[Taxacom] Does a misspelling merit parentheses?

Tue Apr 10 18:33:14 CDT 2018

This is still a bit unclear: 

33.2.3. Any other emendation is an "unjustified emendation"; the name thus emended is available and it has its own author and date and is a junior objective synonym of the name in its original spelling; it enters into homonymy and can be used as a substitute name, but

33.2.3.1. 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.

This suggests that an unjustified emendation cannot be used as a valid name without thereby being deemed a justified emendation, so, in the context of this thread, still no parentheses required (by Art. 51.3.1)

Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 11/4/18, Thomas Pape <tpape at snm.ku.dk> wrote:

 Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Does a misspelling merit parentheses?
 To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 Cc: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
 Received: Wednesday, 11 April, 2018, 9:47 AM

 >>> 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.