Botanical language
- To: m*@ucdavis.edu
- Subject: Botanical language
- From: "p*@nevco.k12.ca.us" <p*@nevco.k12.ca.us>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 18:59:44 -0800
Ix asked:
>Am I the only one troubled by talk of "yellow oxalis"? Is it too hard
>for
>some correspondents to identify plants?
>
>Then Carol asked:
>Do we have a convention on this mail list that we *must* use scientific
>names when posting?
>
>*****
>
>I'll weigh in with a suggestion that we refer to the scientific names
of
>plants when necessary. A casual reference to a plant in a more general
>discussion about a broader subject such as lawns should not require any
>more identification than its common name. But if we're talking about
>species of plants and places where they grow, it's probably wise to be
>as specific as possible to avoid confusion.
>
>In the long run, it probably is very useful to know the genus and
>species names of the plants we're talking about. But language works
best
>when it is the most inclusive as possible.
>
>By the way, I just read a brochure for the Yosemite Association's 1999
>field seminars. There are wildflower and birding outings that have been
>designed for people put off by overly scientific language in nature
>study. That should be a warning that linguistic rules get in the way of
>enjoying flora and fauna.
>
>So, what was "yellow oxalis" anyway?
>
>Paul Harrar
>Nevada City, CA (Zone 7, 2,700 feet)
