[Tweeters] Historical Perspective on Re-naming Birds

[Dennis Paulson]

Chris, I can’t disagree with you strongly about any of this, except perhaps about one point. I don’t think Cyanocitta stelleri is gibberish at all, or at least no more than “blue jay” would be gibberish to someone in Brazil or China. In fact, it is just as meaningful as any name given to anything and actually tells us quite a bit. It contains ‘cyano, Greek for dark blue, and ‘citta,’ Greek for a chattering bird (also used for jays), and thus it means “Steller’s blue jay.”

Someone giving common names to the species of Cyanocitta right now might have come up with Eastern Blue Jay and Steller’s Blue Jay for our two common North American species, in accord with a lot of current attempts to show relationships by vernacular names. That’s what we did with dragonfly names as much as possible. ‘Cristata’ means crested, by the way, so I suppose the eastern one could have been called Crested Blue Jay, but that wouldn’t differentiate it from Steller’s.

And I think at least some kids would think it was the greatest fun to learn scientific names, if they were encouraged to do so. I did it long ago just because I wanted to know what all those Latin and Greek names meant. I never studied the Classics in college, but I have learned so much in my love of scientific names.

And when those 142 eponyms are replaced by something else, I hope the people doing so will know exactly what the scientific names of every one of those species mean, as that can be very helpful when coining a common names.

Finally, what a shame to relegate Steller to the trash heap, so no birder in the future is ever prompted to try to learn just who that person was and what he did—for better or worse.

Dennis Paulson
Seattle


> On Nov 22, 2023, at 12:52 PM, J Christian Kessler <1northraven at gmail.com> wrote:

> 

> Ludlow Griscom’s article is interesting, and makes some good points, but it essentially boils down to two thoughts:

> Perfection is impossible as we don’t – and probably will never  - know a comprehensive and accurate taxonomy of birds.  Both scientific understanding and common naming are so muddled as to be beyond repair.

> Birders can learn Linnean binomials as well as they can learn English “common names.”

>  

> As to the first, I totally agree.  One thing biology has proven over the past century is that a “correct” taxonomy of Aves – or any class – is a constantly shifting target.  Any class is a tree with many tangles, or worse.  Olympic Gull is but one example.  Even a species like Chat is in some respects anomalous.  “Best current judgement” is a useful criterion – “perfect” is not.

>  

> As to whether birders can or should learn and use Linnean binomials, common English language names are for more than avocationally intense birders.  A much wider audience is involved here.  For example, I frequently hear “backyard birders” and others refer to our local jay as a “blue jay” rather than Steller’s Jay.  They never heard of Georg Steller, don’t care, and just know the jay had a blue body.  But Black-headed Jay would be a name they are more likely to remember and use.  Cyanocitta stelleri is gibberish and tells them nothing.  And it doesn’t tell us serious birders much either – it’s just the same name with more syllables for "jay".

>  

> Many people, including most birders, I suspect, are always going to use English language names for birds. Many of us started as kids finding birds interesting; “Mom, I saw a jay” versus “Mom, I saw a Cyanocitta.”   We can make common bird names more friendly, and sometimes more enlightening, while understanding that “always getting it right” is aspirational.  

> 

> Chris Kessler,

> Seattle

> 

> On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 2:38 PM Jon. Anderson and Marty Chaney <festuca at comcast.net <mailto:festuca at comcast.net>> wrote:

> Bob Righter from Denver posted this on the Colorado birding chat group.  I thought it might be an interesting read for those of us who are 'anxiously' awaiting action from the AOS on revising the Common Names of birds that are named after People.

>  

> "From chatter on the internet emerges an interesting article by Ludlow Griscom written in 1947 “Common Sense in Common names.” Griscom, was a power house in the early 1900s and greatly influenced Roger Tory Peterson. The full article can be accessed through Google. I’ve taken the liberty of just featuring the last paragraph which I thought was the most poignant to our conversation on Bird Names:

> 

> "NO “simple and logical principles” for vernacular nomenclature can be formulated.  There are far too many birds; their variations, relationships, and ranges are not simple or logical. Their habits and habitats change from season to season, from one section of the continent to another, from century to century. Which season, which habitat, which section of the country is to be the basis for the “appropriate or associative” name?"

>  

> The article can be read at https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/wilson/v059n03/p0131-p0138.pdf <https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/wilson/v059n03/p0131-p0138.pdf>

>  

> Enjoy!

>  - Jon. Anderson

>  Olympia

> _______________________________________________

> Tweeters mailing list

> Tweeters at u.washington.edu <mailto:Tweeters at u.washington.edu>

> http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters <http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters>

> 

> 

> -- 

> "moderation in everything, including moderation"

> Rustin Thompson

> _______________________________________________

> Tweeters mailing list

> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

> http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20231122/d2acfef6/attachment.html>