Why do we name organisms? Some reminders from the past
نویسنده
چکیده
The naming systems of Linnaeus and Bentham in particular are examined to clarify the relationships between naming and ideas of relationships. Linnaean binomials were adopted largely for practical reasons. Furthermore, Linnaeus proposed his names in the context of system, putting organisms in groups of 10. This allowed botanists of moderate capabilities to know at least the genera. Although binomials are names of taxa of the two lowest levels of a rank hierarchy, much of Linnaeus’ work does not fit easily in the currently widely accepted view of Linnaeus as a hard-bitten essentialist. Neither Lamarck nor the later Bentham believed in a rank hierarchy, although to name organisms both used what is here called a flagged hierarchy: name terminations indicating only a set of inclusion relationships, not ranks of nature implied by a rank hierarchy. Bentham was clear that the adoption of a flagged hierarchy with groups of a particular size in the Genera plantarum was to facilitate botanists’ understanding of the system as a whole. Systematists like Bentham and Linnaeus managed information and presented classification systems simultaneously. I conclude that the lower level of Linnaeus’ hierarchy is a special case of the noun + adjective combination that pervade folk classifications in particular and human language in general. Linking essentialism and “Linnaean” nomenclature is at best a red herring, thus few nineteenth-century botanists believed in a fully-developed rank hierarchy. Naming hierarchies are mostly such that at each level members belong to only one group, and this is at a higher level; most such hierarchies are fairly shallow. Historically, uninomials have seemed more attractive when generic limits were in flux, but suboptimal when relationships were more stable. Naming systems in general incorporate a substantial element of convention, emphasizing particular numbers of groups and groups of particular size; this facilitates comprehension and communication. Similar conventions will be needed whatever naming system is used.
منابع مشابه
Why Do the Results of Studies on the Effectiveness of Pralidoxime for Treatment of Organophosphate Poisoning Vary?
Organophosphate (OP) compounds are frequently used agorchemicals for deliberate self-harm in some parts of the world resulting in high mortality and morbidity. Pralidoxime (2PAM) is the most widely used and trialed oxime for treatment of OP poisoning. There have been variations over the results of trials using 2PAM for OP poisoning. 2PAM therapy has led to favorable outcomes in some studies, wh...
متن کاملHandicrafts, Encountering Modern Technology
This article aimes to emphasize certain points concerning traditional art , and to put forward a question. As the term” Traditional art” is rather ambiguous, first we try to clarify it. To do so, we propose an approach somehow different from one generally admitted. Thereby, we discuss the reasons why it is not so easy to give a definition of traditional art, islamic art in particular, specially...
متن کاملMaster’s Thesis Writing: Cinderella of Iranian ELT Education
For the vast majority of the Iranian M.A. students of TEFL, thesis writing is the first individual engagement with research. Despite having some pedagogical merits, such an academic activity generally poses some intellectual and affective challenges to such students. During thesis completion, if students are not effectively scaffolded by supervisors and not supported by universities, they are l...
متن کاملTo Create Psychology’s Own Capital
“We do not want to deny our past. We do not suffer from megalomania by thinking that history begins with us. We do not want a brand-new and trivial name from history. We want a name covered by the dust of centuries. We regard this as our historical right, as an indication of our historical role, our claim to realize psychology as a science. We must view ourselves in connection with and in relat...
متن کامل