In article ,
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:

As I have said before, and seem to need to repeat, this is nonsense.
The English language is defined by use, and not by self-appointed
arbiters.

That is a point of view, but when it comes to both the scientific and
vernacular names of wild plants in the UK and Ireland, there is an
accepted standard nomenclature. These are as included by Clive Stace in
his 'The New Flora of the British Isles'. Both his scientific and
vernacular names have been adopted by the Botanical Society of the
British Isles.

Tough. The international language is Latin, and all respectable
scientific botanists use that when referring to precise species. And
the English names you refer to have never been accepted by 99% of the
English speakers who talk about plants.

What is good enough for Stace is certainly good enough for me and I see
no harm at all in trying to reduce the use of Mare's-tail (Hippuris)
when people actually mean Equisetum or Horsetail. That's all I was doing
and all I said about it was that I felt the use of Mare's-tail should be
discouraged.

So you feel that the name bluebell for Campanula rotundifolia should
be discouraged? Shame on you!

In any case, you are wrong:

OED: Marestail

The aquatic flowering plant Hippuris vulgaris, ...; formerly called
female horsetail. Also: any of several horsetails (genus Equisetum),
which Hippuris vulgaris superficially resembles.

As a botanist, I follow the standard work on UK and Irish botany when it
comes to plant names not what a dictionary compiled by a non-botanist
happens to say.

The mind boggles! I remember you stating that Stace had claimed that
yew was a conifer, based on a belief that his chapter "headings" were
synonymns. And they included categories as different as the the
gymnosperms and the pine family, if I recall. I do not claim to be a
professional, or even skilled, botanist - but I know better than THAT!

In any case, the OED describes how English is used, and makes no
value judgments as to which group of people are more "worthy" than
others to defined words. Quite correctly. Despite the dogma of a
few, it is completely unreasonable for specialists to attempt to
hijack the language. You will not often see me "correcting" people's
loose use of mathematical, statistical or computing terms, unless it
is relevant in context.

If you want to be botanically precise, then use the proper botanical
name - which is the Latin. Most people on this group have no trouble
with that concept.

I think you mean "scientific" not "Latin" as so many of the names are
actually derived from Greek!

No, of course I don't. As every serious botanist knows, the official
languge of botany is Latin. Species and other names can be derived
from any language or none, but are converted into a Latin form.

That reminds me - what's the Latin name for a bluebell? And where is
it that you claim to live? :-)

I don't remember ever making a "claim" to live anywhere. You used to
"claim" to work for the Cambridge University Computing Centre though a
friend in Cambridge expressed some doubt on the matter :-)

Your memory is clearly very short. I suggest that you use Google
to refresh it.

Presumably you have now retired.

No, I haven't. I still work for the University of Cambridge Computing
Service (not Centre), and am not ashamed to admit it, but have had to
change my signature to avoid my colleagues being pestered by idiots.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.