[Taxacom] Does a misspelling merit parentheses?
Stephen Thorpe
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Tue Apr 10 19:01:11 CDT 2018
PS: The key word in 33.2.3 is the final 'but', which means 33.2.3 doesn't stand alone, and one must interpret it in the context of 33.2.3.1
--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 11/4/18, Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> wrote:
Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Does a misspelling merit parentheses?
To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>, "Thomas Pape" <tpape at snm.ku.dk>
Received: Wednesday, 11 April, 2018, 11:33 AM
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.
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list