362 Rales Jor Rendering the Nomenclature of Zoology Unijorm. 



words of this class are not without foundation. The names, no less 

 than the definitions of objects, should, where practicable, be drawn 

 from positive and self-evident characters, and not from a comparison 

 with other objects, which may be less known to the reader than the 

 one before him. Specific names, expressive of comimrative size, are 

 also to be avoided, as they may be rendered inaccurate by the after dis- 

 covery of additional species. The names Picoides, Emherizoldes, Pseii- 

 dolmcinia, rubecidoides, niaxlmus, minor, minimus, etc., are examples of 

 this objectionable practice. 



/. Generic names compounded from other genera. — These are in some 

 degree open to the same imputation as comparative words ; byt as they 

 often serve to express the position of a genus as intermediate to, or 

 allied with, two other genera, they may occasionally be used with ad- 

 vantage. Care must be taken not to adopt such compound words as 

 are of too great length, and not to corrupt them in trying to render 

 them shorter. The names Galloparo, Tetraogallus, Qijpaetos, are exam- 

 ples of the appropriate use of compound words. 



g. Specific names derived from persons. — So long as these complimen- 

 tary designations are used with moderation, and are restricted to per- 

 sons of eminence as scientific zoologists, they may be employed with 

 propriety in cases where expressive or characteristic words are not to 

 be found. But we fully concur with those who censure the practice 

 of naming species after persons of no scientific reputations, as curiosity 

 dealers (e. g. Caniveti Boissoneauti) , Peruvian priestesses (Cora ama- 

 zilia), or Hottentots (Klassi). 



h. Generic names derived from persons. — Words of this class have 

 been very extensively used in botany, and therefore it would have been 

 well to have excluded them wholly from zoology, for the sake of ob- 

 taining a viemoria technica by which the name of a genus would at once 

 tell us to which of the kingdoms of nature it belonged. Some few per- 

 sonal generic names have, however, crept into zoology, as Guvieria, 

 Mulleria, Rossia, Lessonia, etc., but they are very rare in comparison 

 with those of botany, and it is, perhaps, desirable not to add to their 

 number. 



i. Names of harsh and inelegantpronnnciation. — These words are grating 

 to the ear, either from inelegance of form, as Huhua, Yuhina, Craxi- 

 rex, Esch- Scholtzi ; or, from too great length, as chirostrongylostiniis, 

 Opeiiorhynchus, brachypodiodes, thecodontosaurus, not to mention the 

 Eualiolimnosaurus crocodilocephaloides of a German naturalist. It is 

 needless to enlarge on the advantage of consulting euphony in the con- 

 struction of our language. As a general rule it may be recommended 

 to avoid introducing words of more than five syllables. 



