This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Re: Using botanical and common names


>I really value Latin (hardly a "dead" language since most everything we
>namr that has any more sophistication that a turnip comes from Latin)
>but feel it's more important to scinetists, physicians, landscape
>designers and the like, who must specify exactly what they're talking
>about for precision's sake.  "Mock Orange" is fine with me...!
>Glen Seibert
>Fullerton, CA

I hope this discussion isn't upsetting Duncan, but I think it is very
appropriate to how we conduct our interchange of information in this list.

The problem is that a common name may apply to different plants in
different parts of the country or world.  If I wanted to know about a
"paw-paw" tree, many people would think I was talking about the papaya of
commerce (Carica papaya), when I really want information on the Hoosier
bananna (to people living in Indiana), or the Michigan bananna (to people
living in Michigan), both of which are Asimina triloba.

A "cranberry", can refer to members of the genera Vaccinium, Vitis,
Arctostaphylos, or Astroloma depending on where you live.  Even different
species within each genus can have vastly different cultural requirements,
including seed germination requirements.

Don't be intimidated by thinking that using Latin names is somehow
pretentious and don't get too hung up on pronunciation and spelling (I
couldn't spell half the names without a reference book handy).  In this
forum, however, I think we should all try to identify the plants on which
we are seeking cultural information as best we can.

Don, but more specifically,

Don Martinson
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
dmartin@post.its.mcw.edu
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index