[Taxacom] Does a misspelling merit parentheses?
Francisco Welter-Schultes
fwelter at gwdg.de
Thu Apr 5 18:30:16 CDT 2018
For the emendations consult Art. 33.2. Your last problem should be
answered by Art. 33.2.3.1.
Yes I also think that a specific name cannot be validly combined with a
genus being an unjustified emendation that is not deemed to be a
justified emendation.
Art. 19.2 is congruent with the Glossary "justified emendation".
-----
Francisco
Am 06.04.2018 um 01:06 schrieb Stephen Thorpe:
> There is some confusion here:
>
> 19.1. Unjustified emendations and incorrect spellings. An unjustified emendation of an available name is itself an available name [Art. 33.2.3], provided that it meets the other requirements for availability, but an incorrect subsequent spelling is not
>
> 19.2. Justified emendations. A justified emendation replaces the incorrect original spelling and, as a corrected original spelling, retains the authorship and date of the original name
>
> Article 48. Change of generic assignment. An available species-group name, with change in gender ending if required [Art. 34.2], becomes part of another combination whenever it is combined with a different generic name.
>
> By my way of thinking, a species group name is never going to be validly combined with an unjustified emendation, so we only need to consider the case of justified emendations, but Art. 19.2 indicates (but not perfectly unambiguously) that a justified emendation renders the name emended an incorrect original spelling of the "same generic name", which implies that Art. 51.3.1 does apply (albeit somewhat "retrospectively").
>
> A possible problem is if the spelling of an unjustified emendation is conserved due to usage. I'd have to think about that a bit more ...
>
> Stephen
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Fri, 6/4/18, Francisco Welter-Schultes <fwelter at gwdg.de> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Does a misspelling merit parentheses?
> To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Received: Friday, 6 April, 2018, 11:55 AM
>
> Article 51.3.1 does not come into
> play because Limnebius is the correct
> generic name that must be used.
>
> However if Limnobius was the
> correct name, for example because this
> emendation is in prevailing usage, then
> Limnebius would be the incorrect
> spelling,
> and it would read Limnobius punctatus Wollaston, 1864.
>
> This is how I read Art.
> 51.3.1.
>
> 51.3.1. Parentheses
> are not used when the species-group name was
> originally combined with an incorrect spelling
> or an emendation of the
> generic name (this
> applies even though an unjustified emendation is an
> available name with its own authorship and date
> [Art. 33.2.3]).
>
> It says
> "incorrect spelling", a term that is not defined
> in the
> Glossary. Would Limnebius be an
> incorrect spelling of Limnobius in such
> a
> case?
> An emendation intends to change the
> original spelling. A justified
> emendation
> is "the correction of an incorrect original
> spelling" (see
> its definition in the
> Glossary). So if we use Limnobius as a justified
> emendation (under Art. 33.2.2 or 33.2.3.1),
> this should leave Limnebius
> as an incorrect
> original spelling behind us. Thus, an incorrect spelling
> in the sense of Art. 51.3.1.
>
> If so, then if we apply the
> Code correctly, we could not use Limnobius
> as the valid ame, if this spelling is not in
> prevailing usage.
> "Limnobius punctatus
> (Wollaston, 1864)" would only be possible under a
> violation of the Code.
>
> As a consequence I would not find a case within
> a correct application of
> the Code where a
> misspelling would merit parentheses. If I have not
> overlooked or misinterpreted something.
>
> Best
> Francisco
>
> Am
> 05.04.2018 um 23:59 schrieb Thomas Pape:
> > Article 51.3.1 does not come into play.
> >
> > Note that this
> Article deals with a situation where "the species-group
> name was originally combined with an incorrect spelling or
> an emendation of the generic name".
> >
> > Wollaston (1864)
> described "Limnebius punctatus". Both names appear
> to me to be correct spellings.
> >
> Wollaston LATER used the changed spelling
> "Limnobius".
> >
> > If "Limnobius" is an emendation
> it is also an available name, and if it is used as valid,
> then the correct citation would be:
> >
> > Limnobius punctatus (Wollaston, 1864)
> >
> > /Thomas
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original
> Message-----
> > From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> On Behalf Of Francisco Welter-Schultes
> >
> Sent: 5. april 2018 23:43
> > To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Does a misspelling
> merit parentheses?
> >
> > I must assist Stephen here. Art. 51.3.1
> should be followed. No matter if the emendation was
> justified or unjustified, and also regardless if Limnobius
> has a different authorship and date than Limnebius. A
> misspelling does not merit parentheses.
> >
>
> > a). Limnobius punctatus Wollaston,
> 1864 is correct, without parentheses.
> >
> If you prefer using Limnobius as the generic name.
> >
> > Which I would not
> recommend to do. It seems to me that Limnebius is in
> prevailing usage, not Limnobius. In this point I would
> assist Neal.
> >
> > Best
> regards
> > Francisco
> >
>
> >
> > -----
> > Francisco Welter-Schultes
> >
> > Am 05.04.2018 um
> 22:23 schrieb Stephen Thorpe:
> >>
> Contrary to what others have indicated to you, pleasse refer
> directly
> >> to Art. 51.3.1
> >>
> >> '51.3.1.
> Parentheses are not used when the species-group name was
> originally combined with an incorrect spelling or an
> emendation of the generic name (this applies even though an
> unjustified emendation is an available name with its own
> authorship and date)'
> >>
> >> http://www.nhm.ac.uk/hosted-sites/iczn/code/includes/page.jsp?article=
> >> 51&nfv=#3
> >>
> >> Stephen
> >>
> >>
> --------------------------------------------
> >> On Fri, 6/4/18, Robert Louis Zuparko
> <rz at berkeley.edu>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> Subject: [Taxacom] Does a misspelling merit
> parentheses?
> >> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> Received: Friday, 6 April, 2018,
> 7:17 AM
> >>
> >> In 1864, Wollaston described the
> species
> >> punctatus in a genus
> he originally
> >> spelled as
> "Limnebius". In a later
> >>
> paper, he corrected the generic spelling
> >> to "Limnobius".
> >>
> >> Is
> this correction enough to merit his
> >> name being placed in
> parentheses?
> >> That is, should
> this species now be
> >> referred
> to as
> >>
> >> a). Limnobius punctatus
> Wollaston,
> >> 1864, or
> >>
> >>
> b). Limnobius punctatus (Wollaston,
> >> 1864)?
> >>
>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >>
> -Bob
> >>
> >> Robert Zuparko
> >> Essig Museum of Entomology
> >> 1101 Valley Life Sciences
> Building,
> >> #4780
> >> University of California
> >> Berkeley, CA 94720-3112
> >> (510) 643-0804
> >>
> _______________________________________________
> >> Taxacom Mailing List
> >> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992
> may be
> >> searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>
> >>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions
> >> to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via
> the
> >> Web, visit: http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> You can reach the person managing
> the
> >> list at: taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >>
> >>
> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting
> >>
> Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
> >>
> >>
> _______________________________________________
> >> Taxacom Mailing List
> >> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may
> be searched at:
> >> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>
> >> Send Taxacom
> mailing list submissions to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> To
> >> subscribe or unsubscribe via the
> Web, visit:
> >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> You can reach the person managing the
> list at:
> >> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >>
> >> Nurturing
> Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years,
> 1987-2018.
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> >
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
> searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Send Taxacom mailing
> list submissions to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit: http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > You can reach the person managing the list
> at: taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >
> > Nurturing Nuance
> while Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
> searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list
> submissions to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit:
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
> Nurturing Nuance while
> Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
>
> .
>
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list