DO NOT EDIT THIS PAGE!! This page is automatically generated by PageComment macro.
,0 FranciscoWelterSchultes 2008-10-07 13:17:35 1.4 should be modified. A passage should be added: "Genus-group names established after 20xx must not be identical to available genus-group names listed in the Index Nominum Genericorum (Plantarum) and the Approved List of Bacterial Names, and any such genus-group name is not available." There is no need to continue establishing identical names in the biological nomenclatures. Research engines cannot distinguish between botanical and zoological names.
,0 FranciscoWelterSchultes 2009-08-21 09:28:32 Art. 1.2.2. I agree with Thomas in this point. I also think it is misleading to claim here that the Code regulates names of taxa above the rank of the family-group. The only effective regulation is the spelling of such names in Latin script with upper-case case first letter and without diacritic marks. But I am convinced that the community would follow this convention also if this was not ruled in the Code. Claiming that all these articles are needed to regulate this is certainly exaggerated. I would replace this article: 1.2.2. The Code regulates the names of taxa in the family group, genus group, and species group. The Code does not regulate names of taxa at ranks above the family group, except that they should be spelled in Latin script without diacritic marks and with upper-case initial letter [Art. 27, 28].
,0 FranciscoWelterSchultes 2009-11-10 16:22:08 First change of all: the French version should be online.
,0
FranciscoWelterSchultes
2012-07-05 15:43:55
A new Article should be added, Art. 1.5:
Exclusion of non-Latin names. A scientific name in the sense of Art. 1.1 must be a Latin or Latinized name in the Linnean system. Scientific names proposed in other languages such as French, German, English or Italian are excluded.
Such a very basic statement should be given in this Article, referring to the Latin nature of the Linnean system of naming animals.
Nothing in the Code indicates currently that German, French, English or Italian names are excluded from counting as binominal names in the sense of Art. 5.1 or 11.4, given that they meet the condition to be composed of a generic and a specific name. Such often strictly binominal systems were also established in other languages, which do not fall in the Linnean system. It has always been implicitly clear that German or French scientific names are not Linnean names, but with ongoing time it seems that this knowledge gets lost and young taxonomists would not necessarily take this as self-evident any more.
French names have since long provided big problems because these names are often very closely translated to Latin and look so similar that authorships have been mixed up.
If not here, then the statement that scientific Linnean names must be Latin or Latinized names could also be given somewhere else in Art. 1-5. See also Art. 11.4.
Art. 26 relies implicitly on the same regulation. It is important to note that such French or German names are not vernacular names, which are names used by people (Glossary: used for general purposes), but "artificial" scientific names, proposed by scientists. The definition of a "scientific" name in the Glossary ("as opposed to a vernacular name") does not cover this detail either.,on Essie 2016-01-11 17:06:39 I read your ponitsg and was jealous
,on Emmy 2016-01-12 08:58:42 It's great to find <a href="http://scenxjvju.com">soomene</a> so on the ball
,on Sagar 2016-01-20 21:52:21 Pecfret shot! Thanks for your post! http://hgafxg.com [url=http://alohpmn.com]alohpmn[/url] [link=http://rtxmaz.com]rtxmaz[/link]