[Taxacom] Scientific name vs Scientific name string

[Francisco Welter-Schultes]

Rich,
the ICZN Code's definition for "scientific name" given in the 
Glossary ("scientific name as opposed to vernacular name") includes 
the definition I gave. The ICZN Code's definitions for such terms are 
not always consistent with the use of such terms in the spoken 
language or in the Oxford English dictionary (and then we have to be 
cautious). They are included there to explain the meanings of these 
terms in the ICZN Code, often because their meaning is ambiguous 
and their use in the Code represents only a portion of the entire 
ranges of meanings of such terms in biological sciences, in broader 
natural sciences or generally in the English language.

> In other words, "Homo sapiens" is two
> names: one genus-group name and one species-group name (the latter
> often referred to as an "epithet").  
I disagree and do not interprete the Code in this way. Homo sapiens 
is the one and single name of a species-group taxon, as defined in 
the Glossary (a binomen is *one* scientific name, not two). The 
compound "sapiens" (taken alone) is not a name in the sense of the 
Code.

In any case I agree with you that is is highly desireable to use 
terms that cannot lead to serious misunderstandings. 

I would not use the term "string" in non-electronic environments. 
The term "string" is not contained in the ICZN Code. Maybe it has 
some special meaning in some local English slang in some countries, I 
do not know that. A string in the sense of the dictionary I am using 
is a chain of characters. 
An incorrectly spelled specific name is the same specific name as the 
correctly spelled one, but not the same genus species string.

> relatively broad adoption and consistent usage of the term
> "name-string", which is shorter to type than "a text-string 
> purported to represent a scientific name".
Both terms are equally inaccurate and ambiguous, they can represent 
anything. I would prefer to use terms that have a much narrower range 
of possible misunderstandings. Taxon name author string, genus 
species string, genus-species-author-year combination, self 
explaining terms like these. Don't use expressions for which the 
reader needs to know the usage history and who are the persons widely 
considered to be important enough to have the right to define the 
meaning of such terms.  

Also consider that not every scientist is so firm in English as you 
are. 

Francisco


University of Goettingen, Germany
www.animalbase.org