[Taxacom] Objective synonyms?

[Stephen Thorpe]

PS: I think it would be very wrong to call different combinations "objective synonyms", even though they are "homotypic", unless the genera are objective synonyms. Clearly, the different combinations of a species are VERY subjective ...




________________________________
From: Curtis Clark <lists at curtisclark.org>
To: TAXACOM <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Sat, 29 May, 2010 3:14:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Objective synonyms?

On 5/28/2010 7:28 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> Can you give an example (or provide a link to the article)? The way 
> you explain it makes it unclear to me exactly what the issue is. One 
> thing is for sure, that there aren't any universally 
> agreed definitions (in ICZN at least) for what counts as a synonym. 
> For example, previous combinations are just that, and may or may not 
> be considered synonyms as such ... synonymy in a strict sense is a 
> relation between types (conspecific, or not), not names

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Taxobox#Synonyms

The specific assertion is that neither /Uncia uncia/ and /Panthera 
uncia/ are synonyms, nor are /Canis familiaris/ and /Canis lupus 
familiaris/.

-- 
Curtis Clark                  http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark/
Director, I&IT Web Development                  +1 909 979 6371
University Web Coordinator, Cal Poly Pomona


_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here