hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
 Navigation
Articles
Gallery of Plants
Blog
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Patents
Mailing Lists
    FAQ
    Netiquette
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
Links
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: SP: Spage Age Terminology


From: HIPSource@aol.com

In a message dated 7/9/99 9:22:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time, loberg@jps.net 
writes:

<< Anner's suggestion of 'Appendaged Irises' certainly would be appropriate,
 and I like it, but would it be hard to  "sell" the public? >>

Education is the prime mission of AIS and the Society abounds in technical 
terminology. Explaining "Space Age" with its unfortunate overtones of the 
Jetsons can't be easy now since no one seems to like it or see the 
appositeness of it. Whatever one calls these irises one eventually has to 
deal with the phrase "extra petaloid parts," or some variation that does not 
suggest an unsettling freakiskness. But in reality explaining "standards" and 
"falls" is where one usually has to start out with the public. Then come such 
fine terms as "amoena" and "neglecta" and the inevitable riff on why things 
with striped foliage are variegated, but are not "variegatas"  but striped 
flowers are not variegated, but are "color-broken". And then there are those 
ever popular size divisions. And this is just the basic bearded stuff. 
Unfortunately, regardless of what the "public" will accept, technical 
terminology cannot always be scaled to the lowest common denominator. 

I'm not wedded to the term "Appendaged." In fact I'd personally do way with 
the whole special category and make them part of the larger scheme of things 
with their characteristics to be noted in their formal descriptions like any 
other set of characteristics. 

Anner Whitehead
HIPSource@aol.com

--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

Campaign 2000 is here!
http://www.onelist.com
Discuss your thoughts; get informed at ONElist.  See our homepage.

------------------------------------------------------------------------





 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index