ICZN spelling follow up

[Ron at]

...ium meridionale it is. It is interesting that in the many, and much
appreciated, responses not one alluded to any specific sections of the
ICZN. Of course, I had looked these over myself already - but there seemed
to be some lack of clarity re this combination to _me_.  I knew that -um
was neuter and that -alis was either male or female.  My impression was
that a neuter as a _neither_ would allow an  _either_ in combination. One
of the older versions of the code I have has a section that goes into more
detail on genderization and combinations. That was a helpful past feature
that the new  4th edition does not have.

I have no issue with the form (spelling or sound) of the latinization. I
was just wanting to insure the best, as well as proper, spelling under the
current rules. Personally, I have no major problem with the ICZN's
continued emphasis on matching genders.  However, I think it would be wise
to drop this. The obvious reason (which I am sure you all have discussed
many times here) is to eliminate the "need" to be continually changing the
spellings of names as they are shifted to new, old, or other genera in the
future. Why go to all the effort to make sure it is spelled -us when in
less than a year or two or three it will be found to be better placed in
another genus where it "must" then become an -is.

Ron

PS   I can't even spell things correctly in English, let alone Latin!  When
I tried to teach myself Spanish a few years ago (at 50), my son said "Dad,
you have to learn English first".  He proceeded to buy me a neat little
book on "Learning English."  At least I can now conjugate verbs - sometimes
:-)