Re: RHS vs AHS

Marge wrote:
> think that the level of sophistication
> is much higher in the UK.  For instance, botanical names are the
> norm, where they are not here....most Americans are lead to botanical
> names kicking and screaming.  

Marge, this is a point of contention for me, to. Sometimes common names
are easy and fun, but they can be so confusing. I make the labels for
our seed packets for the MG sale. When someone brings in seed, labeled
'Dock' - good grief, their must be 20 or 30 genera that use that name.
Snakeroot could be any number of things. If there's at least an
adjective like Bloody Dock I can usually track it down to the right
genus and species.

Then there's the reverse. A specific plant may go by 20 different common
names. If we file Prunella vulgaris under Self Heal, the person who
knows it only as Brownwort, may think we don't have it. Consequently,
I've been compiling a cross reference specifically for the seeds we
sell. The names are color coded to indicate accepted botanical name,
botanical synonyms, common name we use here, other common names used by
this plant, and botanical names of other plants that use this common
name. This will be my 4th year adding to this cross reference and it is
getting mighty big and takes a lot of time to compile.


I don't mind if we mispronounce Latin names (no one is really sure about
that anyway). But even an effort at using the botanical name lets the
other person know exactly what you are talking about. There are only a
very few MGs here willing to use the botanical names, the others simply
refuse. Heck, here many often won't even bother with the adjectives. A
sage is a sage. Mealy Cup, Gentian, Clary, doesn't matter - it's all
just Sage.


Kitty



If you have weeds, you don't have enough plants.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE GARDENCHAT
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index