The Capitalization of Birds' Names

[Pages:2]COMMENTARY

The Capitalization of Birds' Names

ANSELM ATKINS 1

Commonspecificnamesof birdsoccurregularly in it not a source of embarrassment for birders to have

literature of all kinds. Sometimesthey are capital- to follow rulesthat contradictthe usagein the world

ized, sometimes not. The situation is confusing. at large?Then, too,how dowe faceour colleagues--

What's going on?

the beetle collectors,orchid fanciers,fruitfly raisers,

Accordingto the Council of BiologyEditors(1978: and primate researchers--none of whom demand

75), one shouldcapitalize"the completevernacular capitalsfor their preferredsubjectmatter?Why are

or commonname of a speciesof birds in accordance wefavored?Darwin himselfcarefullyrefrainedfrom

with the checklist of the American Ornithologists' callingany species"higher" than another.Avesare

Union." For capitalization, then, we have the au- indeed nice, but no more deserving of large letters

thority of the A.O.U. (1957)and itsreiterationby the than any other order.

biologicalstylemanual.What is the authority against Somuchforthe argumentsfromauthorityandfrom

capitalization?Any American dictionary. Look up equality.Two considerationsfavoringcapitalization

"blue jay."

requireresponset:hat commonspecificnamesare ac-

So there is a conflict: the A.O.U. and the CBE ver- tually proper namesand that capital letters remove

susan arrayof dictionariesW. hat arethe dimensions ambiguity (seeParkes1978).I know no soundreason

of this struggle, and who is going to win?

for claimingthatbirds'specificnames,any morethan

I took a survey--limited and unscientificbut still other specificnames,are proper names."Cat" and

revealing.Among the technicalornithologicaljour- "dog"aretrue species(FellscatusC, anisfamiliarisa)nd

nalsI included,not one failed to capitalize:Auk,Con- dearto mankind;yet, no onedreamsof makingthem

dor, Ibis, WilsonBulletin,Journalof Field Ornithology, proper namesor capitalizingthem. "Coyote," "bob-

and OrnisScandinavicBa.utof seventechnicalbiolog- cat,"and "racoon"are discretespeciesb, ut we do not

icaljournalsin otherfields,not a singleonecapital- think of them as proper names. An individualbird

ized specificcommonnames,includingthoseof birds may receive a proper name, just as I might call my

if they occurred:Journaol fMammalogyJ,ournaol fEx- screechowl "Rapture"; but an easternscreechowl is

perimentaZl oologyA, nnualReviewof EntomologyJ,our- simplyan easternscreechowl.

nalofHerpetologyW, ildlifeReviewE, volutiona,nd Quar- It is true that certainindefinitelyreproduciblehu-

terly Reviewof Biology.Editors of these journals man productsreceive capitalized brand-namesand

apparentlyfind no justificationfor capitalizingthe titles (Frigidaire,Mustang,Radio Shack,"Hamlet,"

biotathey treat.Why, they reason,shouldthey make "Eroica").Perhapsit is the unique prototypethat is

an exceptionfor birds or insects(for someentomol- attracting the capital letter, or perhaps there is an

ogistswant to have capitalstoo)?

unspokenrule thatcertain"artificial"speciesmaybe

Literatureof a more generalnature reflectsthe di- capitalized.But acceptedusagehas kept suchartifi-

vided practiceof technicaljournals.Mostfield guides cial setsdistinctfrom natural speciesn, one of which

and someother booksdo usecapitals.On the other areconsideredpropernamesby the dictionary.Thus,

hand, birds are confinedto lower casein the writings a distinguishedmagazinelike TheAtlanticwill capi-

of Darwin, Thoreau, Muir, Aldo Leopold, Stephen talize "Visa" but not "ivory-billed woodpecker."

Gould, and many others.Highly literate magazines As for ambiguity--alas,the Englishlanguageis full

suchasAudubonS, mithsonianN,ationalGeographica,nd of it. We copewith it asbestwe can and somehow

NationalWildlifedo not capitalizebirds' names.Nei- get by. Admittedly, many birds' namesbecomeam-

ther do Sciencoer ScientifiAc mericanA. great number biguousin running prose:"There goesa gray fly-

of writersandeditorsthusfollow the dictionaryrath- catcher"(??).Note that it was perhapsa mistakein

er than the CBE.

the first placeto include suchgeneral(and pedestri-

No one is challengingthe authority of the A.O.U. an)wordsas"common,""eastern,""lesser,"or "gray"

and the scientific community to fix the names of in a bird'sname.Bethat asit may,would it not now

speciesas presented in the check-list. Birds' names be easierfor ornithologiststo changea few names--

"are" what the A.O.U. saysthey are. But capitalsin if clarity is at sucha premium--than for the whole

the check-list? Here the A.O.U. runs afoul of a wider world to change its dictionaries?

authority. Of course,in a free country, the A.O.U. Languagechanges;grammatical usagescome and

maydevisefor itselfwhateverrulesit wants.Butis go. There are no eternal verities here; convention

and consentare all. Rulesof grammararenot handed

down from on high--they are merely a codification

2525McKinnon Drive, Decatur,Georgia30030USA.

of actualusage.The dictionarysays"what is," not

1003

The Auk 100: 1003-1004. October 1983

1004

Commentary

[Auk,Vol.100

"what should be." Nevertheless, it is proper to fol- we do, we ornithologists, with our Important Capi-

low "what is" asdeterminedby the compilersof cur- tals,continueto look CuriouslyProvincial.

rent dictionaries.Professionaol rnithologistsand lep-

idopterists,whosewritings surely constituteonly a fractionof today'sliterature,cannotpossiblywin the

?,ITERATURE CITED

day (but what a gallant showing of nets and binoc- AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS' UNION. 1957. Check-list

ulars againstall thosetypewriters,word processors,

of North American birds, fifth ed. Baltimore,

and printing presses!)L. acking an Archimedes'ful-

Maryland, Amer. Ornithol. Union.

crum, we shall never changeconventionbut only COUNCIL OF BIOLOGY EDITORS. 1978. Council of bi-

succeedin violatingit. Meanwhile,our idiosyncrasy

ology editorsstyle manual:a guide for authors,

causesconfusion among those who want to write

editors, and publishers in the biological sci-

birds' namescorrectly.It would be most helpful if

ences,fourth ed. Arlington, Virginia, Council of

we would generously concede and conform. As

Biology Editors.

Humpty-Dumpty said (it's impossible to make it PARKESK, . C. 1978. A guide to forming and capi-

through a reflective essay without quoting Lewis

talizing compound names of birds in English.

Carroll), it is a questionof who is to be master.In

Auk 95: 324-326.

thisinstance,let ussurrenderto the dictionary.Until Received22 February1983,accepted24 May 1983.

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

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

Google Online Preview   Download