I know the species epithet has to agree with the genus name, and that tree
names are generally feminine. The word arbor itself is feminine. (You'll never
convince me that a ponderosa pine is feminine.)
Now, would somebody please explain Punica granatum and Heptapleurum arboricola.
Thanks,
Iris
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)

Iris Cohen schreef
I know the species epithet has to agree with the genus name, and that tree
names are generally feminine. The word arbor itself is feminine. (You'll
never convince me that a ponderosa pine is feminine.)
Now, would somebody please explain Punica granatum and Heptapleurum
arboricola.

***
Well, Punica is feminine and adjectives take the ending -a.
However this applies only to adjectives. If you check Art 23.1 of the ICBN
you will see that a specific epithet can be "[1] an adjective, [2] a noun in
the genitive or [3] a word in apposition". Almost certainly "Granatum" is an
old name for the genus, pre-Linnaean (it was validly published in 1880 for
Punica by Saint-Lager, likely a repeat of pre-Linnaean usage). It is a word
in apposition.
BTW This is one of the reasons some people advocate writing such cases
(an old name of a genus used as an epithet) with an initial capital, in this
case Punica Granatum. The distinction is pretty much lost on the general
public.

Heptapleurum is neuter and adjectives take the ending -um.
If you check Art 23.5 of the ICBN you will see that epithets using "the word
element -cola" may not be used as an adjective (This is wrong in Stearn's
Botanical Latin. This provision only came into the ICBN with the 2000
edition, well after Stearn wrote his Botanical Latin). A compound word
ending in -cola is a noun ("dweller of/in ..."). This noun is a word in
apposition.

PvR
PS You will never convince me a ponderosa pine is masculine. It looks like a
tree rather than feminine, but never masculine.

PS2: See, no police needed. It is an orderly universe after all. Only more
complex than anticipated

Maybe it should be "Cereus Valida"

"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message
...
Iris Cohen schreef
I know the species epithet has to agree with the genus name, and that
tree
names are generally feminine. The word arbor itself is feminine. (You'll
never convince me that a ponderosa pine is feminine.)
Now, would somebody please explain Punica granatum and Heptapleurum
arboricola.

***
Well, Punica is feminine and adjectives take the ending -a.
However this applies only to adjectives. If you check Art 23.1 of the ICBN
you will see that a specific epithet can be "[1] an adjective, [2] a noun
in
the genitive or [3] a word in apposition". Almost certainly "Granatum" is
an
old name for the genus, pre-Linnaean (it was validly published in 1880 for
Punica by Saint-Lager, likely a repeat of pre-Linnaean usage). It is a
word
in apposition.
BTW This is one of the reasons some people advocate writing such cases
(an old name of a genus used as an epithet) with an initial capital, in
this
case Punica Granatum. The distinction is pretty much lost on the general
public.

Heptapleurum is neuter and adjectives take the ending -um.
If you check Art 23.5 of the ICBN you will see that epithets using "the
word
element -cola" may not be used as an adjective (This is wrong in Stearn's
Botanical Latin. This provision only came into the ICBN with the 2000
edition, well after Stearn wrote his Botanical Latin). A compound word
ending in -cola is a noun ("dweller of/in ..."). This noun is a word in
apposition.

PvR
PS You will never convince me a ponderosa pine is masculine. It looks like
a
tree rather than feminine, but never masculine.

PS2: See, no police needed. It is an orderly universe after all. Only more
complex than anticipated

In article ,
Iris Cohen wrote:
I know the species epithet has to agree with the genus name, and that tree
names are generally feminine. The word arbor itself is feminine. (You'll never
convince me that a ponderosa pine is feminine.)
Now, would somebody please explain Punica granatum and Heptapleurum arboricola.

I think it's because precedence takes precedence even over poor Latin.
I.e. whatever name was given in the first "legal" description stands; even
if there's a mistake. Another example was Sedum rosea - corrected when it
became Rhodiola rosea recently. Linneus himself made a similar mistake
when naming the Cat's Ears as Hypochaeris rather than Hypochoeris, since the
greek word for pig he based it on is choeros. He later corrected himself,
but the rules say that since he used an a the first time this spelling must
stand. (You will still find both spellings in use in modern books - about
50:50. This makes me sound very erudite, but in fact this was discussed in
these very columns a few years ago and I am only repeating what came out
then!)

Howard Clase

Thanks very much for the explanations.
This is one of the reasons some people advocate writing such cases (an old
name of a genus used as an epithet) with an initial capital, in this case
Punica Granatum.

I thought that some years ago they made a rule against it. Always having the
species name in lower case is less confusing. Now that I know it is not an
adjective, I wouldn't have any further trouble along that line.
I should have realized that Heptapleurum arboricola is an epiphyte from the
name, but it certainly doesn't look like one.

