A Capital case for common names “of species offishes- a ...

[Pages:3]A Capital case for common names "of species of fishesa white crappie or a White Crappie

Common names of fishes are an important and often primary means of fish biologists communicating with each other and with the public. Although common names will never replace scientific names, they are indispensable in many areas such as fisheries science, management, administration, and education. In recognition of the important role common names play in communicating information about fishes, the American Fisheries Society (AFS) and the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists (ASIH) have a long-standing cooperative effort to promote the use of standard common names for species of fishes through the joint Committee on Names of Fishes. The first list of fish names, although not covering all species then known in the United States and Canada, was published in 1948 (Chute et al. 1948). This was expanded in 1960 to include all known species in these two countries (Bailey et al. 1960). The list was revised approximately every 10 years with the last edition being Robins et al. (1991). The next list and the sixth edition is expected to be completed this year and will include the ichthyofauna of Mexico, thus giving a complete list of fishes for all North America. The effort's success is evidenced by use of standard common names in fish journals and by the adoption and routine use of the common names list by many agencies, institutions, and natural resource educators. For example, many publications on fishes only require the use of the scientific name with the standard common name once, and thereafter, the common name may be used.

The joint societal effort also resulted in a set of principles guiding the selection of common names. These guidelines include a decision, with which we disagree and which is the subject of this editorial, on capitalization of common names. We strongly support the development and continued updating of standard common names and recognize the importance of the guidelines developed for their use, but believe there are reasons to change the policy on capitalization of common names in English. The common names of fishes by convention have been treated as common nouns, not proper nouns, and accordingly spelled in lower case, e.g., rainbow trout, not Rainbow Trout, and white crappie, not White Crappie. In North American publications, at least, this editorial policy stems from Principle 5 of Bailey et al. (1960), which states, "Common names shall not be capitalized in text use except for those elements that are proper names. (e.g., rainbow trout, but Sacramento perch)." The principle, reflecting the practice in many journals, was based on an interpretation of the rules of English grammar, and as such, is primarily a matter of convention.

JUfY 2002 I I F i s h e r i e s

We feel the importance of common names, as

a primary currency of communication about fishes,

dictates that the AFS and ASIH (publishers of the

journal Copeia) change the convention that now

treats common names as common nouns.

Specifically, we recommend that the editorial

boards of both societies endorse and accept capi-

talization of common names and that this also be

accepted by the joint Committee on Names of

Fishes. We present in this editorial arguments for

both societies to consider on the merits of capital-

ization of common names of fishes.

We are aware of the polemics (and attendant

emotion) that capitalization of common names

invokes among some of the academic community

but choose to focus on how users of fish common

names might be best served. Whether common

names of fishes are technically proper nouns (denot-

ing a particular or unique individual, place, or thing,

i.e., the species as an individual, Wiley 1981;

Coleman and Wiley 2001) or common nouns (nam-

ing things of a group, i.e., individual fish belonging

to a species), is to us all a matter of convention.

People will either accept the advantages of capital-

ization and see no conflict with conventions of

English grammar or will reject the idea citing con-

ventions of grammar as justification.

We anticipate three interrelated arguments

against capitalization, all of which are premised on

convention or perceived loss of credibility stemming

from change. First, there is the "preponderant

usage" argument that stems from dictionaries and

style manuals advocating lower case for common

names. We respond

that this is merely

acknowledgment of past practice and not

Joseph 5. Nelson

an argument against change. If the national and international com-

Wayne C. Starnes Melvin L. Warren

munity of fish biologists (e.g., AFS and ASIH) agrees to change, then dictionaries and style manuals will ultimately reflect practice. Second, as noted earlier, we anticipate the "formal grammar" argument that common names are common nouns,

Nelson is professor of the Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, and can be reached at 780/492-4741, joe.nelson@ualberta.ca. Starnes is research curator of fishes, North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences, Raleigh, and can be reached at 91 g/733-7450 x760, wayne.starnes@. Warren is research biologist and team leader, USDA Forest Service, Hydrology Lab, Oxford, MS and can be reached at 662/234-2744, fswarren@olemiss.edu. They are members of an adhoc committee appointed by ASIH President (now Past

not proper nouns.

