CORRESPONDENCE. 159 



ON THE APPLICATION OF BARBAROUS CORRUPTIONS OF 

 LATIN WORDS AS ENGLISH NAMES. 



To THE Editors of " The Analyst." 



Gentlemen, 



Having been prevented from procuring your excellent Journal for Janu- 

 ary, 1837, until a few days ago, I am almost afraid I shall be too late for 

 your next number, and will only trouble you with a few brief remarks, in 

 the event of a vacant corner. I will not make any observations on the ab- 

 surd style of orthography adopted by your correspondent, S. D. W., in his 

 Nomenclature of British Fishes, because I trust he will take the hint you 

 have given him, and cease to obscure his valuable labours after so ludicrous 

 a fashion ; but I have one or two rather more serious objections to make to 

 his arrangement. 



In the first place, where is the utility of applying barbarous cornipfions 

 of Latin words as English names ? Why is Acerine preferable to Ace- 

 rina, Aspidophory to Aspidophorus, or Xiphy to Xiphias. Where known 

 English names do exist, such as Bullhead, Stickleback, or Angler, nothing 

 can be more beneficial than their adoption into the system ; but the degra- 

 dation of the Latin into uncouth and unrecognized English, appears to me to 

 be an innovation without being an improvement. 



Secondly, I wish to know why S. D. W. has given the name Saurus to a 

 genus standing in his list between Belone and Eococcetus ? The term Saurus 

 has already been applied, by Cuvier, to a genus of the Salmonida, which, 

 from their Lizard-like form and voracious habits, almost justify an appella- 

 tion which is, however, at best but an unfortunate one. But the genus to 

 which S. D. W. has given this name, is, I suppose, from its place in his ar- 

 rangement, the Sa'iris of Rafinesque, the Esox Saurus of Bloch, and for 

 which the term Scomber-esox, applied to it by Lacepede, seems particularly 

 appropriate. The common name given to this fish on the coast — Egyptian 

 Herring— is bad, as tending to confound it with genera of the Herring fami- 

 ly ; but surely no advantage is to be expected from describing it as the 

 Common Saury. 



I hope I do not speak harshly on the subject ; but I conceive that nothing 

 can be more injurious to that precision and clearness so desirable in syste- 

 matic arrangements, than the frequent change of generic appellations, or the 

 creation of new genera or species without very substantial and sufficient rea- 

 sons. Of course I do not apply the latter portion of the remark to your 

 correspondent. 



It would be conferring a great favour on many students of Ichthyology, 

 and myself among the number, if any of your correspondents who possess, or 

 are able to jirocure a sight of, Agassiz's Poissons Fossilcs, would give, through 

 the medium of The Analyst, a synopsis of the classification adopted by the 

 Neufchatel Professor. 



D. W. N. 



Cheltenham, March 7, 1837- 



