Page:Condor2(1).djvu/20

 20 THE CONDOR I Vol. II Communications. AGAINST THE GENERAL USE OF 'SCIENTIFIC NAMES. Mr. McGregor's "Plea for the Gener- al Use of Scientific Names" as set forth in our last BULLETIN, is, to my mind, illogical, and moreover expresses a sen- timent which I am sure is far from prevalent among bird people. Let me say to start with, that I do recognize the necessity of scientific names, and for some of the very reasons Mr. McGregor gives. But I do not favor their general use in literature, either semi-popular or scientific, to the exclusion of vernacular names. To the "average person," take for example the Cooper Club. member- ship, lrdea virescets may very obvious- ly mean as much as Green Heron, and Corvus americanus as much as American Crow; but how about Tachycineta thal- assina, I-[elminthofihila celata sordida and ]-[espero'chla rimvia, the common names of which are respectively, Violet-green Swallow, Dusky Warbler and Varied Thrush? Most of our intellects are far more capable of grasping and retaining a simple English name, as a great maj- ority of our trivial names are, than the often complex and misapplied terms of Latin and Greek origin, with which languages we are not as familiar as are Mr. McGregor, Dr. Coues, Mr. D. G. Elli- ott and other philologists. Mr. McGregor makes a statement which I very much doubt when he says "it is impossible to find enough common names to supply all the species of birds," even taking into consideration the avi- fauna of the whole world. Ornithology is a more popular study than that of many of the other. animal classes. In fact, in entomology and palmontology, scarcely any one but specialists are in- terested, and vernacular names are not needed except for the most familiar and wide-spread species. Hence I do not deem it inconsistent if birds are sup- plied with vernacular names, and cer- tain other groups less familiafly known to the general public, are not. In the cases of many North American birds, there are several scientific syno- nyms. That is no reason why one of them, complying with certain well- known laws of preference, should not be selected as being the only recog- nized and tenable name. Correspond- ingly, among the numerous synonymi- cal vernacular names of many of our common species is it not possible to select one, the best on account of ap- propriateness and most extended use, and recognize that one name as the only tenable one? This the A. O. U. Committee on Classification and Nomenclature has so far done. I know of but this one set of vernacular names for use in connection with our North American birds, the ones which this Committee have selected, just as with the scientific names. I would refer Mr. McGregor to Recommendation X of the A. O. U. Code of Nomenclature. It is true that there are numerous trivial names on the A. O. U. Checklist now, which are taken directly from the I, atin .ge. neric names, or are of barbar- ous origin. But these are mostly ap- propriate and of long standing so that they are now in familiar use. Similarly, there are many poor scientific names, barbarities, some of them mere combi- nations of letters with no meaning whatever. But according to the right- eous law of priority they can never lee changed. Appropriate English names when once adopted, should likewise be'- come fixed and permanent. I do not feel as Mr. McGregor does: I much prefer to see the vernacular name of a bird used in ordinary litera- ture, rather than the Latin name. Sup- posing in the last BULLETIN, instead of our familiar bird names as used in J. M. W.'s delightful essay, the scientific names were in every case substituted! Instead of Meadowlark, Xttrnella,' Towhee, ?ipilo,. Lark Sparrow, Chon- destes,' Barn Swallow, Iirundo; Jay, Cyanocitta,' etc. Would it have added to the value or accuracy of those poeti- cal descriptions? The description of a woodland scene may be as scientific and accurate as the comparative incas-' urements of the primaries of a warbler's wing. In either case where reference is made to a certain bird, shall we say Dendroica or Warbler? Which conveys the keenest idea of the bird in question to the "average person"? By the way, there are far more "half-scientists. who find pleasure in knowing something of