[Taxacom] Does a misspelling merit parentheses?

Thomas Pape tpape at snm.ku.dk
Tue Apr 10 16:47:57 CDT 2018


>>> By my way of thinking, a species group name is never going to be validly combined with an unjustified emendation
--- But why not? An unjustified emendation is an available name and can be used as a substitute name (Art. 33.2.3). This may happen when, for example, it is the oldest substitute name for a senior synonym that is invalid due to homonymy.


>>> A possible problem is if the spelling of an unjustified emendation is conserved due to usage.
--- This is covered by Art. 33.2.3.1 stating that: "when an unjustified emendation is in prevailing usage and is attributed to the original author and date it is deemed to be a justified emendation."

/Thomas


-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> 
Sent: 6. april 2018 01:06
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu; Francisco Welter-Schultes <fwelter at gwdg.de>
Cc: Thomas Pape <tpape at snm.ku.dk>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Does a misspelling merit parentheses?

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