Latin etc.

[JOSEPH E. LAFERRIERE]

> Systematists wanting to further careers are naturally going to choose
>  languages that maximise their audience. "Yanomamo or Kirghizian or even
>  Klingon" would not acheive this, and few scientists would choose notoriety
>  as a vehicle to fame.

You are assuming that "furthering their careers"
invariably means "furthering their reputation
in the international community." For some people this might
not necessarily be the facor important  to some people.
Researchers at institutions in smaller countries might be under
political pressure from their governments or the
administrators of their institutions to publish in
the national language.


>  ... and there is no need to publish in
> more than one language if it has a
>  broad SCIENTIFIC audience.

This misses the entire point. We do not have to
protect ourselves against people doing things right.
We have to protect ourselves against people doing
things wrong. The ICBN is as complicated as it is
precisely because it must take into account things
published by people who did not follow it.
   Systematists are not the only people publishing
information on the world's plants, animals and other
microbes. People working in applied sciences (agriculture,
forestry, wildlife conservation, etc.) also publish
books and articles. There are also publications aimed
at gardeners, hikers, housewives trying to grow houseplants,
tourists wanting to know the names of the pretty
flowers near their tropical hotels, etc etc. Some
of these publications attempt to use scientific names.
Some do it correctly and some do not. The ICBN is
designed to allow us to ignore all of these things.

--
Dr. Joseph E. Laferriere
"Computito ergo sum ...  I link therefore I am."