jepson's Silva of California,
>1910), he's referred to as Dr. F. A. Wislizenius [note the "i" between the
>-zen- and -us, evoking some profound philosophical insight], "a botanist of
>German birth who traveled extensively in the Southwest", and whose
>specimens were subsequently sent to A. DeCandolle.  I would guess that this
>is where the double "ii" came in, not from misreading the Code.
>Barbara Ertter
>ertter at ucjeps.herb.berkeley.edu
>University of California, Berkeley

Chere Barbara,

il y a peu de doute que le nom -- ou l'alias -- a utiliser pour le
botaniste en question est <<Wislizenus>> (non <<WislizenIus>>).
Par contre, il est tres possible que l'orthographe originale, a une epoque
plus ancienne, en Allemagne, ait ete <<WisliCenus>>, comme on le constate
en se referant a des dictionnnaires ou au National Union Catalog, volume
669.
(Le nom <<Wislicenus>> est beaucoup plus frequent que <<Wislizenus>>.)

Je poursuis en ce moment des recherches sur ce nom pour etablir si la
terminaison <<-us>> est latine ou non. Les conclusions seront publiees dans
TAXACOM.

Salutations distinguees,

Jacques Melot, Reykjavik
melot at itn.is