President) Brooks M. Burr to deal with the

Although dictionaries

capitalization of common names of fishes so that a

treat common names

formal editorial policy might be adopted on the issue.

31

as common nouns, the American Ornithological Union (Parks 1978) was a key professional society that long ago advocated capitalization, while the Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles (Crother 2000) and the Herpetological League (B. I. Crother, pets. comm., February 2002) have recently adopted capitalization of common names. Finally, we anticipate the "consistency and tradition" argument. Because there has been at least 40 years of lower case treatment of fish common names through the principles of AFS-ASIH joint Committee on Names of Fishes, some might argue capitalization would not be well received by the scientific community or result in a loss of credibility. The societies' joint effort has promoted stability of common names over the last four or more decades, but we can see no reason that capitalization would have an effect on the list's credibility or acceptance. Changes over the years associated with properly Latinized endings of scientific names are surely much more perplexing and frustrating for the fishery user than our simple proposal to capitalize common names!

One of the most compelling arguments for capitalization of common names of fishes is elimination of ambiguity stemming from adjectives associated with many names. Treating common names as proper nouns ensures that adjectives are recognized as part of the names rather than as a descriptive adjective. The AFS-ASIH list of common names is

replete with names that could be ambiguously interpreted in lower case (e.g., blue catfish, walking catfish, northern pike, lake trout, pink salmon, black brotula, spotted batfish, river darter, and deepsea sole). Consider the sentence: "With the collapse of the centrarchid fisheries in the entire state, better conservation strategies are required for green sunfish, spotted sunfish, and bantam sunfish." What is being conveyed? Is the sentence referring to management of unique, individual species or to sunfish that are green in color, sick with "ick," and small in size? The adjectival ambiguity disappears if the common names of these species begin with capital letters-"With the collapse of the centrarchid fisheries in the entire state, better conservation strategies are required for Green Sunfish, Spotted Sunfish, and Bantam Sunfish."

An even more compelling argument for capitalization of common names of fishes is that, when capitalized, the common name conveys recognition as a distinct, individual biological entity. Capitalization gives emphasis to the name and lets it stand out and be easier to spot in scientific publications, popular guides, aquarium and museum displays, and lecture slides, etc, while lower case names tend to disappear in the text and look, quite frankly, unimportant and common. Giving more prominence to common names, which are already routinely used as proxies for scientific names in

Catch and Release in Marine Recreational

Fisheries

Jon A. Lucy and Anne L. Studholme, eds.

Catch and release fishing has a long history in freshwater 310 pages, hardcover, 2002

recreational fisheries, as a management tool to reduce the impact of fishing on fish populations. Aside from regulatory requirements, freshwater anglers have long practiced catch and release fishing in the interests of promoting conservation-oriented angling. However,

AFS members: $35

Nonmembers: $50

Stock #:

540.3oc

ISBN:

I-888569-30-1

in comparison to freshwater, catch and release fishing in marine fisheries is proving more difficult to define relative to its full impact on anglers and use as a fishery management tool. This symposium proceeding brings together information from researchers, fishery managers, coastal resource management and conservation

To order, contact: American Fisheries Society Orders Dept. 1650 Bluegrass Lakes Parkway Alpharetta, GA 30004 678/366-1411

organizations, and angling community leaders, addressing the fax: 7701442-9742

issues that have arisen in relation to recreational fishing.

Visit the AFS Online Bookstore at

,ATJI

$1:

32

Fisheries I I vol 2 7 n o 7

many journals, is a logical addition to assist readers

b?

in locating information in text. Further, the use of . capitalized common names gives greater recogni-

tion (if not actual respect) for fishes from sport and commercial fishers, lawmakers, policy makers,

Capital Punishment

5

2.

c

resource managers, and the general public.

