Commenting on Alvaro's response to my original inquiry about
standardized lists of common bird names in other (than English)
languages, esp. Spanish:

>Date: Sat, 14 Jan 95 13:35:51 -0800
>From: Alvaro Patricio Jaramillo <jaramill at sfu.ca>

/common
>> These names make it easier for some people (esp. English-speaking
>> people) to discuss birds without resorting to using the Latin
>> binomials. That's good, I guess.

> If you resort to using Latin names its even easier and more useful, as
>it can enable you to communicate with foreign birders/ornithologists as
>long as you both can understand each other.

Well, that's what I told my brother-in-law! But I don't really believe
it.

What's easier about learning lots more generic names than fewer common
group names? E.g. el CARPINTERO tal, instead of Chrysoptilus or
Piculus or Celeus or Dryocopus or Melanerpes or Veliornis or
Campephilus xyzus; all these generic names, with their several species
each are called some kind of carpintero (woodpecker) in one Venezuelan
guide (Meyer de Sch. & Phelps). I don't know how many of them were
"made up" just for the Guide but that's irrelevant since my focus is
precisely on the issue of the invention of a standard list of common
names. (Sorry to hear that a Spanish common name lsit isn't being developed;
I suspect that your pessimism about the prospect of ever seeing one is safe.)

I agree that among scientists the use of the scientific names easily
become the tongue of the realm. I wonder, however, about your observation
above that Latin binomials are easier than common names.

>> There are lots of birds with (multiple*) common names in (Colombian)
>> Spanish, especially for birds found about the cities and towns. But
>> they represent a very small percentage of all Colombian bird species.

> I would disagree with this. My experience in Latin America is that there
>are hundreds of common names and that they differ from region to region
>within one country, and this is not counting the immense number or
>native names which are often used by the non-native Spanish speaking
>locals.

I'll say it again, phrased differently, because I think we agree.

There _are_ lots of birds species in Colombia found in or near towns
and cities, which have common names in Spanish, and which names are
used by a reasonably large number of people in the area. There are many
more species of birds in Colombia which have no Spanish common name
(some of them _may_ have names in other languages spoken in Colombia
however).

These common Spanish names, applied to a particular species of bird,
differ as one goes from region to region; thus, a species of bird can
have lots of common names in Spanish in Colombia (to say nothing of
crossing the border into Venez or Ecuad, etc). In addition, a common
name can apply to a variety of species of birds, not always related
even remotely.

>> If we want people to be concerned about their flora/fauna, they have to
>> be able to name it and talk about it. Common English names, and Latin
>> binomials, are not useful for the non-English-speaking concerned citizen.
>> Peter

> This is probably true, but I would like to make a point. In many remote
> The interesting bit is that locals I
>met that worked with scientists had no qualms about learning a new language
>to name birds/animals/plants, learning a new language just wasn't such a
>big deal.
- - - interesting examples deleted - - -

I suspect that there is a certain amount of motivation, created by the
opportunity to "work with scientists" and perhaps the people who demo'd
this ability were self-selecting; their friends probably either envied
them or thought them a little odd. In any case, I agree with you that
one _can_ learn to use Latin binomials; certainly for a Spanish-literate
person, the Latin is easier to read/pronounce and probably remember than
it is for a person not so disposed (like many English speakers).

> Just some observations about people and names, perhaps
>standardizing names is not all that necessary since we already have
>the binomials which we can use for comparitive purpoises.

Good counter examples, for sure. But, if we look closer to home, I am
under the impression that most birders use common names. Why? If your
counter-examples (i.e., your observations) are valid generalizations,
then it would seem that they should hold true in the US as well, and
we'd all be talking Latin binomials.

Do most tweeters talk in common names or in Latin binomials most of the
time?

Gene Hunn, any expert insights into this stuff?

>Al Jaramillo

Thanks for the counterpoint,
Peter

(For a brief discussion of the phenomenon of regionalism and its effect
on bird common names, see Caldasia (Inst Cienc Nat, Univ Nac,
Bogota) IV(20):546-547, 1947, Armando Dugand, where he refers to the
consequences of the phenomenom as "nomenclatural anarchy", and includes
even an example of an onomatopoetic anarchy: sui'rili, sui'riri,
sui'rile, sui'rele, for the tinamou _Crypturellus soui mustelinus_
[i' is the Spanish accented i].)