You will never convince me a ponderosa pine is masculine.

Chacon a son gout. I've seen full size ponderosa pines out West, and I've seen
them as bonsai. There is a magnificent one in our National Bonsai & Penjing
Museum, donated by the National Forest Service. I don't believe I've ever seen
a ponderosa bonsai grown by a woman. Definitely a guy thing.

Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)

Sorry Peter aphalla, you dumb skid mark.

Unlike you, Cereus is a masculine noun.

Also species epithets are never capitalized.


"Peter Jason" wrote in message
...
Maybe it should be "Cereus Valida"

"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message
...
Iris Cohen schreef
I know the species epithet has to agree with the genus name, and that
tree
names are generally feminine. The word arbor itself is feminine.
(You'll
never convince me that a ponderosa pine is feminine.)
Now, would somebody please explain Punica granatum and Heptapleurum
arboricola.

***
Well, Punica is feminine and adjectives take the ending -a.
However this applies only to adjectives. If you check Art 23.1 of the
ICBN
you will see that a specific epithet can be "[1] an adjective, [2] a
noun
in
the genitive or [3] a word in apposition". Almost certainly "Granatum"
is
an
old name for the genus, pre-Linnaean (it was validly published in 1880
for
Punica by Saint-Lager, likely a repeat of pre-Linnaean usage). It is a
word
in apposition.
BTW This is one of the reasons some people advocate writing such
cases
(an old name of a genus used as an epithet) with an initial capital, in
this
case Punica Granatum. The distinction is pretty much lost on the general
public.

Heptapleurum is neuter and adjectives take the ending -um.
If you check Art 23.5 of the ICBN you will see that epithets using "the
word
element -cola" may not be used as an adjective (This is wrong in
Stearn's
Botanical Latin. This provision only came into the ICBN with the 2000
edition, well after Stearn wrote his Botanical Latin). A compound word
ending in -cola is a noun ("dweller of/in ..."). This noun is a word in
apposition.

PvR
PS You will never convince me a ponderosa pine is masculine. It looks
like
a
tree rather than feminine, but never masculine.

PS2: See, no police needed. It is an orderly universe after all. Only
more
complex than anticipated

In the case of Sedum rosea, the species epithet "rosea" referred to the
plant's common name and does not refer to a color. In this instance, the
gender of species epithet remains unchanged regardless of which genus the
species transferred.


"Howard Clase" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Iris Cohen wrote:
I know the species epithet has to agree with the genus name, and that
tree
names are generally feminine. The word arbor itself is feminine. (You'll
never
convince me that a ponderosa pine is feminine.)
Now, would somebody please explain Punica granatum and Heptapleurum
arboricola.

I think it's because precedence takes precedence even over poor Latin.
I.e. whatever name was given in the first "legal" description stands; even
if there's a mistake. Another example was Sedum rosea - corrected when it
became Rhodiola rosea recently. Linneus himself made a similar mistake
when naming the Cat's Ears as Hypochaeris rather than Hypochoeris, since
the
greek word for pig he based it on is choeros. He later corrected himself,
but the rules say that since he used an a the first time this spelling
must
stand. (You will still find both spellings in use in modern books - about
50:50. This makes me sound very erudite, but in fact this was discussed
in
these very columns a few years ago and I am only repeating what came out
then!)

Howard Clase

Howard Clase schreef in
I think it's because precedence takes precedence even over poor Latin.
I.e. whatever name was given in the first "legal" description stands; even
if there's a mistake.

*****
That is not quite it. For example if the Original Publication would use an
epithet "arboricolus" this would be correctable to "arboricola" no matter
what the gender of the genus (Art 23.5).

Decisions on correction of spelling tend to be involved and sometimes
controversial.
*****

Linneus himself made a similar mistake
when naming the Cat's Ears as Hypochaeris rather than Hypochoeris, since
the Greek word for pig he based it on is choeros. He later corrected
himself, but the rules say that since he used an -a- the first time this
spelling must stand. (You will still find both spellings in use in modern
books - about 50:50. This makes me sound very erudite, but in fact this was
discussed in these very columns a few years ago and I am only repeating what
came out then!)

Howard Clase

Iris Cohen schreef
I thought that some years ago they made a rule against [capitalization]

*****
No. They tried to but failed. Maybe some time in the future, maybe not
*****

Always having the species name in lower case is less confusing.

*****
If you refer to the specific epithet, then yes, many people feel that way.
Capitalization of specific and infraspecific epithets these days is mostly a
mark of a Third World publication (especially in works dedicated to a
certain person, with an initial capital when the person's name comes up),
with only an occasional dedicated taxonomist pitching in, in select cases.
*****

You will never convince me a ponderosa pine is masculine.