Our recommendation of capitalization would

The proposal by Nelson et al. (2002, this issue)

3

apply to all components of a common name of a

to capitalize the common names of fish species

2

species, hence, Bluebarred Pygmy Sunfish, but when seems to me to reflect some underlying but still

3

two or more species are be referred to we suggest poorly formulated veneration of biological species.

the form Green and Spotted sunfishes. We suggest I oppose the proposal, but I am unwilling to enter

that all common names representing taxa or non-taxa an unrewarding debate over veiled value systems. I

above the species level be in lower case and in the

do think the arguments advanced in support of

plural form, e.g., pygmy sunfishes, sunfishes, bony

the proposal are far from compelling, and I will

fishes, and fishes. The conventions on when to capi- address these.

talize and pluralize would also help remove ambiguity

The brief history of the Names of Fishes

in those cases where, as in Robins et al. (1991), there Committee (currently chaired by Joe Nelson) with

is a species bearing the same name as the family

which Nelson et al. begin their proposal is accu-

name, e.g., Squirrelfish (Holocentrus adscensionis)

rate but incomplete. The committee adopted its

and squirrelfishes (Holocentridae).

guiding principles for the second edition (1960) of

We have benefited by comments from many indi- its list. Principle 5 ("Common names shall not be

viduals over several years in discussing the issue that capitalized in text use except for those elements the common name of species in English be treated as that are proper names") was not chosen arbitrar-

proper nouns. hl

ily; the committee polled many ichthyologists and

References

Bailey, R.M. (chairman), E.A. Lachner, CC. Lindsey,

fishery workers who overwhelmingly favored using lower case (R. M. Bailey, letter to AFS President Moffitt, 2 June 2000). Consistent application of the principles, as a package, over the ensuing

Robert L. Kendall

C.R. Robins, P.M. Roe& W.B. Scott, and years has been a key factor in the widespread LP. Woods. 1960. A list of common and scientific acceptance of the committee's recommended

names of fishes from the United States and Canada. names. The committee's list has not been static,

2nd edition. American Fisheries Society Special h owever. Although few existing names change

Publication 2.

Chute, W.H. (&airman), R.M. Bailey, W.A. Clemens, J.R. Dymond, S.F. Hildebrand, G.S. Myers, and L.P.

Schultz. 1948. A list of common and scientific names of the better known fishes of the United States and

Canada. American Fisheries Society Special

P u b l i c a t i o n l(and Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 75:355-398).

Coleman, K.A., and E.O. Wiley. 2001. On species

from one edition of the list to the next, new species are constantly added-160 to the fifth edition and many more to the upcoming sixth edition-and common names for many of these are committee inventions whose stabilities have to be proven. The committee's effort of a decade ago to standardize the common names of non-North American fishes (Robins et al. 1991) has met con-

individualism: A new defense of the species-as- siderable resistance from ichthyologists and fishery

individuals hypothesis. Philosophy of Science scientists, which should warn us against declaring

68(4):498-517.

these names to be "proper." Changing the rules in

Crother, B . I . (ed.). 2000. Scientific and standard midstream, especially if done to promote an

Kendall was editor, managing editor, and director of publications with the American Fisheries Society

during 1g74-1 g9g. He can be reached at .

English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America North of Mexico, with comments

regarding confidence in our understanding. Society

for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles

Herpetological Circular 29.

Parks, K.C. 1978. A guide to forming and capitalizing

compound names of birds in English. The Auk

95~324.326. Robins, C.R. (chairman),R.M. Bailey, C.E. Bond, J.R.

Brooker, E.A. Lachner, R.N. Lea, and W.B. Scott.

1991. Common and scientific names of fishes from

the United States and Canada. 5th edition. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 20.

Wiley, E.O. 1981. Phylogenetics. the theory and

practice o f p h y l o g e n e t i c systematics. Wiley-

Interscience, New York.

agenda external to the committee's charge, will not make the goal of name stability easier to accomplish. The implications of such change extend beyond fish and fisheries. The fish name's committee's principles have been adopted almost verbatim by several scientific societies that are working with AFS to standardize the common names of North American aquatic invertebrates (e.g., Turgeon et al. 1998).

Nelson et al. anticipate objections to their proposal from defenders of conventional grammar. I decline to argue whether past practices should permit or deter change, but I draw attention to a larger dynamic. Use of capitalization has been declining in the English language for a long time

(longer in the United States than in Canada), as

J u l y 2 0 0 2 I I F i s h e r i e s

33

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download