[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