Chacun a son gout. I've seen full size ponderosa pines out West, and I've
seen them as bonsai. There is a magnificent one in our National Bonsai &
Penjing Museum, donated by the National Forest Service. I don't believe I've
ever seen a ponderosa bonsai grown by a woman. Definitely a guy thing.

*****
Not sure what this is supposed to prove?
PvR

Cereus-validus schreef
In the case of Sedum rosea, the species epithet "rosea" referred to the
plant's common name and does not refer to a color.

* * *
No. Actually, _Rosea_ is another case of a name of a genus.
PvR

(Iris Cohen) wrote in
:

Thanks very much for the explanations.
This is one of the reasons some people advocate writing such
cases (an old name of a genus used as an epithet) with an initial
capital, in this case Punica Granatum.

I thought that some years ago they made a rule against it. Always
having the species name in lower case is less confusing. Now that
I know it is not an adjective, I wouldn't have any further trouble
along that line. I should have realized that Heptapleurum
arboricola is an epiphyte from the name, but it certainly doesn't
look like one.

You will never convince me a ponderosa pine is masculine.

Chacon a son gout. I've seen full size ponderosa pines out West,
and I've seen them as bonsai. There is a magnificent one in our
National Bonsai & Penjing Museum, donated by the National Forest
Service. I don't believe I've ever seen a ponderosa bonsai grown
by a woman. Definitely a guy thing.



All pines are masculine. Take a look at the Genus name, and
pronounce it using the various rules available. You may notice the
amazing similarity between one of them and the English word for an
undoubtably masculine body part. Add the meaning of the Spanish word
"ponderosa" and that one in particular becomes even more masculine.

Sean

"Sean Houtman" a écrit dans le message de news:
1096502536.yRFRd905vDPKsOZjUdAA/g@teranews...
(Iris Cohen) wrote in
:

Thanks very much for the explanations.
This is one of the reasons some people advocate writing such
cases (an old name of a genus used as an epithet) with an initial
capital, in this case Punica Granatum.

I thought that some years ago they made a rule against it. Always
having the species name in lower case is less confusing. Now that
I know it is not an adjective, I wouldn't have any further trouble
along that line. I should have realized that Heptapleurum
arboricola is an epiphyte from the name, but it certainly doesn't
look like one.

You will never convince me a ponderosa pine is masculine.

Chacon a son gout. I've seen full size ponderosa pines out West,
and I've seen them as bonsai. There is a magnificent one in our
National Bonsai & Penjing Museum, donated by the National Forest
Service. I don't believe I've ever seen a ponderosa bonsai grown
by a woman. Definitely a guy thing.



All pines are masculine. Take a look at the Genus name, and
pronounce it using the various rules available. You may notice the
amazing similarity between one of them and the English word for an
undoubtably masculine body part. Add the meaning of the Spanish word
"ponderosa" and that one in particular becomes even more masculine.

Sean


Excuse my bad language, perhaps I've not well understand the question !
Is this site good for you ? (in french :-)))

http://www.tela-botanica.org/index.p...presentati on

have a good day

--
Alain

(enlever le x.)
Mon village en Haute-Soule (loisirs, fleurs...) :
http://perso.club-internet.fr/jarailet
Carnet de voyages : http://perso.club-internet.fr/jarailet/Randobal

Caroli Linnaei in his S.P.(1753 first edition) has only one mistake Glecoma an it should be Glechoma
that is why you see ORTHO. CONSERVANDUM maintaining his original.

Evodia or Euodia... Euonimus or Evo... you can see the complet Tokyo Code* from IAPT at www.islapro.com/ecologia/iapt.doc
Coruleo or Cærulea

Best wishes from Mallorca, Spain



Jose Matas



"Howard Clase" escribió en el mensaje ...
In article ,
Iris Cohen wrote:
I know the species epithet has to agree with the genus name, and that tree
names are generally feminine. The word arbor itself is feminine. (You'll never
convince me that a ponderosa pine is feminine.)
Now, would somebody please explain Punica granatum and Heptapleurum arboricola.

I think it's because precedence takes precedence even over poor Latin.
I.e. whatever name was given in the first "legal" description stands; even
if there's a mistake. Another example was Sedum rosea - corrected when it
became Rhodiola rosea recently. Linneus himself made a similar mistake
when naming the Cat's Ears as Hypochaeris rather than Hypochoeris, since the
greek word for pig he based it on is choeros. He later corrected himself,
but the rules say that since he used an a the first time this spelling must
stand. (You will still find both spellings in use in modern books - about
50:50. This makes me sound very erudite, but in fact this was discussed in
these very columns a few years ago and I am only repeating what came out
then!)

Howard Clase

Somebody already explained hese wo names. (Sorry, key is broken.) he species
epihe has o agree wih he genus if i is an adjecive, which mos of hem are.
Granaum is a noun from an old name, and arboricola means somebody who lives in
rees.
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)