[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Fw: new name for Oldsquaw
- To: "rick" <rblom@blazie.com>, <carolinabirds@duke.edu>
- Subject: RE: Fw: new name for Oldsquaw
- From: "Kendrick Weeks" <kcweeks@unity.ncsu.edu>
- Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 13:31:39 -0400
- Importance: Normal
- In-Reply-To: <v01510121b3e6f6226c7f@[206.173.56.212]>
- Sender: carolinabirds-owner@acpub.duke.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: carolinabirds-owner@acpub.duke.edu
> [mailto:carolinabirds-owner@acpub.duke.edu]On Behalf Of rick
> Sent: Monday, August 23, 1999 10:17 AM
> To: carolinabirds@duke.edu
> Subject: RE: Fw: new name for Oldsquaw
>
>
What advantage is
> there in insisting on the scientific name?
People can learn them, contrary to popular belief, and communicate
effectively across language barriers, not just with those whose first
language is English. The tendency of official English names is to release a
lot of the pressure of learning scientific names. However, it does stand
reason to standardize names in one language when dealing with a subject that
has as much interest as birds (why else would there be an Ornithological
Union?). And, this standardization certainly suffices the average birder
which purchases much of the literature about birds. All of your points are
well taken and very well thought out. The greatest point from all of this is
that no other science has as much recreational public interest than
ornithology and that this is the main reason for official English names.
Kendrick Weeks
Campus Box 7617
Department of Zoology
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-7617
kcweeks@unity.ncsu.edu, 919-515-9772