Taxacom: Tropicos and gender of names

[Douglas Yanega]

On 2/7/22 12:33 PM, Richard Zander via Taxacom wrote:
> For those with problems determining proper gender endings for taxon names, Tropicos (botancal names) is a good resource.
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftropicos.org%2Fhome&data=04%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C4393379805b145b9299e08d9ea84a602%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637798678889330816%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=5KL7wB00aTijxqoG49qyKD4CHsRGhJ1SnkgIuKmkL94%3D&reserved=0
>
> How to:
>
> In the search box, you can use % as a wild card.
> Examples:
>
> Neo% gives you all names beginning with "Neo"
> Neo% fili% gives all genus and species starting thusly with with all endings.
> % %coma gives all epithets ending with "coma"
> % coma% gives all epithets starting with "coma"
> % %sis gives all epithese ending with "sis"
> %zz% gives all generic and higher names with "zz" in them.
>
> If you have a genus and want to name it with an epithet like oceanus or maybe oceana or maybe oceanum, see what other authors have used for your particular genus or try a genus with a similar ending....
>
> Rare endings are probably wrong and probably recent names, as most ancients knew their Latin.

While this is interesting in certain ways, it is - practically speaking 
- not very useful for determining whether a name is properly 
gender-matched insofar as the rules of the Botanical Code (and there may 
be some very fundamental differences between the Botanical Code and the 
Zoological Code).

It doesn't actually tell a naive user, anywhere, whether a genus is 
masculine, feminine, or neuter; you can only make assumptions about this.

It doesn't actually tell a naive user whether a species epithet is a 
declinable adjective or a noun; you can only make assumptions about this.

For example, when I look up Crataegus succincta, am I supposed to assume 
that Crataegus is feminine, or to assume that "succincta" is a noun? I'm 
not a naive user, so I'm forced to assume that Crataegus is feminine 
(which is really confusing), but other people might not easily come to 
that conclusion.

As for differences between Codes, the ICZN specifies that if a name can 
be either a noun or an adjective, to treat it as a noun by default. 
Accordingly, in zoology you can have names that are *apparent* 
mismatches, such as "Hemiopsida nanus", when the epithet is a term that 
can be a noun. I've looked at a lot of the same epithets in this 
Tropicos file, and can't find a single mismatch, suggesting that 
botanists assume everything is adjectival by default (either that, or 
this database automates gender agreement, which could be VERY 
misleading). As such, I would never recommend this resource to a 
zoological taxonomist who was interested in gender agreement.

Honestly, a taxonomist needing guidance can do better looking things up 
in Wiktionary, which - despite a distinct small percentage of errors and 
omissions - is *generally* pretty reliable in giving exactly the sorts 
of details needed to adhere to the Code.

For example:

https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wiktionary.org%2Fwiki%2Fpumilus%23Latin&data=04%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C4393379805b145b9299e08d9ea84a602%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637798678889330816%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=Kwqm7I0Q3267lZdj83uC9grHRL3mGwM%2Ftwcix%2FmVV%2FU%3D&reserved=0 correctly indicates that 
pumilus can be either a noun or an adjective in Latin, both meaning 
"dwarf". It does not, however, point out that "pumila" and "pumilum" 
could also be nouns.

https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wiktionary.org%2Fwiki%2Fnanus%23Latin&data=04%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C4393379805b145b9299e08d9ea84a602%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637798678889330816%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=CqKvSAkp0ZtfVlcfRj3CwSBqczPSz5cJgjC%2FQdXRBCI%3D&reserved=0 indicates that nanus (and 
nana and nanum, all also meaning "dwarf") can only be a noun in Latin, 
but this runs counter to the overwhelming usage as an adjective by 
taxonomists, and at least a few lexicons say it can be an adjective.

https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wiktionary.org%2Fwiki%2Fsagittarius&data=04%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C4393379805b145b9299e08d9ea84a602%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637798678889330816%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=nS2mjzZtcUAWUfzWiTQTpx4Grd%2BRtmapQNOZS6gVBu0%3D&reserved=0 gives another example of a 
word that can be either a noun or an adjective, though again the 
feminine and neuter forms are not listed as nouns.

Perseus has another good resource, though also with quirks - for example:

https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.perseus.tufts.edu%2Fhopper%2Fmorph%3Fl%3Dpumilus%26la%3Dla%23lexicon&data=04%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C4393379805b145b9299e08d9ea84a602%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637798678889330816%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=1eYq6rYtS8EjCFxYTrsZHr4C%2FmAQoF9q02T0rr6VUzQ%3D&reserved=0 is 
fine, but it yields no response at all for either pumila or pumilum, not 
even as adjectives.

https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.perseus.tufts.edu%2Fhopper%2Fmorph%3Fl%3Dsagittarius%26la%3Dla%23lexicon&data=04%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C4393379805b145b9299e08d9ea84a602%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637798678889330816%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=illEKfQ0zmuJeqtgBgxZFS4rHwIIu2j0QXN%2Ba6BSeI0%3D&reserved=0 
likewise shows that sagittarius can be either a noun or an adjective, 
and 
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.perseus.tufts.edu%2Fhopper%2Fmorph%3Fl%3Dsagittarium%26la%3Dla%23lexicon&data=04%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C4393379805b145b9299e08d9ea84a602%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637798678889330816%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=Hx4JJFIYcBtsgsm3BBdbtEzviKqCK6110LnaS1f4pNg%3D&reserved=0 
shows that sagittarium can be either a noun or an adjective, but gives 
no response at all for sagittaria.

The point is, there are resources, but they must be viewed with some 
circumspection, as they often conflict with one another, or even 
internally. This is one of the main reason I advocate making lists of 
actual published names available giving definitive statements of these 
parameters, rather than compelling taxonomists to do the work 
themselves; depending on one's training and one's sources, the 
conclusions will often be inconsistent or contradictory, and that is no 
help to the community.

Peace,

-- 
Doug Yanega      Dept. of Entomology       Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314     skype: dyanega
phone: (951) 827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
              https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffaculty.ucr.edu%2F~heraty%2Fyanega.html&data=04%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C4393379805b145b9299e08d9ea84a602%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637798678889330816%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=5K3UJmrzwGM20iZs3IpzYhk8NhiyME%2FnVx1VJuB5PBo%3D&reserved=0
   "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
         is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82